ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2014 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, November 05, 2012

The last Republican

Thanks to the suicidal pro-immigration policies of the Reagan and Bush administrations, Mitt Romney may be the last viable Republican candidate.
The demographic threat to the Republican Party grows out of the fact that every four years the electorate becomes roughly two percent less white and two percent more minority, primarily as a result of the increase in the Hispanic and Asian-American populations and the relatively low birth rate among whites. By my computation, this translates into a modest 0.85 percentage point gain for Democrats and 0.85 percentage point loss for Republicans every four years. In other words, the changing composition of the electorate gives Democrats an additional built-in advantage of 1.7 percentage points every four years.
Contra some optimistic left-liberal assertions after the 2008 election, I was confident that the demographic tipping point hadn't been reached yet.  It could, however, happen as soon as 2016, and it will almost certainly happen by 2024.  Once Texas becomes a reliable Democratic stronghold, which it will thanks to its Hispanic immigrant population, it will be virtually impossible for a Republican to win the presidency again.

Unless, of course, the Republican party becomes the party of white nationalism and starts winning 75 to 80 percent of the white vote, which seems extremely unlikely given SWPL cultural influence, white female left-liberalism, and the party elite's preference for irrelevance to "extremism".  So, my prediction of a US collapse by 2033 would appear to be progressing rather nicely.

Labels: , ,

144 Comments:

Anonymous JartStar November 05, 2012 12:30 PM  

I've been saying this for a while about the demographics but never did the math. The question is, how long will the minorities continued to be ruled by white Democrat elites until they are supplanted by an amalgam of non-white ethnic groups?

Anonymous RINO November 05, 2012 12:37 PM  

So I guess this really could be the most important election ever for Republicans. But only if they do something to stop the open immigration.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 12:37 PM  

Vox Texas is very Christian and most latin americans are strongly Catholic. You believe free hand otus trump abortion for hispanics?

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 12:37 PM  

*outs

Anonymous zen0 November 05, 2012 12:39 PM  

Spengler has a similar take over at Asia Times. He demonstrates that Obama took on the Catholic Church because his handlers correctly assessed that Latinos are tending to vote entitlements rather than faith.

It is a Wheeleristic nightmare.

Anonymous DrTorch November 05, 2012 12:40 PM  

I don't know about his calculations, but a significant number of Asians lean toward conservative politics, and even a bit libertarian at times.

But yeah, this trend doesn't bode well for liberty.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 12:40 PM  

You believe free hand otus trump abortion for hispanics?

Yes, just like "bomb the scary brown people for Jesus" trumps abortion for evangelicals.

Anonymous Mr. Nightstick November 05, 2012 12:42 PM  

When people are fat and happy no one cares. Once the fat and happiness is gone, the GOP will have a huge resurgence.

Anonymous Mr. Nightstick November 05, 2012 12:42 PM  

The GOP or its successor.

Anonymous RINO November 05, 2012 12:47 PM  

Vox Texas is very Christian and most latin americans are strongly Catholic. You believe free hand otus trump abortion for hispanics?

That can be proven easily - when left to their own devices hispanics consistently construct socialist governments.

Anonymous Theophilus November 05, 2012 12:47 PM  

I was going to say something similiar to Mr. Nightstick. Hard times generally make people harder. Once the realization and reality of the job losses--that aren't coming back-- set it and the reality that we aren't laeving our children a better country than the one we had sets in... well, it is going to get ugly quickly. I told an in-law that I wouldn't be surprised if the U.S. faced a civil war in the next 20 years and she obviously thought I was crazy. But it really doesn't seem that outlandish to me. But, besides the obvious divide between whites and minorities, there is just as large of a divide between left and right. Could political differences foster a war more quickly than race issues? They are interconnections of course... I don't know... But nothing is linear, either.

Anonymous The Gray Man November 05, 2012 12:48 PM  

TheOne,

I cannot believe you buy into the myth that the mystic semi-Catholic Latinos are going to create some kind of magic conservative base to replace some of the liberal whites.

It is not happening and will never happen. The Mexican population is inherently socialist and supports Democrat candidates and liberal agendas.

Anonymous Loki of Asgard November 05, 2012 12:49 PM  

Vox Texas is very Christian and most latin americans are strongly Catholic. You believe free hand outs trump abortion for hispanics?

Considering that as of your year 2004, your resident Hispanics had undergone a full 22% of abortions, despite being only 17% of your population?

I suppose your next question is whether anyone really believes that Hispanics care more for the Fifth of May than for the Fourth of July.

Anonymous zen0 November 05, 2012 12:54 PM  

I don't know about his calculations, but a significant number of Asians lean toward conservative politics, and even a bit libertarian at times. --Dr. Torch

The Spengler article covers that as well. As I have said for years, you need more Chinese immigration.

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler November 05, 2012 12:58 PM  

Jeb Bush is married to an Hispanic.

In the Parade magazine, which is an insert to most Sunday newspapers has an article about "Reforming Immigration". It is co-written with Clint Bolich, Hoover Institution research fellow.

This is what they wrote:

"America's population growth has stalled, and our social welfare burden is escalating as fewer workers support more retirees. The only way to save safety-net programs and escape a crushing debt burden is to have a pipeline of hardworking, talented immigrants"...."(Immigration) should be driven by economic demands and provide a chance for law-abiding people to earn a share of the American dream."

This from a "Republican". Jeb Bush, if you google, was against the Arizona Immigration law.

This man is an idiot. His miscegenation colors his judgement. I told you. Modern republicanism was the vehicle to destroy European civilization and replace it with Jewish messianism/globalization. The Republican Party is infused with Political Correctness which is Jewish/Marxist ideology. It is killing itself.

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler November 05, 2012 12:59 PM  

That was published in the November 4th, 2012 issue of Parade magazine. Jeb Bush along with Clint Bolick are the authors.

Blogger Shimshon November 05, 2012 1:09 PM  

Vox, I think the outcome of the election vis a vis your prediction is more interesting than the election itself. Even bloggers like Mish and Denninger give Obama huge odds of winning (90% for Mish). Amusingly, Mish, in his latest, says that even though quite a few states are in the margin of error, it's impossible for the margin of error to swing the same in every single poll. Completely missing the obvious possibility of bias in the polls, whether intentional or not.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 1:10 PM  

Yes, just like "bomb the scary brown people for Jesus" trumps abortion for evangelicals.

~Josh

I don't understand your comment. The bomb the brown people party is the anti abortion party

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 1:16 PM  

I cannot believe you buy into the myth that the mystic semi-Catholic Latinos are going to create some kind of magic conservative base to replace some of the liberal whites.

It is not happening and will never happen. The Mexican population is inherently socialist and supports Democrat candidates and liberal agendas.

The Gray Man

I didn't say that, but I don't believe they will go as pro democrat at as high a % rate as blacks. Also I don't believe conservatives are so much better than liberals regardless and no race is inherently freedom minded.

Anonymous Boetain November 05, 2012 1:17 PM  

RCP Average 9/9 - 10/14 -- -- 55.7 39.0 Romney +16.7

Yeah...the GOP should be really worried about Texas.

Don't forget there are a lot of conservative, white, GOP-type people fleeing high tax communist states such as California and moving into Texas. This will offset some of the Dumbocrat gains in the state to keep it solidly Repukacan for decades to come.

Of all the things in the world to worry about, this ain't one.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 1:18 PM  

Vox Texas is very Christian and most latin americans are strongly Catholic. You believe free hand otus trump abortion for hispanics?

That can be proven easily - when left to their own devices hispanics consistently construct socialist governments.

~RINO

No different than whites, look at Europe. Religion is a bigger factor than genetics in my view.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 1:19 PM  

I don't understand your comment. The bomb the brown people party is the anti abortion party

Because the evangelicals voted for the warmonger over the most consistent pro life candidate in the primaries.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 1:22 PM  

No different than whites, look at Europe. Religion is a bigger factor than genetics in my view. 

So the hispanics that are voting for socialism aren't catholic?

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 1:24 PM  

Wheeler, shouldn't you be supporting increasing the numbers of hispanics, since they are catholic, and will support your catholic monarchy?

Anonymous MachoMan November 05, 2012 1:27 PM  

The first civil war happened when the south realized they had reached a similar demographic point of no return with no hope of outvoting the north. One wonders what whitey will do when he realizes that 70-80% of whites can vote one way and lose every time.

Anonymous The Gray Man November 05, 2012 1:29 PM  

TheOne:
I didn't say that, but I don't believe they will go as pro democrat at as high a % rate as blacks. Also I don't believe conservatives are so much better than liberals regardless and no race is inherently freedom minded.


So 90% or more? That's a negligible amount left to vote Republican. One is virtually correct in saying that all blacks vote Democrats with statistics like that.

Anonymous Axe Head November 05, 2012 1:36 PM  

The Republican Party is infused with Political Correctness which is Jewish/Marxist ideology. It is killing itself.

It's a good thing. Evil is self-correcting. It destroys itself.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 1:36 PM  

Because the evangelicals voted for the warmonger over the most consistent pro life candidate in the primaries. ~Josh

What election are you referring too? Both Ron Paul and Mitt Romney are pro life, so the issue becomes a wash and the electorate move on to other issues.

So the hispanics that are voting for socialism aren't catholic? ~Josh

Catholics are more likely to vote for a centralized power structure that reflects Catholicism. Protestants are more likely to vote for decentralized power structure which represents Protestantism. I think a Spanish Protestant will be less socialist in their views than a white atheist. But once again to my original comment I don't believe Hispanics will break as much as blacks to the Democratic party due to abortion.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 1:40 PM  

TheGrayMan,

I personally would be very surprised if Hispanics went to the democrats in the 90% range

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 November 05, 2012 1:45 PM  

In order for the shame of our democratic system to be maintained, there needs to be the illusion of choices. I doubt the American people will stand by and let their illusions break down.

Anonymous carnaby November 05, 2012 1:47 PM  

Free hand Otus is one of my best buddies, I think Luke is his cousin.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 1:49 PM  

What election are you referring too? Both Ron Paul and Mitt Romney are pro life, so the issue becomes a wash and the electorate move on to other issues.

Romney isn't pro life, unless you hold to the idea that "nominating Republican scotus justices" will end abortion.

When was the last time any significant progress was made by republicans to end abortion?

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 1:52 PM  

Catholics are more likely to vote for a centralized power structure that reflects Catholicism. Protestants are more likely to vote for decentralized power structure which represents Protestantism. I think a Spanish Protestant will be less socialist in their views than a white atheist

Except that hispanics are catholics, not protestants.

Congratulations.

You've now successfully refuted your own argument.

Anonymous Daniel November 05, 2012 1:55 PM  

No, that's Free Bird Otus, carnaby. We're talking about Freehand Otus Trump, Donald's more capable brother. He noodles catfish with the one hand, and with the free hand, signs requests for government support. He calls it "diversifying his portfolio."

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 1:55 PM  

Josh, you need to differentiate between a candidates personal conviction and the system that stops those convictions from being implemented. How would a President help the cause of pro life with the supreme court striking every law down? It would take a constitutional amendment. And yes, considering Romney is a Mormon, I do believe he is pro life.

Anonymous Vidad November 05, 2012 2:01 PM  

"you need to differentiate between a candidates personal conviction and the system that stops those convictions from being implemented."

Oh come on. People act out their convictions.

If W really thought abortion was murder, why didn't he say that every time he gave a speech? The president has a bully pulpit. He can talk, talk, talk about it and hopefully bring the electorate with him. He can also encourage legislation, such as the Sanctity of Life Act that strikes back against the tyranny of the judiciary. He can also enact executive orders, if so desired.

We simply haven't had any real pro-lifers in the Presidential office. Just pretenders.

Anonymous Jason November 05, 2012 2:02 PM  

"Josh, you need to differentiate between a candidates personal conviction and the system that stops those convictions from being implemented. How would a President help the cause of pro life with the supreme court striking every law down? It would take a constitutional amendment. And yes, considering Romney is a Mormon, I do believe he is pro life."

Pro-life, as in protecting the life of every child, regardless of rape or incest?

OpenID meistergedanken November 05, 2012 2:02 PM  

"-considering Romney is a Mormon, I do believe he is pro life."

Whatever. So is Harry Reid!

Anonymous Stilicho November 05, 2012 2:03 PM  

And yes, considering Romney is a Mormon, I do believe he is pro life.

So, what was his record on this issue in Massachusetts?

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 2:04 PM  



Except that hispanics are catholics, not protestants.

Congratulations.

You've now successfully refuted your own argument.

~Josh

No I did not Josh, let me explain in detail. The more Catholic the individual, the less likely they are to vote pro abortion so they will break Republican. Once both candidates are pro life, example being a primary, than the socialist tendency will exert itself. Which is why I agree with Vox that the Republican party will drift further away from freedom.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 2:04 PM  

How would a President help the cause of pro life with the supreme court striking every law down? It would take a constitutional amendment.

No, it doesn't take a constitutional amendment (and even if it did, why haven't the republicans proposed one every year?)

Congress could, by majority vote, remove abortion from the jurisdiction of the federal courts and return the issue to the states.

Congress could, by majority vote, extend the provisions of the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the unborn.

Congress could, by majority vote, issue letters of marque and reprisal against abortion doctors.

Hell, a president could target every abortion clinic with drone strikes.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 2:07 PM  

The more Catholic the individual, the less likely they are to vote pro abortion so they will break Republican. Once both candidates are pro life, example being a primary, than the socialist tendency will exert itself.

Then why are hispanics voting for democrats if they're as pro life as you seem to claim?

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 2:11 PM  

Okay, to all those commenting on my pro life comment, please respond with what you would do if you were President that would Not get overturned by the Supreme Court. If you can't come up with a realistic answer, then your criticism is pointless. As to a constitutional amendment, there isn't even enough support to get one passed regarding marriage, let alone abortion.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 2:11 PM  

So, what was his record on this issue in Massachusetts?

Oh, it's the height of foolishness to actually look at politicians' records.

Besides, how do we know that Romney wasn't hiding his true intentions so that he could be protected from liberal attacks?

Anonymous Anonymous November 05, 2012 2:13 PM  

Hispanics voting margins in 2012:

http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/polls/5097b52debcabf1f9f000014

Lana

Anonymous paradox November 05, 2012 2:15 PM  

Josh

Wheeler, shouldn't you be supporting increasing the numbers of hispanics, since they are catholic, and will support your catholic monarchy?


Epic beard supposedly no longer Catholic.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 2:15 PM  

Josh, please statistics showing Hispanics are voting for Democrats at nearly the same % rate as Blacks. Also I agree with you that a NON religious Hispanic will break Democrat, I am saying that religion is a mitigating factor, but of course not all Hispanics are very religious.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 2:15 PM  

 As to a constitutional amendment, there isn't even enough support to get one passed regarding marriage, let alone abortion.

We had eight years of a Republican president, six years of a Republican Congress, and there "isn't enough support" to pass an amendment on abortion?

Not to mention that, ante Obama, seven of the.scotus justices had been Republican appointees.

Congratulations. You've proven that the Republican party is not a pro life party.

Anonymous re allow anonymous comments November 05, 2012 2:17 PM  

@ RINO

I believe the "socialist" governments of latin america mostly ban abortion.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 2:17 PM  

Josh, please statistics showing Hispanics are voting for Democrats at nearly the same % rate as Blacks. 

You're shifting goalposts. You had originally asserted that hispanics were going to vote for republicans because they're pro life and catholic.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 2:24 PM  

Okay, to all those commenting on my pro life comment, please respond with what you would do if you were President that would Not get overturned by the Supreme Court.

Put abortionists and planned parenthood executives on the kill list and assassinate them with drones.

Problem solved, problem staying solved.

Blogger IM2L844 November 05, 2012 2:24 PM  

The drive away from a constitutional republic and toward a more pure democracy seems to be gaining momentum with every election cycle.

Given the facts that roughly 80% of the population is concentrated within 50 miles of a coastline (including the Great Lakes) and with greater population density, the propensity for liberal ideologies to dominate the populace increases exponentially, the push toward electing presidents via popular vote is clearly part of the liberal agenda and will probably become part of the new normal sooner rather than later.

Just one more reason I don't think Vox's 2033 prediction here can be too far off the mark.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 2:29 PM  

Josh, please statistics showing Hispanics are voting for Democrats at nearly the same % rate as Blacks.

You're shifting goalposts. You had originally asserted that hispanics were going to vote for republicans because they're pro life and catholic.

~Josh

No I did NOT, you are getting sloppy.
Here is my original post at 12:37 which actually asks a question.

"Vox Texas is very Christian and most latin americans are strongly Catholic. You believe free hand otus trump abortion for hispanics?"

And here is my third post at 1:16 in response to thegrayman fleshing out my first comment. The second post was me asking you what you meant because I didn't' understand.

"I didn't say that, but I don't believe they will go as pro democrat at as high a % rate as blacks. Also I don't believe conservatives are so much better than liberals regardless and no race is inherently freedom minded."

Blogger James Dixon November 05, 2012 2:29 PM  

> I personally would be very surprised if Hispanics went to the democrats in the 90% range...

Fortunately for the democrats, 70% is good enough.

Anonymous Kel November 05, 2012 2:32 PM  

The One,

I'm Catholic (of Italian heritage) and grew up in New Jersey. Let me tell you, hispanics aren't going to vote Republican because hispanics are no more pro-life than any so-called "Catholic" who lives in New York or New Jersey.

New Jersey, depending on which statistics you look at, has a Catholic population of roughly 40%. Yet it's been a consistent democratic stronghold for decades (and years ago, while consistently Democratic, its Catholic population was roughly 50%). The fact is, being "Catholic" doesn't equate to pro-life, and certainly neither equates to voting Republican.

In fact, except for me and a few of my friends who are actual, believing, practicing Catholics, most "Catholics" I know are CINOs: Catholic in Name Only. They were raised Catholic, knowing nothing about it since they were taught a watered-down, feminized version of Christianity, and so they might call themselves Catholic but don't believe a whit of it. Moreover, they certainly would NEVER let their morals be influenced by religion, let alone their vote. So New Jersey has all the problems of a liberal democratic stronghold: out-of-wedlock births, abortion, etc, etc. Liberalism is their religion, not Catholicism.

Hispanics are only worse in this regards, because perhaps unlike a white Catholic, a hispanic Catholic can be bribed by government handouts. It's a myth that Hispanics are more fervent believers in Catholicism. They aren't. And even if they were, it'd be a watered-down, feminized version of Catholicism that unfortunately only recently the Church has begun to deal with. Certainly not the religion they were raised on 20 years ago. So forget it.

Anonymous Anonymous November 05, 2012 2:34 PM  

The Democrats used to have the Solid South for which they could always rely on, until the South woke up and realized that the Democratic Party didn't represent their values.

Hispanics migrated from predominately Catholic regions to North America, and they certainly didn't run from those regions because they thought things were going just fine, and it wasn't religion they were trying to get away from.

Take an anecdotal survey of any group of African Americans and you'll find very few that believe in gay marriage. And this idea that there is such a thing as a traditional family unit, what group could benefit the most right now from realization of that old concept?

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 2:38 PM  

James Dixon, statistics please? Not some phone survey with a 300 sampling size, but hard stats. How many Hispanics voted democrat/republican in the 2008 and 2004 Elections. Where is this 70% number?

Anonymous Cheddarman November 05, 2012 2:40 PM  

So I guess this really could be the most important election ever for Republicans. But only if they do something to stop the open immigration. - RINO

My guess is that Romney will pass some sort of comprehensive immigration reform, to legalize all the illegals currently residing in the U.S. The Senate and House, will gladly go along with it. The business community wants access to cheap labor. The talking heads at Fox will support it as well. I think it is fitting, as the Republicans will again be outed as the worthless traitors that they are.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 2:42 PM  

Josh, your answer of murder proves my point about what a President can do regarding abortion. Saying the Republicans control this or that is pointless as they never (in the past few decades) controlled 2/3 of the house and senate plus 3/4 of the state legislators at the same time which is needed to overrule the Supreme Court.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 2:43 PM  

No I did NOT, you are getting sloppy.Here is my original post at 12:37 which actually asks a question."Vox Texas is very Christian and most latin americans are strongly Catholic. You believe free hand otus trump abortion for hispanics?"

That is the primary assertion that I've been attacking. For "handouts" to trump "abortion", it doesn't require hispanics to vote as heavily democratic as blacks do, only for them to vote more democratic than republican. That is assuming your paradigm of democrats = handouts and republicans = anti abortion.

And as lana's link shows, over seventy percent of hispanics are voting democratic.

So, it seems that, for hispanics, handouts do trump abortion.

Unless you want to asset that, unless a demographic group is as reliably democratic as blacks, they're not democratic.

Anonymous Gen. Kong November 05, 2012 2:43 PM  

The only significant block of hispanics who ever voted for the Repukes were the Cubans who fled Castro's socialist paradise. As they age and die off, their descendants are trending towards the leftist socialism of the vast majority of the other hispanics (primarily Mexican). The "40%" vote Jorge Busheron allegedy got in 2004 was a lie - proved by Sailer repeatedly - yet the Ministry of Truth and the Rove Repukes repeat it endlessly. Hispanics vote consistently Democratic by a 2/3 - 1/3 margin, which will shift to 75% or more over time. The Bushes and Roves love to push the notion of pro-life hispanic Catholics, which is laughable. They vote pro-abortion 2/3 of the time - actually more considering that only a minority of Repukes actually oppose abortion. The only two groups in the electorate who vote more heavily Democratic and hispanics are Jews (78% last time) and blacks (96% last time).

Blogger W.LindsayWheeler November 05, 2012 2:45 PM  

No, I don't welcome the hispanic immigration into America. No way whatsoever.

I've been around the world. I've seen much of it. I like the American way of life in which I grew up in. That was in the 60s tail end of the 50s. America is the product of the WASP and German mindset in America. Without the Northern European, America is sunk. The Mexican/hispanic does not have the spiritual or intellectual quality to further America.

In order to preserve the culture, one must preserve the race. As you can see about Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney, it is all about "economics, economics, economics". Life is more than "economics". And these people are tooooo stupid to realize it.

Blogger ProNorden November 05, 2012 2:48 PM  

We should do more to promote Foreigner Repatriation.
Our Congressmen should compose and sponsor bills for it.
At the State level, Foreigner Repatriation should also be promoted.

Anonymous Kel November 05, 2012 2:51 PM  

"Okay, to all those commenting on my pro life comment, please respond with what you would do if you were President that would Not get overturned by the Supreme Court."

Planned Parenthood receives federal funding. I would veto all funding bills indiscriminately until Planned Parenthood is 100% de-funded (so that they can't stick it into an important funding bill. ALL would go down until PP is purged).

I would order that all abortion services forbidden from military bases.

I would make nominations for EVERY FEDERAL OFFICE (not just a judge) dependent on, among other things, a litmus test for being pro-life. Moreover, I would publicly announce this and would make it well known in speeches that people who support child murder have no place in public office at all.

I would only support pro-life candidates for office, regardless if they're in the same party as me.

I would only have pro-life speakers and ministers at the Nominating Conventions.

I would support federal legislation restricting abortion, daring the court to overturn it.

I would write new federal regulations to bury abortion providers in endless paperwork.

Most importantly, I would ignore Supreme Court orders to protect abortion providers and I would not enforce bullshit laws to "protect" abortion mills. The President is the executor of the laws, let the Supreme Court go to hell. I'd dare Congress to impeach me.

That enough for starters?

Anonymous Daniel November 05, 2012 2:51 PM  

The One, they don't need a Supreme Court override to pass a law illegalizing infanticide, nor do the states. The fact that no states have banned abortion is all you need to know: politicians won't touch it, and judges don't have to.

If your law is just, you don't need a supermajority to advocate it.

Can you name one law, state or federal, that has been passed that simply identifies abortion as illegal murder or at worst negligent intentional miscarriage?

If I were a Republican with a majority, that's exactly what I'd do. It isn't terribly difficult to do.

Let it get overturned or hijacked! But that's the very least a majority could do if it wanted to.

It is provable that it does not.

Republicans are in favor of abortion, certainly for different reasons than democrats, but undeniably in favor. Just as they are in favor of socialized medicine and retirement funding. Just as they are opposed to privacy.

After all this time, with that many governments under their control, you would think a republican wing would have passed a simple ban on abortion.

Anonymous Gen. Kong November 05, 2012 2:52 PM  

Oh, and by the way, the US Catholic Church does not really oppose abortion. That's why the signed onto Obamacare before they started mouthing some ineffective faux-opposition to it. Instead of excommunicating abortionists and those who support and profit from the practice, there has been decades worth of "dialogue" on the issue. As Ann Barnhardt has pointed out, the US Church (and likely most of the European Church as well) is essentially controlled by Marxist homosexuals and pedophiles. Latin American countries from Mexico to Brazil are all legalizing abortion and enacting gay marriage - per instructions from the ruling elite (Carlos Slim, Soros, vampire-squids, et al). The church there is not really putting up any effective resistance either. They've likely been infiltrated by the same gang - which was initiated in the 1930s.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 2:55 PM  

Josh, your answer of murder proves my point about what a President can do regarding abortion. Saying the Republicans control this or that is pointless as they never (in the past few decades) controlled 2/3 of the house and senate plus 3/4 of the state legislators at the same time which is needed to overrule the Supreme Court.

Drone strikes against babykillers aren't murder, they're justifiable homicide, under the "he needed killin" defense.

Regarding the level if republican control, you missed my list of all the things Congress could do by majority vote.

And you conveniently ignored that the overwhelming majority of Scotus justices over that timeframe were republican appointees.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 2:59 PM  

Kel,

I know what you are talking about. I am Italian and grew up in Brooklyn, NY. As you say many are Catholic in name only. I disagree with what you say about the Spanish. Latin America may be socialist, but it is very restrictive on abortion which proves it is an important issue. I do think they are more fervent. All I am saying it is a mitigating factor, I am not saying that a majority of Hispanics will ever vote Republican.

Anonymous Gen. Kong November 05, 2012 3:00 PM  

Wheeler notes:
In order to preserve the culture, one must preserve the race. As you can see about Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney, it is all about "economics, economics, economics". Life is more than "economics". And these people are tooooo stupid to realize it.

Even their economic arguments are BS and lies. There is nothing free about a rigged system whereby the ruling oligarchy counterfeits money which they then lend to the government (and everyone else) at interest. They're just Marxists pretending to be capitalists, which has a history going all the way back to Engels (Karl Marx's sugar-daddy). Death and hell to them all.

Anonymous Daniel November 05, 2012 3:01 PM  

"Okay, to all those commenting on my pro life comment, please respond with what you would do if you were President that would Not get overturned by the Supreme Court."

Terminate all federal government spending on abortion by executive order.

I'd also make up a Presidential Declaration of Harm: Abortion. I would state that it is the Office's Position that abortion is a state's issue that should have the moral imperative to declare abortion the murder or manslaughter of an unborn citizen.

I would oppose any and all federal legislation determining the criminality of abortion practice. Message: It isn't the right of the Federal Government to govern the immoral act of abortion.

I would sick my First Lady on abortion opposition and awareness.

I would declare abortion to be a left-wing plot to exterminate blacks in the womb.

The first state to pass a straightforward ban of abortion and shutdown of clinics and abortion support would get Fed kickbacks like none other.

The Supreme Court would remain completely silent on all of these issues, as they did Bush's suspension of stem cell research.

It is dead solid obvious that the Republicans like having pro-life messaging, and will be damned before they ever do anything to kill that golden goose (like, I don't know, actually re-illegalizing abortion.)

Anonymous JaimeInTexas November 05, 2012 3:03 PM  

"The first civil war happened when the south realized they had reached a similar demographic point of no return with no hope of outvoting the north. One wonders what whitey will do when he realizes that 70-80% of whites can vote one way and lose every time. "

Are we talking about Tejas first skirmishes with the central government of Estados Unidos de Mexico, due to new laws stopping all immigration?

Anonymous JaimeInTexas November 05, 2012 3:07 PM  

Oh, "outvoting the north." Got it. Tejas couldn't outvote the south. You must be talking 1961.

Correction: not all immigration from these uSA was outlawed but severely curtailed.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 3:12 PM  

No I did NOT, you are getting sloppy.Here is my original post at 12:37 which actually asks a question."Vox Texas is very Christian and most latin americans are strongly Catholic. You believe free hand otus trump abortion for hispanics?"

That is the primary assertion that I've been attacking. For "handouts" to trump "abortion", it doesn't require hispanics to vote as heavily democratic as blacks do, only for them to vote more democratic than republican. That is assuming your paradigm of democrats = handouts and republicans = anti abortion.



And as lana's link shows, over seventy percent of hispanics are voting democratic.

So, it seems that, for hispanics, handouts do trump abortion.

Unless you want to asset that, unless a demographic group is as reliably democratic as blacks, they're not democratic

~Josh

Lana's link had a sampling size of 300?? to represent a population of millions. In addition it was a telephone survey, not actual votes. Didn't we just have a blog post quoting about the unreliability of surveys.

Then the assertion you are attacking is false. I asked Vox a question hence the question mark, I did not issue a statement. Once again notice the question mark.

Here is my actual assertion.

Religion is more important to Spanish then white people. (Hence Latin America's strict abortion law's) This will act as a mitigating factor to Hispanics going democrat as long as the Republican Presidential candidate is pro life. The majority of Spanish will still vote democrat, but at a lower rate then blacks.

Blogger James Dixon November 05, 2012 3:14 PM  

> James Dixon, statistics please?

OK, first 70% is a slight overstatement, I'll admit. It's actually only 69%.

Let's start with Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_and_Latino_American_politics

I'll quote the relevant section: In the 2010 midterm elections, 60% of Hispanics voted Democratic, while 38% voted Republican.[5] In 2008, 67% of Hispanics voted for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, while 31% of Hispanics voted for Republican
presidential candidate John McCain.[6] In 2006, 69% of Latino voters supported Democratic candidates in congressional races, while 30% supported Republican candidates.

Which seems to get most of it's figures from: http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/reports/130.pdf

And which seems to be backed up by http://www.wcvi.org/data/election/wcvi_nov2008nationalanalysis_121808.pdf and http://cis.org/latinovoting

Is that enough, or do you want me to do more web searching for you?

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 3:19 PM  

Daniel,

Those are good suggestions, but everything you said would last four years, max eight. I'm talking about actual laws that last longer than the person in office, as Roe vs Wade outlasted the actual justices. Any actual law passed would be deemed unconstitutional. I'm sure the Supreme Court would remain silent. It would take exactly the amount of years you are in office plus one day until the case was heard in the supreme court.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 3:23 PM  

Religion is more important to Spanish then white people. (Hence Latin America's strict abortion law's) This will act as a mitigating factor to Hispanics going democrat as long as the Republican Presidential candidate is pro life. The majority of Spanish will still vote democrat, but at a lower rate then blacks.

This is logically incoherent.

If religion is more important to hispanics than whites, then more hispanics would be religious than whites, and if religious hispanics vote for republicans because of abortion, than the majority of hispanics would be voting republican. However your last sentence is that hispanics will still vote democratic. Which means that your logic chain preceding that sentence is broken.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 3:33 PM  

> James Dixon, statistics please?

OK, first 70% is a slight overstatement, I'll admit. It's actually only 69%.

Let's start with Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_and_Latino_American_politics

I'll quote the relevant section: In the 2010 midterm elections, 60% of Hispanics voted Democratic, while 38% voted Republican.[5] In 2008, 67% of Hispanics voted for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, while 31% of Hispanics voted for Republican
presidential candidate John McCain.[6] In 2006, 69% of Latino voters supported Democratic candidates in congressional races, while 30% supported Republican candidates.

~Jame Dixon

The 2006 statistic doesn't have a source so I'll ignore it. Averaging 67% and 60% gives us 63.5. Since we know blacks goes democrat 90%+ of the time, that means Catholicism acts as a mitigating factoring to the tune of 25% points. That is huge and what I have been saying all along.

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 3:35 PM  

For my above statement it is Catholicism+culture, but they are strongly intertwined.

Anonymous The CronoLink November 05, 2012 3:42 PM  

Josh, you're just making up strawmen.

Anonymous 11B November 05, 2012 3:43 PM  

The only way to save safety-net programs and escape a crushing debt burden is to have a pipeline of hardworking, talented immigrants"...

The elites have been pushing that line for years. However, their practice of allowing in destitute peoples who immediately go on the public dole, even in the prime of their lives, only exacerbates the strain on the safety-net programs. Translation, if they were really interested in saving the safety-net, they'd limit immigration to just those who would not become a burden on the public, and end the ridiculous family unification policy that allows a good worker to dump his deadbeat family on America's safety-net.

Anonymous Anonymous November 05, 2012 3:48 PM  

"Latino registered voters prefer President Barack Obama over Republican challenger Mitt Romney by 69% to 21% and express growing satisfaction with the direction of the nation and the state of their personal finances but are somewhat less certain than non-Hispanics that they will vote in this election, according to a new nationwide survey of 1,765 Latinos."

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/10/11/latino-voters-support-obama-by-3-1-ratio-but-are-less-certain-than-others-about-voting/

Lana

Anonymous The One November 05, 2012 3:49 PM  

Religion is more important to Spanish then white people. (Hence Latin America's strict abortion law's) This will act as a mitigating factor to Hispanics going democrat as long as the Republican Presidential candidate is pro life. The majority of Spanish will still vote democrat, but at a lower rate then blacks.

This is logically incoherent.

If religion is more important to hispanics than whites, then more hispanics would be religious than whites, and if religious hispanics vote for republicans because of abortion, than the majority of hispanics would be voting republican. However your last sentence is that hispanics will still vote democratic. Which means that your logic chain preceding that sentence is broken.

~Josh

Really???

Example: Whites are 25% religious. Hispanics are 35% religious.

No majority needed. And of course non religious whites are voting based on other issues.

*Are your attentions elsewhere (at work?)? Because between taking my question as a statement, referencing a 300 person survey and saying my logic is unsound when it is fine is unbecoming of you.

Blogger Cogitans Iuvenis November 05, 2012 3:50 PM  

I'm not entirely sure Vox. From what 1st generation Americans, parents who were immigrants, who are hispanics are just as likely to want to restrict illegal immigration as normal white Americans according to Reason magazine. Assuming that this is correct, then considering that the hispanics are culturally conservative, but vote for democrats because of immigration policies. Then wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that as the number of hispanic Americans who are 1st generation Americans or greater increases as a percentage of the hispanic population that they would be more likely to not vote democratic?

There is also the fact that conservatives, of the religous sort, are out reproducing progressive minded individuals as pointed out by Joel Kotkin. Assuming that the first point is plausible, and then considering the second point, I am not so sure that the Republican party is assured a demographic dead end. But I guess we won't really know for sure until 4-12 years from now.

Anonymous YIH November 05, 2012 3:53 PM  

@Josh:
Vox Texas is very Christian and most latin americans are strongly Catholic. You believe free hand (outs) otus trump abortion for hispanics?
Short answer: YES. For decades the Pope has extolled not just 'pro-life' but also a 'social justice' (socialism) agenda on the basis that 'social justice' is 'pro-life'. Note how after Fidel Castro softened his stance on the Church Pope John Paul II was happy to embrace him.
And finally how about 'Catholic' Italy? Pretty left-wing politically from what I've heard, and like 'Catholic' Central and South American countries more than a bit corrupt.
But I'm not Vox, perhaps he can address that issue a bit better than I can.

Anonymous 11B November 05, 2012 3:53 PM  

Religion is more important to Spanish then white people. (Hence Latin America's strict abortion law's) This will act as a mitigating factor to Hispanics going democrat as long as the Republican Presidential candidate is pro life. The majority of Spanish will still vote democrat, but at a lower rate then blacks.

I really think most Americans could do with a decent discussion of the people who make up Latin America. Unfortunately the term 'Hispanic' lumps together such disparate peoples that it really cannot constitute a cohesive group. Most people wold be surprised to learn that a plurality of the people of Latin America are actually white.

Blogger James Dixon November 05, 2012 3:55 PM  

> Averaging 67% and 60% gives us 63.5. Since we know blacks goes democrat 90%+ of the time, that means Catholicism acts as a mitigating factoring to the tune of 25% points.

It means hispanics aren't the monolithic voting block blacks are, but there's no indication the difference is Catholicism.

However, a difference which makes no difference is no difference. A 60%+ voting percentage is enough to ensure the democrats win.

Anonymous 11B November 05, 2012 4:00 PM  

Follow up: Unfortunately since the whites own Latin America, we don't get that many of them as immigrants. We primarily get the Mestizos of Mexico and Central America. It would probably be better to just start referring to most Hispanics in America as Mestizos since that's what they are and that's how they refer to themselves in their home countries.

Anonymous Daniel November 05, 2012 4:10 PM  

Those are good suggestions, but everything you said would last four years, max eight. I'm talking about actual laws that last longer than the person in office, as Roe vs Wade outlasted the actual justices. Any actual law passed would be deemed unconstitutional. I'm sure the Supreme Court would remain silent. It would take exactly the amount of years you are in office plus one day until the case was heard in the supreme court.

So? The fact that no politician has ever approached the issue in forty years should tell you that no Republican in power really wants abortion to go away. If they can't be bothered to speak and directly save a big proportion of 8 million lives, then to hell with them: abortion is the enemy they would prefer to be closely held rather than slain.

Abortion provides emotional cover for most Republicans. The minute it is illegal is the minute they lose a significant emotional qualifier. After all, The Prohibition Party practically died because of its greatest victory (the 18th Amendment). The minute the Republicans get serious about abortion is the minute abortion is re-criminalized at the state level and the minute the Republicans lose their critical emotional differentiator.

There are a few ideologues who oppose it, vote against it at every turn, and are furious with their colleagues. But I would say that is a very few. Republican majority will always result in pro-abortion (in general) laws with some window-dressing restrictions on occasion.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 4:12 PM  

Josh, you're just making up strawmen.

Do point them out.

Anonymous Anonymous November 05, 2012 4:14 PM  


Look, this "conservative Hispanic" nonsense is easy to test. Start with the county by county map from the 2000, 2004 or 2008 election. Let's take Texas for an example. Examine the map for counties that solidly voted Democrat. Aside from such places as Travis County, you will find a high correlation with immigration from Mexico.

Two obvious examples: the counties around El Paso, and the counties around Brownsville. El Paso is right across from Ciudad Juarez, and Brownsville is neighbors with Matamoros. Both areas have seen a steady demographic shift since the 1960's. Both areas are so solidly Democrat, the Republican party essentially does not exist. The Mexican immigrants (legal and illegal) in both areas may well be as "hard working" and "family value oriented" as GW Bush claimed, but they vote the straight party ticket election after election, and no matter how far up the economic ladder they go, they do not change their politics.

It could be that, were the immigration spigot turned off, acculturation might shift the politics of the Mexican immigrants and their descendents. Maybe. But maybe not. For sure, as long as endless waves of chain migration from Mexico and the even poorer countries of Central America continues, the party of handouts has a sure supply of voters.

The combination of SWPL whites, racialist-tribalist blacks, and authoritarian Hispanics seems likely to create a perpetual one-party state, where the middle class is systematically looted by the rich to buy votes from the poor. Come to think of it, that's not a bad description of the Mexican political system of the last 80 or so years...

Anonymous Servant November 05, 2012 4:14 PM  

It may have missed this conversation entirely, but the pentecostal movement amongst persons of Hispanic descent is continuing to show year by year increase (please check the statistics of the Gulf Latin American District (now renamed into two districts due to expansion) of the Assembly of God - and these will vote pro life on the majority. Assuming all North/Central/South American immigrants speaking Spanish are Roman Catholic or will remain RC once here is an assumption and not a terribly good one.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 4:14 PM  

Example: Whites are 25% religious. Hispanics are 35% religious. No majority needed. And of course non religious whites are voting based on other issues. 

How are you defining religious?

Anonymous Rollory November 05, 2012 4:22 PM  

You will NEVER see the likes of Glenn Reynolds admit this sort of thing.

I have completely had it with Instapundit. The other day I tried asking myself what exactly Reynolds' positions that AREN'T liberal might be. The only thing I could come up with was vague mouthings about "small government", like the all-hat-no-cattle Porkbusters, which didn't actually do anything to address the budgetary problems since 80% of the budget is health care, pensions, military, and welfare.

The man is a liberal, and the more I see of his now-permanent crop of cobloggers the more clear it is that they all are also. And that is considered one of the mainstays of the right-leaning blogs!

Texas going Hispanic will (should) be the final damning curse upon them all. They'll be in their 60s at the time and mumbling vaguely about irrelevancies, the same as today's Republicans mumble vaguely about being polite and gentlemanly.

To borrow a line from the immortal Cleve Blakemore, these guys are just baffled all the time.

Their children and grandchildren, those that survive, will curse their names and everything they stood for.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 4:23 PM  

Are your attentions elsewhere (at work?)? Because between taking my question as a statement, referencing a 300 person survey and saying my logic is unsound when it is fine is unbecoming of you.

That was one survey, several other surveys have been linked, all showing the same preference for democrats by hispanics. Yes, you asked a question, i answered it, you disputed my answer, and away we went.

What exactly is your point, that republicans will win based on future demographics because while the majority of hispanics vote democrat, it's not as big of a majority as the democratic share of the black vote?

And your logic about religion making a difference is busted because a majority of whites vote republican, whereas a majority of hispanics do not, even though according to you hispanics are more religious than whites.

Anonymous JustMe November 05, 2012 4:24 PM  

How are you defining religious?

However he is, it's probably irrelevant. How many "religious" people continue to vote for those who hold non-Biblical worldviews and political beliefs? I don't know how anyone calling themselves a "Christian" could vote pro-choice Democrat, but there are plenty that do. Being "religious" hardly matters anymore since I'm pretty sure only atheists wouldn't apply that label to themselves.

Hispanics that I deal with are all leftists. There's one that's not. They also don't consider themselves "Americans" but "Dominican," "Mexican," "Puerto Rican," or whatever. They all support Obama as well. I'm sure many, if not all, would also consider themselves "religious."

Anonymous cherub's revenge November 05, 2012 4:24 PM  

I don't know about his calculations, but a significant number of Asians lean toward conservative politics, and even a bit libertarian at times. --Dr. Torch

The Spengler article covers that as well. As I have said for years, you need more Chinese immigration.


Golly gee, if there were only some place on Earth with a large population of Asians where we could test this Asian libertarian hypothesis.

This is right along the lines of the Asian-White genius hybrid hypothesis you see so often on HBD blogs, as if Tajikistan didn't exist.

Blogger vandelay November 05, 2012 4:39 PM  

Man, talk about going out with a whimper. Romney as the last Republican. Serves as an appropriate epitaph for America at least.

Anonymous Gen. Kong November 05, 2012 4:43 PM  

Rollory:
You will NEVER see the likes of Glenn Reynolds admit this sort of thing.

I have completely had it with Instapundit. The other day I tried asking myself what exactly Reynolds' positions that AREN'T liberal might be. The only thing I could come up with was vague mouthings about "small government", like the all-hat-no-cattle Porkbusters, which didn't actually do anything to address the budgetary problems since 80% of the budget is health care, pensions, military, and welfare.


... and another one opens his eyes. At the end of the day, "conservatives" like Reynolds, Romney and Rove all believe in the doctrine of weaponized equality every bit as much as Housenigga Hussein and his acolytes do. The chief difference is that they're less honest about it. Weaponized equality really boils down to ethnic replacement and genocide. Repukes like Reynolds are making money shepherding hapless Evangelicals and assorted idiots into digging their own graves. This has been going on for the last four decades and very few have woken up to it. Congratulations, you're beginning to see reality.

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 4:44 PM  

Golly gee, if there were only some place on Earth with a large population of Asians where we could test this Asian libertarian hypothesis.

Calculus classes?

Blogger M November 05, 2012 5:10 PM  

Jews, Blacks, Hispanics, liberated white women, bankers, unchecked capitalists, and religious philanthropists killed our nation.

Pretty simple.

Blogger M November 05, 2012 5:15 PM  

"The combination of SWPL whites, racialist-tribalist blacks, and authoritarian Hispanics seems likely to create a perpetual one-party state, where the middle class is systematically looted by the rich to buy votes from the poor. Come to think of it, that's not a bad description of the Mexican political system of the last 80 or so years..."

Thanks, Jews.

Anonymous cheddarman November 05, 2012 5:29 PM  

What does the SWPL acronym stand for?

Single White Professional liberal?

I tried looking it up on line, i get "stuff white people like"

sincerely

cheddarman

Anonymous Josh November 05, 2012 5:30 PM  

I tried looking it up on line, i get "stuff white people like"

That is correct. Swpl refers to those types of whites who behave that way.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Ethnologist November 05, 2012 5:57 PM  

Interesting they always say "Hispanic" immigration. That's about as dumb as thinking immigration from Vietnam is the same as from Japan.

They really need to divide it into groups along a gradient.

Peninsular, Criollo: Full-blooded Spanish descent. The first is born in Spain or the Iberian Pennisula, the latter abroad such as in Mexico. Dividing the two is no longer a big deal after the Spanish Empire collapsed.
Mestizo: Mixed Spanish and Amerindian descent.
Indios: Full-blooded Amerindian types. Aztec, Mayan, and a million other little groups.

These are not my terms, and are in fact very old. There are many others, but this is keeping it simple. I left out things like Isleño, which is not important for the United States. Now why did they drop this? A) To try and hide the fact Mexico is flushing the toilet on us. B) Try to conflate Aztecs with Spaniards C) Raciss is bad!

Now, I guarantee the amount in the Indio and Mestizo groups is much, much larger then anything else. Which is bad news for US economic development and human capital.

Like I said previously, the dirty little secret is a lot of these immigrants do not speak English or Spanish.

Anonymous Matthew November 05, 2012 6:35 PM  

"Hispanic" is vampire squid ink.

Regular every-day normal Whites use it to mean "mestizo", almost exclusively. Texans usually just call them all Mexicans, because we don't care where they're actually from.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Ethnologist November 05, 2012 6:45 PM  

In fact, except for me and a few of my friends who are actual, believing, practicing Catholics, most "Catholics" I know are CINOs: Catholic in Name Only. They were raised Catholic, knowing nothing about it since they were taught a watered-down, feminized version of Christianity, and so they might call themselves Catholic but don't believe a whit of it. Moreover, they certainly would NEVER let their morals be influenced by religion, let alone their vote. So New Jersey has all the problems of a liberal democratic stronghold: out-of-wedlock births, abortion, etc, etc. Liberalism is their religion, not Catholicism.

Hispanics are only worse in this regards, because perhaps unlike a white Catholic, a hispanic Catholic can be bribed by government handouts. It's a myth that Hispanics are more fervent believers in Catholicism. They aren't. And even if they were, it'd be a watered-down, feminized version of Catholicism that unfortunately only recently the Church has begun to deal with. Certainly not the religion they were raised on 20 years ago. So forget it.


Yes!

They are culturally Catholic due to being raised in it, not religiously Catholic. Same reason the Mexican gangbanger can have the Virgin Mary tattoo on his chest, then run out and shoot people and peddle drugs. Go to mass, hang out, eat some good food, see the family.

Not to mention the Catholicism in Latin America is always grafted on to the native religions like the Aztec one.

The Aztec religion was insanely violent. Even the other people nearby like the Maya and Inca were not as bad. It kind of explains the Mexican drug cartels and the Day of the Dead celebration. The violence still lingers on in the gene pool, epigenetically in the background.

Blogger Bob Wallace November 05, 2012 6:51 PM  

"Jeb Bush is married to an Hispanic."

And his grown son looks like the village idiot. His normal expression is close to that of Alfred E. Newman - "What? Me worry?"

Anonymous DonReynolds November 05, 2012 7:05 PM  

I have seen many of these forecasts over the years, usually straight-line projections against a fixed total. Of course, I do not accept them. They should all include the caveat "IF WHITES DO NOTHING". (I know them well enough to know they will do quite a bit, rather than surrender.)

In my opinion, and this is based on the experience in several states, where whites have ALREADY become a minority or an endangered majority, whites tend to retreat into a single party and overlook their own petty differences in favor a single tribe. You mention Texas and this has already occurred there. The Democrat party in Texas is already the "black and hispanic" party. The only whites who are still Democrats in Texas are those carpetbaggers from California, hippies and the old LBJ Democrats, who are now quite elderly.

To move up the evolutionary ladder a few rungs, I would stuggest states like Mississippi and South Carolina, where they have more experience (and success) at fighting a rearguard action against an aggressive minority. Other states like Arkansas, Tennessee and Alabama will be a while getting to that point because their minority populations are actually small. The reason you find the reddest states in the South is because they have already incorporated the demographics into their politics, largely by having a white political party. This is nothing new. What is new is the fact that it is now the Republican party. For more than a century, the Democrat party in the South was the conservative white party.

Here in Arkansas, we have the unlikely case of the Republicans being the liberals and the Democrats still being the more conservative party. No doubt this is true in some of the other states as well. The Republican party in Arkansas was imported by Winthorp Rockefeller and a few carpetbaggers. Being Ripon Society Republicans, they have little in common with the conservative bent of the national party. The minorities are controlled WITHIN the Democrat party, which is still overwhelmingly white.

Anonymous cherub's revenge November 05, 2012 7:28 PM  

What does the SWPL acronym stand for?

A SWPL is someone who publicly advocates for EBT scanners at the local all-White organic farmers's market, while being the first to abandon it if that demographic showed up to use them.

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Aztec Studies November 05, 2012 7:35 PM  

Now, I know people reading are going to go "What about Christianity, Islam, ect? Didn't they kill a bunch of people?" "What about the Vikings, or the Assyrians?" Yes, but that was during warfare.

You see, the difference is the violence is inherent to the Aztec religion due to their calendar and cosmology. It made them special.


An intrusive and militant group, such as the Aztecs, were distrusted and disliked by the dominant powers of the area, but their fighting skills could be put to use, and this made them attractive as mercenaries or allies. For about a century the Aztecs wandered around the shores of the lake, being allowed to settle for a while and then driven out by more powerful neighbors.

After the fall of the Toltecs. They were violent from the very beginning.


The Culhua reaction was disgust and dismay at the bloodthirsty potential of their mercenaries. Subsequently, the Aztecs confirmed this opinion when they killed and flayed a young Culhua princess who was, ostensibly, to become the wife of Huizilopochtli. They then invited the victim’s father, Achitometl, to the wedding, where he came across a priest wearing his daughter’s skin.

Achitometl naturally demanded vengeance and the Aztecs were thrown out. They escaped to Acatzintlan on the shore of Lake Texcoco, where the water was shallow enough for them to cross.


Flayed as an offering to their Gods. Like Silence of the Aztec Lambs, they made themselves a pretty Woman Suit. And that's how the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan came to be, in the middle of a swamp. Later on to be rebuilt as Mexico City. Also entitled: "Why Mexico City always has so much earthquake damage. It's built on a huge fucking swamp with volcanoes nearby."


Sacrificial rituals among the Aztecs and in Mesoamerica in general must be seen in the context of religious cosmology: sacrifice and death was necessary for the continued existence of the world. Likewise each part of life had one or more deities associated with it and these had to be paid their dues in order to achieve success. Gods were paid with sacrificial offerings of food, flowers, effigies, and quail. But the larger the effort required of the god, the greater the sacrifice had to be. Blood fed the gods and kept the sun from falling. For some of the most important rites, a priest would offer his own blood, by cutting his ears, arms, tongue, thighs, chest or genitals, or offer a human life, or even a god's life. The people who were sacrificed came from many segments of society, and might be a war captive, slave, or a member of Aztec society; the sacrifice might also be man or woman, adult or child, noble or commoner.

You don't say? Tell me more.


The ’Atlcahualo’ was celebrated from the 12th of February until the 3rd of March. Dedicated to the Tlaloque, this veintena involved the sacrifice of many children on sacred mountaintops. The children were beautifully adorned, dressed in the style of Tlaloc and the Tlaloque. On litters strewn with flowers and feathers; surrounded by dancers, they were transported to a shrine and their hearts would be pulled out by priests. If, on the way to the shrine, these children cried their tears were viewed as signs of imminent and abundant rains. Every Atlcahualo festival, seven children were sacrificed in and around Lake Texcoco in the Aztec capital. They were either slaves or the second born children of nobles.

That's my favorite entry on the Aztec Calendar. It happened every year.
God Tlaloc

Anonymous Dr. Idle Spectator, Aztec Studies November 05, 2012 7:36 PM  

Read it. Let it flow through you. Then properly conclude:

"What the hell is wrong with these people?"

Blogger LP 999/Eliza November 05, 2012 7:39 PM  

Collapse by 2033...The entire scene is ALL GONE, it isn't even remotely intelligible.

Anonymous rycamor November 05, 2012 8:03 PM  

cherub's revenge November 05, 2012 7:28 PM

What does the SWPL acronym stand for?

A SWPL is someone who publicly advocates for EBT scanners at the local all-White organic farmers's market, while being the first to abandon it if that demographic showed up to use them.


A SWPL is an overeducated white bore who loves "vibrancy" as long as it is pre-packaged and delivered to them in some safe but "authentic" manner, such as a Haitian/African drum circle playing at their local organic single-origin-coffee-bean coffeehouse. Of course, if families of Haitians started moving into their apt building and sacrificing chickens, it would be fast exit for whitey.

I really think SWPL needs to become a pronounceable word in English: "swipple". It just says everything.

Blogger R. Bradley Andrews November 05, 2012 8:09 PM  

Daniel, I agree that it won't happen in the modern political climate, but killing pre-born children is far more of an issue that should be federal than freedom of speech. Murder should not be permitted, though modern society revels in it.

Anonymous The Lightworker November 05, 2012 8:43 PM  

"Unless, of course, the Republican party becomes the party of white nationalism and starts winning 75 to 80 percent of the white vote, which seems extremely unlikely given SWPL cultural influence, white female left-liberalism, and the party elite's preference for irrelevance to "extremism"."

That unlikely scenario is the best case, and I hope for it.

There's a third scenario that you did not consider and that I fear. The Republican Party could regain relevance as the "more anti-White than thou" party.

The Democratic Party wasn't always the anti-White party. It only became that through a tremendous sellout of the White race. What Democratic politicians can do, Republican politicians can do too.

Anonymous Roundtine November 05, 2012 8:45 PM  

I already know of one new conservative Republican state that wants to form: Western New York. Much of the demographic shift is still in the cities. The South wasn't able to expand slavery and met demographic doom, but an unapologetic push for the creation of new states could be a win, especially if it breaks off into "black" and "hispanic" states, since their political leaders would see the $$$ in it. It's basically the Sailer strategy on steroids.

Anonymous Idle Spectator, Voodoon't November 05, 2012 9:07 PM  

Of course, if families of Haitians started moving into their apt building and sacrificing chickens, it would be fast exit for whitey.

Voodoo gets much, much better than that.


Voodoo and human sacrifice: The haunting story of how Adam, the Torso in the Thames boy, was finally identified

In the Thames River. Next to the Globe Theater where Shakespeare once plied his trade. Celebrate diversity.

Great job, England. You stupid tossers.

Anonymous Daniel November 05, 2012 9:17 PM  

Daniel, I agree that it won't happen in the modern political climate, but killing pre-born children is far more of an issue that should be federal than freedom of speech. Murder should not be permitted, though modern society revels in it.

You do realize that murder is not a federal crime, correct? Under what circumstance should a constitutional federal baseline incorporate normal felonies properly addressed by the state?

Abortion is no more of a federal issue than shoplifting or manslaughter. Why on earth should a doctor and the accomplice mother in, say, New York, be sent to nationally funded federal prison, when state run Attica is right there?

Blogger Nate November 05, 2012 9:47 PM  

All of this is entirely irrelevant... since by 2016... the United States won't even exist anymore in any recognizable form.

Anonymous zen0 November 05, 2012 10:47 PM  

Nate November 05, 2012 9:47 PM

All of this is entirely irrelevant... since by 2016... the United States won't even exist anymore in any recognizable form.


The constantly approaching apocalypse, that never seems to arrive. The hare pursuing the tortoise of reality. The paradox holds.

Anonymous 11B November 05, 2012 10:57 PM  

What does the SWPL acronym stand for?

Single White Professional liberal?

I tried looking it up on line, i get "stuff white people like"

sincerely

cheddarman


The SWPL designation was started by those on the right by using the acronym from this website Stuff White People Like. This website was created by a left leaning white guy who planned to make fun of young, educated, urban whites in a tongue and cheek manner. So he list things that are social markers for those whites, hence stuff white people like, such as their love of micro breweries, shopping in camping stores, the Soccer World Cup and so on. There was nothing controversial with this website.

However, since most of the items on that website appealed to the trendy, over-educated, socially conscious liberal whites who preach diversity but practice gentrification, people on the right started to refer to any liberal white opponents as 'SWPLs' for short which seems to instantly form a picture in one's mind once you know its meaning.

I find myself calling a lot of people SWPLs and many of my friends have no idea what I mean. Once I show them that website, they laugh because it really does describe your white Obama voter.

Blogger Rod Freeman November 05, 2012 11:20 PM  

The abortion issue? Really? C'mon you guys...

Abortion is a boogeyman to be evoked whenever convenient by politicians of all stripes to scare their base into kicking back some knee jerk support.

There hasn't been any real change on the federal level in abortion rights for 40 years ... and nobody is going to change that. Nobody.

Abortion is a sucker issue - a useful emotional power-wedge intentionally employed by the political class to get their citizens psychologically invested in legitimizing the official "only we can save you" charade.

All a politician has to do with some people is say the word "abortion" and hint that their opponent is going to either give it away free or ban it and they can guarantee 5% of their base will have an apoplectic fit and run to them for salvation.

In reality it's the government against YOU - whether you are pro life or pro choice. Stop playing their game and you stop fighting a war they intentionally keep on a constant low simmer.

Blogger Jamie-R November 06, 2012 12:00 AM  

2033 might be generous if Obama is reelected and the trajectory of debt speeds up, which I think it will under him. America has an unstable federal government now. Comparing it to Greece is idiotic, Germany can cover Greece's sins all day. America in Greece's situation is nothing but F'd in the A. At some point you'll have to deal with insolvency, because a Democrat will return one day and do this again, or a shit conservative like Bush, who I don't think Romney is purely in business acumen and financial management terms. But at least I can be like Keynes and say, well I'm almost dead so who cares. Some of those Greek pensioners dying now had a great run! Let's keep the run going a little longer, America!

Anonymous The Lightworker November 06, 2012 12:48 AM  

zen0: "The constantly approaching apocalypse, that never seems to arrive. The hare pursuing the tortoise of reality. The paradox holds."

You don't see it because you'd need time lapse photography and the liberal mass media is supplying your eyes.

The truth is that White genocide is already happening. Whites are in decline both relatively and absolutely, and the anti-Whites are not easing up.

Anonymous Unpaid Goldman Sachs Intern November 06, 2012 1:17 AM  

Hooray for White Womyn!!!!!

Hey Hey Ho Ho Western Civilization Has Got to Go
Hey Hey Ho Ho Western Civilization Has Got to Go

Anonymous Toby Temple November 06, 2012 1:30 AM  

Wake up, white man! No to birth control!

Anonymous bw November 06, 2012 2:51 AM  

the tortoise of reality

That is an intersting symbolism.
Especially where the Fabian Socialists are concerned - that is one of their symbols, signifying the need for gradualism, slow and progressive incrementalism, along with the wolf in sheeps clothing, symbolizing the deception through which they will carry out the goal of "remoulding the earth nearer to (their) heart's desire".
This last goal is sybolized and contained in their stained-glass window in the London School of Economics. (Sidney Webb and Edward R. Pease hammering the earth on an anvil).

Anonymous Anonymous November 06, 2012 3:04 AM  

Dr. Idle Spectator, Aztec Studies is on the money. An easy and interesting read is "The Conquest of New Spain", written by one of Cortez's men. There are descriptions of some Aztec practices from the point of view of a European observer. The retreat from Tenochticlan, fighting all the way, is worth the effort to find the book.

Aztec deities are no longer confined to Dia de los Muertos (Day of the Dead, Nov. 1, aka All Saints Day). For some years, there has been a new version of an old deity surfacing in parts of Mexico, now she's showing up along the border. Supposedly an outgrowth of the cartel culture.

Santa Muerte, "Saint Death". Any search engine will provide images. There's probably a Wiki page or two. These are the "Catholics" that are supposed to show up and vote pro-life...the ones with a candle to Santa Muerte on the shelf right next to the Virgin Mary statue.

Anonymous VryeDenker November 06, 2012 3:43 AM  

One sometimes tends to forget that "conservative" is not synonymous with WASP. It is 100% correct to refer to a Hispanic as a "conservative" if he wishes to "conserve" his
preferred means of statecraft, even if that means it is in contrast to your own WASP conservatism. Unlike liberalism, conservatism is tied up with staunch patriotism. This means that a US and Mexican conservative wouldn't necessarily have any more in common than a US liberal and US conservative.

Blogger R. Bradley Andrews November 06, 2012 4:16 AM  

I will have to consider that a bit Daniel. I would still argue that Constitutional principles should prevent a state from legalizing murder as much as legalizing theft. We are far from both however.

Anonymous zen0 November 06, 2012 4:23 AM  

This last goal is sybolized and contained in their stained-glass window in the London School of Economics.
- bw

Interesting. All the figures worshipping socialist tomes at the bottom prove that socialism is intended to be a religion.

Thanks for pointing this out. My brother studied at the London School of Economics but I never heard anything from him about this window.

Anonymous The Lightworker November 06, 2012 6:04 AM  

VryeDenker: "One sometimes tends to forget that "conservative" is not synonymous with WASP."

A Japanese who wants Japan to remain entirely Japanese is a conservative, and good luck to him.

But an anti-White is not a conservative. Mass non-White immigration into all (and only) White countries, and forced integration and assimilation, with the inevitable result that White people would cease to exist, is a genocidal project, not a conservative one.

VryeDenker: "It is 100% correct to refer to a Hispanic as a "conservative" if he wishes to "conserve" his preferred means of statecraft, even if that means it is in contrast to your own WASP conservatism."

An immigration invader who wishes to impose his own political culture and end and replace the race of the people whose land he is occupying is not a conservative.

VryeDenker: "Unlike liberalism, conservatism is tied up with staunch patriotism."

Liberalism supports forms of patriotism instrumentally and tactically. The Great Patriotic War is an example. Support for non-White identities as battering rams to smash up the Whites is another example.

VryeDenker: "This means that a US and Mexican conservative wouldn't necessarily have any more in common than a US liberal and US conservative."

A US and Mexican conservative necessarily have more basis for peaceful relations than a US liberal and US conservative.

The anti-White "liberal" holds that means White countries are the property of all, though non-White countries are the property of their own people. The conservative Mestizo Mexican may choose to remain behind his borders in the spirit of "what's yours is yours, what's mine is mine". This is a fundamental difference.

Blogger Nate November 06, 2012 8:54 AM  

"The constantly approaching apocalypse, that never seems to arrive. The hare pursuing the tortoise of reality. The paradox holds."

Hardly. 2016 is approaching at a standard rate. It will arrive. I will be right.. or I will be wrong. You can see the basis of my prediction.

Its math. Simple math. You are free to check it.

In late 2015 the US will not even be able to pay the interest on the debt... thus... no new debt will be purchased... thus.... the financial situation collapses. There are two ways around this.

1) Hyper-inflation

2) Blatant default.

Either will eventually require a new currency to be created... and both will almost certainly result in a world war.

Blogger Nate November 06, 2012 9:05 AM  

Look I'm not talking about Revelation here. Empires fall. Nations war. It happens. And yes... we're due.

Anonymous JW November 06, 2012 9:23 AM  

" bw November 06, 2012 2:51 AM the tortoise of reality

That is an intersting symbolism.
Especially where the Fabian Socialists are concerned - that is one of their symbols, signifying the need for gradualism, slow and progressive incrementalism, along with the wolf in sheeps clothing, symbolizing the deception through which they will carry out the goal of "remoulding the earth nearer to (their) heart's desire".
This last goal is sybolized and contained in their stained-glass window in the London School of Economics. (Sidney Webb and Edward R. Pease hammering the earth on an anvil)."

Indeed the gradualism theme was picked up and spread by Gramsi in his Prison Notes writings regarding "The Long March Through The Institutions".

Anonymous HH November 06, 2012 9:40 AM  

"Look I'm not talking about Revelation here. Empires fall. Nations war. It happens. And yes... we're due"

Yes but barring alien invasion or catastrophic events like asteroids etc they tend to rise up, peak and then fall at some rate. Has anyone looked at the rise, steady state and fall times of the various empires over time ? to the casual observer it is certainly getting to be a faster cycle...maybe 2016 is on schedule..

Anonymous JW November 06, 2012 10:12 AM  

"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

The above is from The U.S. Constition, Article Three, Section Two, Para 3.
The key words are "with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."
This section allows Congress to effectivly override the courts decisions or prevent the court from hearing a case. This section was used by Newt Gingrich (and others in congress) back in the ninties to GIVE for free, what was then called PCS, ie: radio frequencies to the Graham (Wash. Post) organization. Part of that legislation was worded to prevent any court from hearing any challenges to this action.

For all their talk about being against abortion, and "we must obey the Supreme Court's ruling", the republicans could have passed legislation overriding SCOTUS when they held the House & Senate...but there was no will to do so. The republicans could also use this section to override the court's rulings regarding religious activities.

Silly people keep voting for "anti-abortion republicans", thinking they will somehow end abortion; but they never do end it.

Blogger Nate November 06, 2012 10:17 AM  

"Yes but barring alien invasion or catastrophic events like asteroids etc they tend to rise up, peak and then fall at some rate. Has anyone looked at the rise, steady state and fall times of the various empires over time ? to the casual observer it is certainly getting to be a faster cycle...maybe 2016 is on schedule.."

There is no time table. But there are stages that are obvious... and each stage has indicators. Empires and rise and fall in as little as a 50 years... or can last as long as Rome.

Anonymous The Lightworker November 06, 2012 10:39 AM  

JW November 06, 2012 10:12 AM: "Silly people keep voting for "anti-abortion republicans", thinking they will somehow end abortion; but they never do end it."

That's not being silly; that's doing the right thing but being powerless and being betrayed.

At minimum, those voters have done something to reject formal cooperation with evil.

Anonymous JW November 06, 2012 11:10 AM  

The LightworkerNovember 06, 2012 10:39 AM

Nice to know that some read (to?) the tail end of comments.

Anonymous DonReynolds November 06, 2012 11:12 AM  

Well, the deed is done. No lines at all at the polling station. Quick and done.

Ben Franklin was asked at the end of the Constitutional Convention what type of government do we have now. Franklin said, a Republic....if you can keep it. What I detect in his reply is a hint of doubt that such a government can endure over time. He may have been correct.

More importantly, I have heard various politicians talk about how divided the country has become. Nonsense. This country has ALWAYS been divided....from the very beginning, came to blows during the Civil War, and those same divisions persist to this day, with many of the same differences for more than two centuries. I am convinced we would be two happier peoples if we agreed to an amiable divorce. Break up the country into three parts and let each find their own version of happiness, prosperity, and security. This is a much better solution than resolving the same issues by force of arms, which is closer than anyone seems to think.

Blogger James Dixon November 06, 2012 11:22 AM  

> And yes... we're due.

I'd guess slightly past due, actually.

Also, I would expect a default rather than hyper-inflation. We could have both, of course.

Anonymous Stilicho November 06, 2012 12:09 PM  

I already know of one new conservative Republican state that wants to form: Western New York.

Western NY is "conservative" only in comparison to NYC. It's like saying that Gomorrah was godly compared to Sodom.

Blogger R. Bradley Andrews November 06, 2012 2:03 PM  

DonR, the problem is that no firm geographical line exists anymore, even if it did at that time. Where would you split the parts?

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts