Why Do White People Think Mitt Romney Should Be President?Parsing the narrow, tribal appeal of the Republican nominee.
Second: You can make a tax deductible contribution via VDARE by clicking here. (Paypal and credit cards accepted, including recurring "subscription" donations.) UPDATE: Don't try this at the moment.
Third: send money via the Paypal-like Google Wallet to my Gmail address (that's isteveslrATgmail.com -- replace the AT with a @). (Non-tax deductible.)
Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.
You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.
Or you can send money via credit card (Visa, MasterCard, AmEx, Discover) with the industry-standard 2.9% fee. (You don't need to put money into your Google Wallet Balance to do this.)
Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).
Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here's how to do it.
(Non-tax deductible.)
Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)
Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)
Posts
41 comments:
"Not Just a Pretty Face.."
You're so mean!
Sorry man, I just can't do Slate. Not anymore.
http://yochicago.com/chicago-had-largest-downtown-population-growth-from-2000-to-2010/28054/
Meanwhile, 97% of black people are going to vote for Obama.
The NYTimes picked a comment citing you on this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/opinion/roger-cohen-americas-gender-divide.html?hp&_r=1&
I was pleased with their choice.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-us-birth-rate-hits-all-time-low-407-babies-born-unmarried-women
I should have stopped at the "and in Slate" part.
That Slate article was gibberish. That guy gets paid to write that?
It's hard to keep track, however, of whether its white people or white men who are the evil tribalists.
Nah. It's easy. It's those who refuse to vote for the Mocha Messiah.
Unmarried women shouldn't be allowed to vote.
"Minorities and women are the people standing still, while white men run away from them."
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!
That's the Sprite-out-of-your-nose-spewing-est, ROTFLMAO-est statement there ever was. How the fuck do blacks move any further towards Obama than the 99.999998% of their vote they gave him in 2008?
"The story mentions no particular plan by the Obama campaign to capture the nonwhite vote."
Used here, illegally granting amnesty to ~2 million Latino illegal aliens for the purpose of Hispandering constitutes "no particular plan" for winning their vote.
"in the first presidential debate, Obama was slack and ineffectual against a sharp Romney...And then Obama shredded Romney in the second debate, and kept cuffing him around in the third."
That's not my memory of the three debates, but who gives a shit? At this point in the campaign all media sources left, right and reputed center are unloading everything they have and (more importantly) everything they wish they had on the candidate they hate. Truth ain't in it. There's no time to counterattack or critique or thoughtfully consider the allegations in question. Every side just wants to win.
kids make white folks vote GOP. Kids emit a chemical soup that modifies adult brains.
/you may now return to your pseudo-sociopolitical discussion
When oh when will this assault on the white man ever end?
I could not follow that too well since at a certain point it was like an alarm bell, "Scocca is expecting Romney to win and getting a head start on the blame epic" so whatever he wrote after that... I don't think that's the more likely outcome, though I was amused by Paul "Only Stupid People Think It's Close" Krugman--right before he praises the acumen of Intrade and Betfair. Thanks, media insiders!
Parsing the narrow, tribal appeal of the Republican nominee.
God help me, I actually assumed he was being ironic. No, it's your standard lefty anti-white racist claptrap.
Scocca seems to be distressed that he has to be part of an uncool group, and is expending energy to distance himself from it.
The real question that Slate should be asking is why do black people think that Obama should remain president?
Is Benghazi Obama's Iran hostage crisis?
Another embassy, another blowback.
I see,-when 60+ percent of whites vote against obama thet are narrow tribalists , when 95+ percent of blacks vote for obama it's because of his record. Ok got it. One must also note in passing mr. scocca's courage in coming out as a white man for obama- the Congressional Medal of Honor would not be out of place here
Readers of this blog might find the following discussion illustrative of various things:
http://philosopherscocoon.typepad.com/blog/2012/10/what-drives-women-away-from-philosophy-some-anecdotal-speculation.html
The comments are really the main event.
"And so we have two elections going on. In one, President Obama is running for re-election after a difficult but largely competent first term"
ah, i figured out the problem. tom scocca is a moron.
well, there's certainly no doubt democrats have the moron vote locked up.
But the Slate article was right that this is about identity politics. Obama's actual record -- boringly establishment, continuing Bush's legacy in lots of ways with the major exception of HC reform, which he continued from Romneycare -- certainly does not justify the histrionic denunciation of him on right-wing media (and sites like this one).
If it's any comfort to folks here, Chris Roch has demonstrated that Obama is, in fact, white .
On the right hand side of Slate there is a link to one of Slate's sister sites and it is called The Root. Here is the description:
"The Root is a daily online magazine that provides thought-provoking commentary on today's news from a variety of black perspectives."
Tribalism is bad except when practiced by Latinos, Blacks, Jews, Homosexuals, Muslims, Asians and all those who oppose Traditional America.
Liberalism is anti-white racism, nothing more. That should be obvious to everyone at this stage.
Obama's actual record -- boringly establishment, continuing Bush's legacy in lots of ways with the major exception of HC reform, which he continued from Romneycare -- certainly does not justify the histrionic denunciation of him on right-wing media (and sites like this one).
Moby's are the lowest form of internet life.
The real question is why any believing Christian, especially a Catholic, would vote for a heretic cult member like Romney. Clearly racial identity trumps theology for most people.
I stopped reading Slate when they (apparently) banned me from commenting. I don't know if the ban is real or not, just the my comments stopped going through.
When oh when will this assault on the white man ever end?
Never.
MOO HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!
What I want to know if how blacks would vote today if it were Bill Clinton vs Obama. That would be interesting.
The linked article shows the danger of intellectual bubbles. He never even noticed the huge hole in his argument--if one party gets most of the white or male vote, and the other party gets most of the nonwhite or female vote, it's silly to criticize only one side for that. Why aren't the Democrats interested in winning over more whites and males?
It seems that Buchanan's White Party is now forming.....not exactly in the way he would have wished, but it is forming nonetheless.
That it prefers to go by another name is perfectly understandable, and can be thought of as simply good PR.
I could not follow that too well since at a certain point it was like an alarm bell, "Scocca is expecting Romney to win and getting a head start on the blame epic" so whatever he wrote after that.
Meanwhile the betting markets reflect a wellspring of support for Obama. He's now -370 (risk $370 to win $100), and Romney is +310 (risk $100 to win $310).
He never even noticed the huge hole in his argument--if one party gets most of the white or male vote, and the other party gets most of the nonwhite or female vote, it's silly to criticize only one side for that.
No, it's not.
MOO HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!!
The Futurist book group at the Local Lefty Bookstore is reading Murray’s “Coming Apart” this month. It must be a dissident book group. Murray, although a semi-homeboy, did not speak about the book at the old LLB.
The real question is why any believing Christian, especially a Catholic, would vote for a heretic cult member like Romney.
Are you seriously arguing that Obama is the mainstream Christian in this contest? At least Romney didn't go to a church where the clergyman openly expressed anti-white views the way Obama did.
So, "ben tillman"--if that is your real name--are you calling your shot? I'd take points on Romney to beat the Vegas line (none of this Dublin book garbage). They have him down around 240 EV. But hey, evidently you think he loses Virginia too...
Meanwhile the betting markets reflect a wellspring of support for Obama. He's now -370 (risk $370 to win $100), and Romney is +310 (risk $100 to win $310).
I know and I tried to get in on some of that easy money with Romney, but the damned banks won't let me get money to Intrade (in Ireland) before the elections.
I know and I tried to get in on some of that easy money with Romney, but the damned banks won't let me get money to Intrade (in Ireland) before the elections.
Bookmaker.eu is taking bets until noon EST tomorrow. Depending on when this comment is published, you may have time to open an account and send them money by Western Union.
...are you calling your shot? I'd take points on Romney to beat the Vegas line (none of this Dublin book garbage). They have him down around 240 EV. But hey, evidently you think he loses Virginia too...
Don't have much of an opinion. However, if you want electoral-vote-spreads, 5 Dimes offers Obama over/under 249.5/259.5/269.5/279.5/289.5/299.5/309.5 at various odds -- take your pick.
"this fact is obfuscated because white people control the political media"
Yeah, right. White people.
Tom is basically arguing that the USA is no longer a coherent polity with enough in common to accept common government. So what's the next step, logically? Presumably, a) the secession of white, Republican America and homelands for all, or b) the disfranchisement of the wicked whites (their elimination would doubtless be preferable - see Ignatiev, N and Wise, T - but someone's got to keep the tax revenue rolling into the coffers of the permanent majority (see Africa, S). How long before weighting votes according to race (1 white vote counts for 2/3 of a "minority" vote) is seriously and widely suggested?
Post a Comment