November 6, 2012

Election Open Thread

Tell me about it.

By Steve Sailer on 11/06/2012

52 comments:

Evil Sandmich said...

In The Matrix which was the good pill, the red or the blue one, I can't remember.

11/6/12, 4:35 PM
irishman said...

Berman or Sherman Steve?

11/6/12, 4:35 PM
x said...

AIPAC wins.

11/6/12, 4:57 PM
peterike said...

Man, Vermont has a lot of really stupid white people in it.

11/6/12, 5:01 PM
Anonymous said...

Whoa - Bill O'Rreilly on Fox just now - "Blacks, Hispanics, and Women want THINGS. And everyone knows that Obama is the candidate offering THINGS."

Sounded really shockingly HBD-esque.

11/6/12, 5:11 PM
Londoner said...

Watching it on the BBC. The Red/Blue thing gets more and more annoying with each second - blue =/= Democrat and red =/= Republican. It couldn't look more wrong. The Democrats have done very well to appropriate blue, and the Republicans have been very stupid to allow themselves to be identified with the colour of hostility, rage and revolution.

11/6/12, 5:21 PM
Anonymous said...

"Blacks, Hispanics, and Women want THINGS. And everyone knows that Obama is the candidate offering THINGS."

The want things on credit.

11/6/12, 5:26 PM
AMac said...

Maryland's Dem governor and Dem legislature gerrymander the state's Congressional districts after every Census in order to further cut down Repubs it sends to the House. And to further protect Dem incumbents, of course.

This time, somebody (Repubs? good citizens?) cried foul, and wants the districts to be redrawn in a less crazy-quilt fashion. They got a Question put on today's ballot to force this issue.

Here's how it read in the voting booth:

- - - - -

Question 5
Referendum Petition
(Ch. 1 of the 2011 Special Session)
Congressional Districting Plan

Establishes the boundaries for the State’s eight United States Congressional Districts based on recent census figures, as required by the United States Constitution.

For the Referred Law
Against the Referred Law

- - - - -

In other words, only the fraction of people who read up on the issue and remember that "Against" means "Yes to redistricting" can vote their intentions.

Even the true blue WaPo described the issue as one of politicians choosing their electorate.

Democracy in action, 2012.

11/6/12, 5:27 PM
Matra said...

Whoa - Bill O'Rreilly on Fox just now - "Blacks, Hispanics, and Women want THINGS. And everyone knows that Obama is the candidate offering THINGS."

He then said the "white establishment is now a minority". So, with establishments always being a minority of the population, did he really mean whites are now a minority and that this is the future?

11/6/12, 5:48 PM
Sowe said...

Its funny to notice that only my foreign work colleagues dare to ask work aquaintances directly who they are voting for.

11/6/12, 5:53 PM
SoCal Philosopher said...

"Blacks, Hispanics, and women don't have lots of THINGS, so they want THINGS. Obama will give them THINGS." = racist


"Blacks, Hispanics, and women don't have lots of POWER, so they want POWER. Obama will give them POWER." = enlightened

11/6/12, 5:54 PM
Truth said...

Well, look on the bright side, folks; It's only four years until Jeb "upholds traditional Conservative values."

11/6/12, 6:08 PM
Anon87 said...

Democracy in action!

I'm not sure how long it will be (ever?)before this is not relevant in an election.

11/6/12, 6:09 PM
Anonymous said...

Adelson or Saban?

11/6/12, 6:20 PM
WMarkW said...

To those who think VT and ME are stupid -- liberalism is fine in a SWPL environment. Marin County, Minnesota, Portland OR, run absolutely fine liberal communities.

Except in states dominated by agriculture, the Republican share of the white vote is almost totally correlated with the minority population.

11/6/12, 6:27 PM
Anonymous said...

All commentators seem to be saying the same:

The Non-White Bloc Vote (Black, Hispanic, Asian, Jewish, Mixed Race, Other) seems to be at least 3-to-1 for Obama (Slash Any Non-White Democrat), and will exceed 25% of votes cast this year. (was 26% in '08).

11/6/12, 6:32 PM
Anonymous said...

did he really mean whites are now a minority and that this is the future

That was definitely what I thought O'Reilly meant.

O'Reilly also said some stuff about the end of "traditional" America, which sounded like it came right out of iSteve these last few weeks.

I think that a lot of White folk are finally waking up and saying, "WTF?"

As in, "I mean, seriously, W.T.F?!?"

Romney may yet pull this out by the skin on his teeth, but this election is a wake-up call to White America: The "Other" really really REALLY hates us.

11/6/12, 6:32 PM
Orthodox said...

Everyone is talking about demographic change; it's now a completely mainstream topic. Now's the time to press the issue, especially to disillusioned Republicans since it looks like Obama will win.

I suggest pressing hard to get an opinion piece in the WSJ or somewhere similar, they will be open to this interpretation in the wake of their loss.

11/6/12, 6:33 PM
Auntie Analogue said...

On election night Media-Pravda is at its most insufferable. It's like Ilya Ehrenburg vs. Joe Göbbels on steroids AND acid. What a nightmare! Or, it's like watching coprophagists salivating over a pair of sumo wrestlers defecating in super slo-mo. Or it's like listening to the track announcer calling a race at Belmont Park on a 78 rpm record played at 16 rpm. Sheer. Frikking. Agony.

Not switching to the election returns channels until at least 2200 CST. Until then I have ME-TV's old sit-com fare on for background drone company while I surf the net for anything but election drool.

11/6/12, 6:41 PM
Anonymous said...

Get ready to watch lots of hags with granny glasses gloat on TV.

11/6/12, 6:58 PM
Matthew said...

Black Swan Event: if Obama wins, the Democratic Party (and much of its base) will unravel in the next four years. Trillion dollar annual deficits can't go on forever. This Obama Miracle Economy has been propped up by massive deficit spending. Unemployment will probably be higher 4 years from now than it is today.

Of course Democrats could still gain from that since they're the party of giving handouts to poor people.

Republicans? Need to weed out the dumber evangelicals from their leadership ranks. Extremist positions on abortion (i.e., no exceptions for rape, opposition to stem cell research) are utterly absurd. No more Todd Akins, please. The GOP establishment, meanwhile, needs to stop fellating the CoC lobby (i.e., the Chamber of Commerce). It needs to act to shore up the respect of middle class supporters.

No more bashing (white) government bureaucrats, like teachers. Citizens actually do want a well-run school system, and want teachers to be respected. Support cutting the bloated military budget, and no more wars for Israel. Pandering to AIPAC hasn't done shit for Romney.

Somehow, some way, the GOP needs to find the magic behind winning the support of Northeastern/Midwestern whites. There's electoral votes there that could considerably offset the browning of the rest of America.

11/6/12, 7:01 PM
Anonymous said...

I suggest pressing hard to get an opinion piece in the WSJ or somewhere similar

"An opinion piece"?

Dude, is that supposed to be a joke?

If the demographics have shifted to the point where we can't beat Mr. "I hate America and fully intend to destroy it" Soetoro Dunham, then it ain't time for "an opinion piece" - it's time to start talking seriously about The S Word.

Let the Blue States rot in hell.

For the rest of us - we who aren't suicidal - it's time to leave.

11/6/12, 7:05 PM
jody said...

"To those who think VT and ME are stupid"

i think the people in maine are not too smart, because all our data indicate they aren't too smart. in 2011, maine had the lowest average SAT scores in the entire country, by a significant margin.

http://www.commonwealthfoundation.org/policyblog/detail/sat-scores-by-state-2011

their test scores always come in at the bottom of the new england states, and below the US average.

there aren't many smart people in maine. why would there be? there's nothing in maine. everybody with a brain probably moved south long ago for better opportunities.

i made no observation about the brainpower of the folks in vermont. only the anecdote that one guy i know, a chemistry PHD who works in the chemical industry, often mentions how many of the people in vermont are happy to take that gubmint money and just chill. not much motivation to be industrious and work hard. he could be biased, and he probably is. maybe vermont is not that way. i certainly don't know. vermont is a tiny state with less than a million people.

11/6/12, 7:07 PM
Semi-Employed White Guy said...

South Florida overwhelmingly for Obama. Huge surprise. Expect the Republicans to double-down on the slobbering over Israel in 2016.

11/6/12, 7:11 PM
Haddox said...

Great points on stupid VT white voters. Here's a pre-election prediction from "Vermont David" over at Sam Wang's Princeton election site:

Vermont David // Nov 6, 2012 at 7:40 am
Prediction:

Republicans will try to steal FL, OH, PA, CO, WI. If they succeed in all of these places then they will have stolen a third national election out of 4.

It is harder for them to steal states with large percentages of white voters who favor the President. They can only really attack in those states where there are enough minorities and enough racism to allow for what is happening in Ohio.

My Prediction. Intelligent, compassionate women, and above all Brave, determined minorities will save us all.

I am ashamed as a white male to say that Romney will win white males by a large percentage. But the better angels of democracy, those groups who only really earned the right to vote in the last 100 years will take that responsibility seriously. They will stand in line for hours (paying the new “poll tax” as some have said) they will fight through racist election observers and demand that their votes be counted and their voices heard.

America is a better place in 2012 than it was in 1912, but only because the electorate is more than just white males.

**Tragically and pathologically stupid.**

11/6/12, 7:18 PM
Whiskey said...

South Florida is full of ... wait for it ... Black people. The Panhandle has retired snowbirds from the NE. Jews in ... Israel back Romney by 85% or so. But they can't vote. SWPL (and US Jews are heavily part of that group) vote Dem heavily.

Haddox -- that SWPL Beta Male guy is just repeating stuff the women around him mouth. He doesn't get that its a measure of disgust at White guys not being the sexy, dominant, domineering guys they were generations ago.

Most White Women ARE Sandra Fluke. That's most of the single ones and about half the married ones (where do you think they come from)?

This is Obama's country. As a straight White guy you're a criminal just for existing. Like me.

11/6/12, 7:25 PM
Matthew said...

Slobbering over Israel gets you campaign contris, but not votes. Republicans need to find a way to replace the former, because the latter they cannot do without.

Republicans, iirc, used to have a big advantage among small donors, but not no more. I'm wondering if W turned off other small donors the way he turned off this one: mostly cheap labor and low taxes for the rich.

11/6/12, 7:39 PM
travis said...

Somehow, some way, the GOP needs to find the magic behind winning the support of Northeastern/Midwestern whites.

Yankees and the Republican party are the problem, not the solution. If you don't believe, see the movie.

11/6/12, 7:45 PM
irishman said...

Affirmative action is getting banned in Oklahoma.

If voting for Obama meant racial self respect for blacks, voting for Romney must be utterly humiliating for whites. He did not even pretend to serve the interests of his voters.

Check this out. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-05/why-voters-should-fear-romney-s-tax-plan.html

Top 10% get 94% of Romney's tax cut. A very big problem for the Republicans in the future is that their subservience to the capitalist class will mean they will increasingly be doing things for SWPL, Jews, and Asians who despise their voters and whom their voters have no connection. This cannot be sustained. And it won't.

11/6/12, 7:47 PM
haddox said...

News coverage is sure ard to stomach re: Latino/Hispanic vote . . . GOP needs to heed lessons learned here, soften anti-immigration stance, increase reaching out to this growing demographic, blah blah blah.

This coming post-mortem is going to lead to all the wrong conclusions. Read some Sailer, idiots. Stupid party indeed, Sam Francis RIP.

11/6/12, 7:50 PM
Auntie Analogue said...


One thing's for sure, switch on your tube tomorrow and all the campaign will have been supplanted by all the "Holiday" (used to be, you know, Christmas) commercials - most likely absent the quietly discontinued Mitt Romney Chia Pet.

Look for Chanel's sterile-erotic spot direct from Frank Gehry's wastebasket, including the usual Vogue-orexic female anti-fertility totem. Maybe this year the Chanel logo won't be a fleeting shadow on Vogue-orxic female anti-fertility totem's mocha skin and will go All The Way to a logo tattoo. Brands just adore committment.

There'll also be either a repeat of last year's twist on the Ov-Glove, or a novel twist on it for Holiday 2012 - maybe a holster stitched onto it to hold the New OV-O-MEATER meat thermometer. Made everyplace but the U.S.A., and guaranteed to take the temperature everyplace except, like, Benghazi and Aleppo and Gaza.

Okay. Six minutes to my Big TV Switch to Media-Pravda's election night bromides and boilerplate. So, please, pray for me. Pray for us.

11/6/12, 7:54 PM
Huck said...

Not looking good. If Obama wins this after fucking up so much and doing his damnedest to flush the US down the drain, I'm going to have to pull a reverse Michelle and say I'm feeling pretty ashamed to be an American.

11/6/12, 7:58 PM
Anonymous said...

How did they declare Wisconsin for Obama when Romney was ahead in the count there ? It has since swung to Obama.

11/6/12, 8:03 PM
Matthew said...

"If voting for Obama meant racial self respect for blacks, voting for Romney must be utterly humiliating for whites. He did not even pretend to serve the interests of his voters."

That's the irony: facing the fiscal cliff means tax increases for the rich and fewer bennies for welfare queens and government bureacrats...no matter who wins.

11/6/12, 8:11 PM
Matthew said...

"How did they declare Wisconsin for Obama when Romney was ahead in the count there ? It has since swung to Obama."

They look at the exit poll data in reported precincts, compare it to the actual result, then apply it statewide. You can also tell by comparing them to Obama's margins in '08. If Obama is more or less holding onto his margins, even in precincts or counties he lost in '08, then he's probably going to do just as well in counties he won.

11/6/12, 8:13 PM
Anonymous said...

There are many things wrong with Romney but damn, how could this country elect that imbecile Bush (who promptly did everything to help ruin the country) twice and not vote for Romney after four years of the completely inept Obama administration?

Yes, we are doomed. The slide down the drain continues and even accelerates.

11/6/12, 8:18 PM
Anonymous said...

"Not looking good."

There are positives in this: no war with Iran, probably no other Middle Eastern wars. Any extra money that Obama is going to spend on welfare mothers in the next 4 years would have been wasted on neocon wars if Romney won.

11/6/12, 8:19 PM
jody said...

i know this hasn't been touched on much, but it's hard to overstate the advantage the democrat has now that the US news media has gone over to 90% cheerleading for them. this happened slowly but steadily since 1990 i guess, but the change in the last 5 years or so has been astonishing.

the average person is not that smart, and doesn't read the internet or magazines or even many newspapers, and generally gets their info from the television. well, all they hear all day every day now is how great democrats are and how terrible republicans are. that certainly sways millions of people, who are otherwise not certain locks to vote one way or another.

what i noticed now, is most of the news media does not even report democrat screw ups. this is one of the most powerful weapons in the media, and is the same exact tactic the sports media has been using for at least 10 years. when a black quarterback has a bad game, YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT THAT. you go out and find a white quarterback that had a bad game and BASH HIM. you do this every week. never talk badly about the black players, ignore when they screw up. find the white players that screwed up and hammer them.

praise good athletic performances by black athletes to the high heavens. conversely, if a white athlete does something impressive, IGNORE IT. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. cut that out of the highlights, don't talk about it, don't acknowledge that it was pretty good, definitely saved the team that game, whatever. instances of good play by white players who haven't been moved into the "brand name, safe from the usual treatment white athletes get" category, is simply to be ignored, period.

do this every week. it works. it's effective. that's what they've been doing with the national news for a couple years now.

a quick example is the scumbag who was commerce secretary. got drunk or high, did a double hit and run, got caught, resigned. barely any coverage of that at all. so a person at the cabinet level in the obama admin is THAT much of a scumbag, but we're not gonna talk about it, at all. obama doesn't associate with scumbags (let's ignore most of his associates are scumbags AT BEST.)

another example, notice how over 2000 guys are dead at this point in afghanistan, and the US is still blowing 100 billion a year for no good reason at all. america is losing about a guy a day over there.

amount of reporting on it? zero. no interest at all anymore from the media in those caskets coming back. why? well, because, THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. ignore, ignore, ignore. obama is president now. instead, let's talk about how mitt romney put a dog on his roof 20 years ago. holy wow, no WAY can we trust the country to a guy who does that!

11/6/12, 8:21 PM
irishman said...

In 2008 McCain ran a rag-tag campaign and lost an electoral college landslide. Romney and his 1% friends spent the guts of a billion and won the McCain coalition with North Carolina and Indiana...

Couldn't happen to nicer people.

11/6/12, 8:29 PM
Matthew said...

This is a repeat of...2004. A president whom some people know is on the brink of disaster gets handily re-elected. The disaster in Bush's case was the growing problems with the war, and the coming housing crisis. The disaster in Obama's case is one part acute (the trillion dollar annual deficit) and one part chronic (the continuing demographic decline of The Country Formerly Known As America).

The Republicans got to elect an idiot for two terms, and now its the Democrats' turn.

Democracies fail because too many voters can't see past the ends of their pocketbooks to understand the greater good. Most voters have only the vaguest understanding of the issues. Many voters base their votes on the most trivial of matters.

Take gay marriage. Will it be a good thing, a bad thing, or make no difference - who really knows? But when voters ultimately settle the matter - if it isn't already settled - it will basically be decided on the basis of whether people "like" or "accept" gays, not on whether gay marriage is good or bad policy.

The GOP needs a game changer - someone who can speak to conservatives and reinterpret conservatism in a way that speaks to their interests and beliefs, while removing some of its sillier aspects (obsession with abortion, etc.) while also, hopefully, making controversial aspects (opposition to illegal immigration and AA) politically viable.

Where is that guy? Does he even exist?

11/6/12, 8:33 PM
Anonymous Rice Alum #4 said...

facing the fiscal cliff

There is no fiscal cliff. Not at the Federal level. The Fed gov't can create dollars at will. Federal deficits are not a problem, the national debt isn't a problem, our grandkids don't owe anyone a penny, and China cannot foreclose on us.

Deficits can be inflationary, but at 7.9% unemployment, and underemployment somewhere in the teens, there's a lot of slack economic capacity that would suck up those Keynesian pump-priming dollars/Reagan-style tax cuts.

The only other argument against government spending is, you get more of what you subsidize. Don't like what the US government is doing with the dollars it creates at will? Work with your Congressman to cut welfare, farm subsidies, solar power subsidies, etc.

But, again, solvency is not an issue. There is no fiscal cliff.

11/6/12, 8:40 PM
Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

There are positives in this: no war with Iran, probably no other Middle Eastern wars."

Famous last words. I wouldn't be surprised if that's still in the offing.

"Any extra money that Obama is going to spend on welfare mothers in the next 4 years would have been wasted on neocon wars if Romney won."

Or alternatively, any extra money that Romney would have spent on neocon wars will now be wasted on welfare mothers - wow, a whole new generation of ghetto thugs to fill the schools, streets, and prisons. Yippee.

11/6/12, 8:47 PM
Mr. Anon said...

FOX is calling it for Obama. Earlier they had some democratic flack (who was - remarkably - a blonde woman) giving the Republicans' new strategy a test drive - that they need to reach out more to hispanics. And all the while she was being fed straight lines by Megyn Kelly (also known as Pepper-spray Barbie).

FOX News - the Blonde leading the Blonde.

11/6/12, 8:50 PM
Matthew said...

There is no fiscal cliff.

Until those countries currently accepting our dollars decide they aren't worth what we think they are. $7/gallon gas, here we come.

another example, notice how over 2000 guys are dead at this point in afghanistan, and the US is still blowing 100 billion a year for no good reason at all...amount of reporting on it? zero."

Agreed but a) A Republican started the war; 2) Republicans aren't out in the streets protesting the war; 3) Republican pols aren't demanding an end to the war.

But yeah, the MSM has mostly become a cheerleader for Obama % Co.

11/6/12, 8:56 PM
Haddox said...

Yep, Whiskey, that guy is probably in omega territory based on his self-hatred. The comment was clearly beyond parody, but it reflects the enmity many whites have internalized. SWPL <> themselves.

Also, right on Jody on the media. The media/PC apparatus in addition to the demographics of major states means the GOP is screwed.

11/6/12, 9:05 PM
Anonyia said...

One thing that unfortunately helped Obama: a lot of young white males voted for Gary Johnson. It seems their protest vote was to show solidarity with Ron Paul, and to a lesser extent show concerns over marijuana....sigh

11/6/12, 9:08 PM
ben tillman said...

Except in states dominated by agriculture, the Republican share of the white vote is almost totally correlated with the minority population.

Not "minority". NON-WHITE!!!!!!

Whites are a minority, for God's sake!!!! In Texas, in California, in New Mexico, in Hawai'i, in almost every big city in this country, and in the world as a whole. We can't afford your complacency.

11/6/12, 11:06 PM
Dave in N. Calif. said...

BTW that "Vermont David" post is classic (no relation)

11/7/12, 3:50 AM
Sir Charles Pipkin said...

Whites have projected their own sense of justice onto others. They expect non-whites to reciprocate but the fact that every group other than whites voted for the anti-white needs to wake them up. But then if 2008 didn't, nor will this.

11/7/12, 5:11 AM
Cail Corishev said...

"There are positives in this: no war with Iran, probably no other Middle Eastern wars."

I'm too annoyed this morning to be anything but blunt: are you really this stupid?

11/7/12, 5:12 AM
David said...

My prediction was that Romney would win in a landslide. Boy, was I wrong.

11/7/12, 7:22 AM
Cail Corishev said...

"I know this hasn't been touched on much, but it's hard to overstate the advantage the democrat has now that the US news media has gone over to 90% cheerleading for them. this happened slowly but steadily since 1990 i guess, but the change in the last 5 years or so has been astonishing."

Yes it has. The media certainly didn't like Reagan, but they played fair enough that he was able to get his message across, and that was when three TV channels had a near monopoly on it. Now we have many more channels, even one major one that's supposedly on the GOP side, yet they seem to operate more in lockstep than ever.

I think there are at least a couple factors at play. First, they were bound to defend a black president more than a white one, especially when he looked like he might be in trouble. The idea of the Great Anti-Racist Experiment being refuted was just anathema to them. The race angle also acted as a guide so that, even more than usual, they all knew where to stand on every issue without needing to discuss it for a while first. If it made Obama look bad, it had to be suppressed, immediately.

Second, I think competition from social media has them scared, but rather than trying to compete by opening up and being more responsible, they've gone the other way and tried to extend and leverage their control as much as possible.

I know people who thought the Internet and social media would make it impossible for the media to control the debate this time. That may be the case someday, but it clearly isn't yet. Social media makes it easier for people of like mind to communicate with each other, but it doesn't yet help them to get their message out to others. I went to Twitter on election day to see if there was a channel for exit poll data, and right up top there was a "vote for Obama" channel to follow, and nothing about Romney. The people who own and operate social media sites are as left-leaning as non-white racial groups, maybe more so. They may not notice when folks like us use their systems for our reactionary blogs and communications, but their front pages are all pro-Democrat.

11/7/12, 9:59 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)