Luke Ford

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Single, childless women are a danger to society. Some of the most hardline, butthurt SJWs are single white women. Single men aren’t great either, but their dysfunction is mostly inward and less likely to manifest as ideology.

Big, traditional families are more conservative, and single people tend to be more childish with immature views of the world. The way of the world. This is true for non-whites as well, except most express their racial conservatism by voting Democrat.

I believe the solution is to reform academia. College education has very negative impact on birth rates and family formation. If Trump gets in, he needs to defund/gut the colleges of humanities/social justice courses (many of which attract naive young women). Without them, there would either be fewer women in college, or fewer indoctrinated college women. And definitely fewer leftists.

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Trump seems to have gone all in on the Sailer strategy. And despite everything, he is still in this. Even if he loses, as long as it isn’t a landslide, I think it vindicates the theory. Someone who never talked about grabbing pussy on tape will run with it, and we will call that person president.

* The Sailer hypothesis ignores the obvious point John Deryshire makes often: sociologically and culturally speaking, there are no whites, there are goodwhites and badwhites. Everything you can do to max out the badwhite vote drives down your share of the goodwhite vote (some moderate goodwhites vote R over taxes and what not).

This whole election has also totally disproved another Sailer hypothesis, that the electoral map can be shaken up by changing the GOP’s policies. Reality: Trump will win the exact same states as McCain and Romney +/- 3.

What you are left with is “Sailerism by Default”, relying on the badwhite vote whilst making futile attempts to reach out to goodwhites and nonwhites, which is what, in one form of another, every GOP candidate, including Trump, has been doing for 20 years.

* Trump has grokked this distinction. He is maxing out badwhite turnout with his downscale MAGA message while stanching the loss of goodwhites by hammering on Hillary’s unique history of brazen public corruption. It just might work.

* Trump is running a different campaign where he defies the establishment ideas like amnesty which are deeply unpopular across both goodwhites and badwhites, as well as blacks, and even many of the Hispanics who’ve been here legally.

Have you ever seen any other Republican presidential candidate have a black homeless woman stumping for him who gets kicked around by angry Hispanics?

Comments:

* Also, what is with Steve being so smug in this post? I guess he doesn’t like Trump. Well la ti da. That fact combined with a love of the musical abomination known as Hamilton will finally earn him a big goose egg.

Was the last fifteen years of being an iconoclast leading to something, or was it just a niche way to present your nominally superior IQ?

* I love how “Pervert Anthony Weiner” sounds like an official title.

* Coming up with those names has been one of Trump’s strong points since before the primaries started. Crooked Hillary, Lying Ted, Low-Energy Jeb; they all stick really well.

I guess it should bother me that a primary strength of the guy I voted for is name-calling, but sound bites trump nuanced debate every time.

* Abramovic is a “famous” conceptual artist. That “spirit cooking” stuff was just some stupid conceptual “art”. John Podesta is an Italian-American guy who likes to cook Italian cuisine. This is really grasping at straws.

* I followed along with one of their Podesta leak dissections. 90% of the time the e-mails never actually said what they thought they said. They would think there were massive revelations to be found in negative Hillary articles the campaign was simply sharing among themselves. Sometimes they even missed the important ones the leftie journalists picked up.

Reddit should be wall-to-wall why globalism is bad, illegal immigration is going up, is bad for jobs, Americans, borders are practically wide open, Hillary is for war (#DraftOurDaughters was hilarious), etc., etc.

Everything Chris Matthews said recently.

But in the final stretch they’re chasing squirrels like a bunch of clowns. It’s almost like they’ve been suckered by a disinformation campaign. So what if it’s true? The election is days away and you’re probably converting people to Hillary with what is, at this stage, TruePundit InfoWars David Icke (Satanic pedo rings are an Icke fave) tier conspiracy theorizing.

* I’m suspecting that “In connection with an unrelated case, the FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation” may go down as one of the great lines of the 21st century.

* I saw someone else describing the FBI Records account as “weaponizing the autism” of the chans and reddit to find the code that Podesta is describing and it seems like they might be right.

* We are being governed by a bunch of clowns who wouldn’t be competent enough to organize a church bake sale, yet they seriously regard themselves as philosopher kings. They habitually talk among themselves as if they are omnicompetent, superbly discerning technocrats, and yet their private communications reveal them to be nothing more than DMV clerks with Ivy League degrees.

I mean, I always suspected that this was the case, but the Wikileaks stuff just confirms it in depressing detail.

We are, as Noonan said, being patronized by our inferiors. These idiots display the egomania of Patton and MacArthur, yet their private communications show them to be searching for prop wash and blinker fluid while wondering which end of the rifle to point at the enemy.

That alone should be more than enough to piss people off.

* If she’s still on cumadin, the thyroid medication, AND drinking, she’s playing with fire. Sooner or later, it’s gonna kick her in the ass, like when she collapsed getting into that van.
Cumadin is tough stuff. It’s not like taking a vitamin. It messes with body and brain. Call it a deal with the devil. It’s better to take it, with all it’s long-term negative effects, than to die. It’ll take it’s physical and mental toll on her. You can count on it.

Comment: “The project of “getting race out of American politics” means non-whites and Jews acting in their own ethnic interests, while whites behave like docile cows being prodded towards the slaughterhouse.”

Two academics write in The New Republic:

In a study of white Americans’ attitudes and candidate preferences, we found that Trump’s success reflects the rise of “white identity politics”—an attempt to protect the collective interests of white voters via the ballot box. Whereas racial prejudice refers to animosity toward other racial groups, white identity reflects a sense of connection to fellow white Americans.

We’re not the first to tie Trump’s candidacy to white identity politics. But our data provide some of the clearest evidence that ongoing demographic changes in the United States are increasing white racial identity. White identity, in turn, is pushing white Americans to support Trump.

When we talk about white identity, we’re not referring to the alt-right fringe, the white nationalist movement or others who espouse racist beliefs. Rather, we’re talking about everyday white Americans who, perhaps for the first time, are racially conscious.

The concept of “garden variety” white racial identity stands in contrast to conventional wisdom. In the last three decades of scholarship on whiteness as a race, the prevailing view has been that most whites fail to notice their own whiteness. In a society dominated by white people, whiteness simply fades into the background. Just as fish fail to notice the water around them, whites are unlikely to think about how they are members of a distinct group.

Our research shows that the era of “white invisibility” is coming to a close.

Non-Hispanic whites are projected to become a minority in the year 2044. This increasing diversity across the country is making whites’ own race harder and harder to ignore. Political and social phenomena, from Barack Obama’s presidency to the Black Lives Matter movement, are making whiteness even more salient to white Americans…

Recent research in social psychology suggests that when whites engage in discrimination based on their perceived collective interests, it’s hard to convince them that such discrimination is wrong. After all, doesn’t every group have a right to prioritize its own members? We believe our results portend increasing difficulty in achieving the democratic aim of getting race out of American politics.

Hillary may have the votes but Trump supporters have the guns. If Trump wins, there won’t need to be a coup. If he loses, there might be.

One man’s ugly feeling is another man’s freedom fighter.

TheHill: There’s an ugly feeling in the air. A Trump supporter in Ohio, Dan Bowman, tells a reporter, “If [Hillary Clinton’s] in office, I hope we can start a coup. She should be in prison or shot. That’s how I feel about it. We’re going to have a revolution and take them out of office if that’s what it takes. There’s going to be a lot of bloodshed. But that’s what it’s going to take.”

An ex-House member, Joe Walsh, tweets “On November 9th, if Trump loses, I’m grabbing my musket. You in?” Facebook, comment sections and message boards are full of angry people worrying that the vote will be “rigged” and discussing what they will do if the election is “stolen” from Donald Trump.

Free speech is an American’s birthright. But for the first time in living memory, ordinary people are pushing the boundaries of the First Amendment. Message boards, on-line comment sections and social media make the problem even worse. A lot of these people may think that they are just blowing off steam.
But when you are actually discussing using violence to overthrow the government or to interfere with an election, there’s a very thin line between “just talk” and criminal conspiracy. In the modern world, it is perfectly possible to become a member of a criminal conspiracy by “liking” a tweet.

Conspiracy is a little different than most crimes. The essence of conspiracy is an agreement by two or more people to do something illegal. Some conspiracy statutes require that at least one of the participants take some concrete step — known as an “overt act” — toward actually carrying out the conspiracy. Some statutes do not.

Conspiring to overthrow the government by force or to “prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States” by force is known as “Seditious Conspiracy” and is punishable by 20 years in federal prison. (18 USC 2384.) Just agreeing to use force to overthrow the government or to prevent Hillary Clinton from becoming President can be a federal crime, even if you never take action.

Because seditious conspiracy is essentially speech, the First Amendment comes into play. In a case called Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court held that mere speech cannot be punished unless it is both aimed at producing “imminent lawless action” and it is likely to produce such action. So writing a book about the need for a revolution won’t pass this test. Someone exhorting a crowd to burn down City Hall very well might.

But “imminent” doesn’t necessarily mean “immediately.” Depending on the details of the conspiracy, lawless action might be “imminent” even if the conspirators understand that no violence might occur for weeks or months.

The Brandenburg test has a lot to tell us about this election. A year ago, people on message boards and social media discussing coups and revolutions were something of a joke. No one took them seriously, probably not even themselves, so all the talk was unlikely to produce action of any sort.

But the situation is different now and might be a lot different on November 9th if millions of Donald Trump’s supporters believe the election has been stolen from them. Tossing a burning match into a bucket of water isn’t likely to produce a fire. Tossing a burning match into a bucket of gasoline is.