Odds of Republicans winning according to:
| House | Senate | |
| FiveThirtyEight | 13.0% | 84.2% |
| PredictWise | 34% | 78% |
| Hypermind | 20% | 92% |
| Oddschecker | 33% | |
| PredictIt | 36% | 88% |
| Augur | 36% | 82% |
| Good Judgment Open | 23% | 83% |
| Metaculus | 32% |
I quote the “classic” scenario from FiveThirtyEight (Nate Silver’s site), which includes polls and “fundamentals” but no expert assessments. PredictWise is based on predictions markets, polling, and fundamentals.
Hypermind is a predictions market that uses experts.
Oddschecker averages the implied probabilities from numerous betting sites. PredictIt is by far the most popular predictions market, where you need to pay to play.
Augur is a cryptocurrency based predictions market.
Good Judgment Open and Metaculus are open to anyone and don’t require money.
While it’s tempting to listen to the people who put their money where their mouths are, the gamblers also gave Le Pen a ~33% chance of victory before the first round of the French Presidential elections last year. That was always going to be nonsense.
I’ll make the safe prediction that Republicans will keep the Senate but lose the House.
Otherwise, I agree with James Jatras’ gloomy presentiments. The Dem campaign to impeach Trump will kick into high gear, censorship will increase, and the neocons will be going off the reservation.
Prediction markets and bookies greatly overrate GOP chances because of the partisan leanings of most bettors.
Bookies and prediction markets greatly overrate GOP chances because of the partisan leanings of most bettors.
Prediction GOP markets overrate greatly and chances partisan bettors of leanings because.
The other comment got deleted, so later readers won’t understand the joke.
AK: Ha, I thought it was a double post. Good thing there’s a restore function.
My predictions re what White women will do:
There will be no change for better or for worse, because competing factors militating both for and against White women’s continuing coalition in the GOP will cancel each other out:
For:
Continuing escalation of anti-White rhetoric.
Kavanaugh.
Booming Trump economy.
Against:
No wall.
Death of older women voters and their replacement with younger women voters subjected to more intense shaming in media and Academy.
I would add that this is probably a good thing. Ideally, Republicans should feel that White women are easily winnable, but cannot be taken for granted. Bannon is correct that nothing can be done about college-educated White women. They will either see through the poz or they won’t. Attempting to pander to them will only undermine their gains among working-class Whites, both men and women.
Are there any estimates when this central American migrants caravan will reach the US border?
I wonder what will happen then, if the US military shoots some of them, this will probably be presented as some horrible tragedy.
Btw, there seems to be something similar going on in the Balkans, according to some Austrian tabloid about 20 000 “refugees” (many from Pakistan) are intending to break through the Croatian border, with the intention of going to Germany and Scandinavia. But it’s difficult to get reliable info about this.
The marching columns are very slow, it is more the symbolic impact than actually anything happening. 2015 was an exception because Germans/Austrians provided trains.
The migrant caravans are going to become a regular thing. They will march from South Asia, Africa, Middle East, Latin America – we are at the beginning of this phenomenon. The political impact on the liberal-globalist left will be devastating – it is not a pretty picture to campaign on, 2015 was a disaster for the Euro-progressives.
The only thing that is holding it together is the silly notion that it was an ‘exception‘, ‘one time event‘, that it is under control. Most liberals would like to put 2015 Merkel march in a memory hole. Media will go out of its way to ignore it in the future, that’s why the preventive attempts at censoring any talk about it.
It will not work, the Third Worlders will continue marching, people will see it, and it will discredit both the established globalist politicians and their media. Then there will be a dramatic backlash and a turnover in the ruling class. The only question is whether it will happen soon enough to save at least some of the European culture and historical demographic. It might be too late, but the likes of Macron are down to 20% approval, one more migrant event and the will disappear into well-deserved obscurity.
Well, it was a double post. That’s what our heroic Bulgarian pilot made fun of.
Well, Trump has bombed Syria, cozied up to the Saudis, done nothing to prevent Russia sanctions, appointed Haley Pompeo and Bolton, and will almost certainly not build any wall. Meanwhile immigration hadn’t fallen, sjwism has become even more firmly entrenched in the institutions and soft-censorship has been normalized.
His election campaign, in hindsight, seems utterly cynical; “tell the deplorables what they want to hear to stand out from the crowd in the republican primaries and, once elected, make peace with the establishment and dump them”. His problem seems to be that neoliberalism.txt is so utterly puritanical and, to them, blasphemy is blasphemy, even if you never meant it.
I don’t see that happening in Germany at least, a large part of the electorate is totally brainwashed and quite fanatical in favour of open borders, despite every week bringing new horror stories.
Anyway, I wondered what will happen at the US border, because Patrick Lang thinks it might get ugly:
https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/11/open-thread-1-november-2018.html
I wonder what will happen if US soldiers kill a few of those central Americans…I guess it will be spun by the liberal media as yet more evidence for Trump being a cruel White nationalist.
yes – the media will eventually push suburban soccer moms to the right cos they’re driven by fundamental class materialist geopolitical tectonic realities (aka sexual jealousy).
i have no clue personally but various alt-rightists i follow seem to think Trump is going to do reasonably well – dunno.
as to the border if rocks are thrown a better alternative to shooting lots of people might be to build some kind of linear rock-proof defensive structure.
The proper response from Europe to all of this should be that yanks are foreigners, and not particularly friendly ones at that, and what happens over there is of no concern of us: The more central Americans over there to dilute them the better. Of course, for obvious reasons that’s not the case. They seem to block-vote democrat at a time when us liberals are truely dangerous fanatics. European governments, and most of the population, are unanimously anti-Trump, but unfortunately that doesn’t translate into any-atlanticist, the opposite in fact, whenever he does something really stupid, he becomes “presidential at last”, so the one possible saving grace of his presidency doesn’t materialise. It won’t be a great loss if he’s forced out.
Here’s a twitter link of UN coordiantor, and he really coordinates them https://twitter.com/PeterAuweraert?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor , there’s around 9 000 on border right now.
I tend to agree in principle; however unfortunately Europe is going to be under strong US influence for the foreseeable future, so it would be better for us, if there was a political change in the US against mass immigration and open borderism.
I don’t have much sympathy for Trump as a person either, apart from some of his ideas on immigration (which he hasn’t acted upon), there’s very little to like imo. The foreign policy of his administration has certainly been appalling so far.
The cognitive dissonance of Europe wrt Trump is off the scale though. He’s a “crazy loon who’ll start wwiii”, but then is “finally taking his role as leader of the free world seriously” when he does do something stupid. In the long term, having the us overrun with central Americans seems like the best hope Europeans have for getting rid of them.
Apologies for snapping at you over something or other recently. Mea culpa.
Thanks. I’ve read as well that the UNHCR is facilitating this “refugee” wave, there’s definitely some organization behind this (those UN organizations like the International organization for migration really need to get more scrutiny).
Europeans have been mentally colonized by the US, anti-Trump Europeans are mostly just regurgitating the talking points of liberal US media, and unfortunately that means he’s only criticized for his “racism”, not the things which really are deserving of criticism because they’re contrary to European economic and security interests. And unfortunately there are plenty of stupid right-wingers in Europe as well who are uncritically pro-US…true independence is unthinkable for them.
Also the migrants are being issued with prepaid debit cards by the EU, the UN, and Soros.
Sounds like some conspiracy theory headline… But perhaps not!
https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/un-eu-and-soros-provide-migrants-with-prepaid-debit-cards-to-fund-their-trip-to-and-through-europe/
Europe wouldn’t have all those Syrian refugees if our foreign policy was more in line with the values of the vast majority of Americans.
US foreign policy isn’t helpful, but tbh there’d be massive problems anyway…the population growth in sub-saharan Africa or in countries like Pakistan isn’t driven by US military interventions. Even Syria exploded into civil war not least, because there had been too much population growth (1960: 4,5 million, 2010: 21 million), producing lots of discontent young men with few perspectives.
The real problem is that Europeans are unable to just reject those “refugees” and use the necessary force because of the stupid, suicidal values they’ve adopted.
My prediction: Republicans gain strength in the Senate, lose seats in the House but keep their majority.
Less confident about this prediction than my 2016 call for Trump as mid-terms are a lot harder to gauge.
Agree that if the Dems take the House that the House will do more or less nothing but “investigate” Trump for the next two years. Not the worst thing in the world as it means at least no bad legislation is likely to pass.
If the GOP retains its majority expect actual immigration control legislation to be introduced in the next Congress.
I actually saw those myself, except mastercard i saw had only UN sign, or maybe i didn’t noticed EU flag on it, it was all happening in a hurry.
Anyway 1/3 are from Pakistan, 1/5 from Iran, Serbia had visa free travel with Iran until recently, but was forced to cancel it.
But whole travel is well coordinated, one idiot was trying to help them pass to Croatia (to get rid of them, forgetting that “successful pass” will attract them more to the city) over Sava river. But guy refused saying: “no no, i need to go trough Bihać”, so someone is definitely making them plans.
Speaking of Bihać(majority Muslims/Bosniak) they went from the initial ” For the Umah” , “Viva the jihad” “Conquer the kuffar” to the full stormfront, on the city forum. Here on this page you can see two videos https://biscani.net/forum/index.php?/topic/246-migrantska-kriza/&page=103 . One of the current situation in the city, and at the bottom, of some Iranian woman claiming there’s too many Finns in Finland.
Poetic justice is in whole thing, is that Alija Izatbegović use to present Pakistan as a role model civilization for South Slavic Muslims (Bosniaks as they call themselves now), in his books. Well citizens of Bihać and Cazin got to observe their role models from first hand.
You don’t know what you are talking about.
From a foreign policy perspective, the craziest faction in American politics is the Hillary Clinton wing of the Democratic Party.
They supported every unnecessary war, sanction and intervention of the post-Cold War era, and they are insanely convinced that non-existent “Russian interference” was an act of war, worse than Pearl Harbor and 9/11.
This is the faction that primarily benefits from the new voters brought in via mass immigration.
The neocons also benefit, to a lesser extent, from anti-Communist right wing Latin American immigrants. Miami area Representatives and Florida Senators (such as Rubio) are typically the strongest supporters of a belligerent US foreign policy within the Republican Party.
The two most anti-war factions in America are Bernie Sanders progressives and the paleo-conservatives who formed the hard-core base of Trump’s America First campaign. They both rely disproportionately on old-stock voters – the Bernie voters are mostly prosperous blue-state SWPLs who feel guilty about their own prosperity, and paleo-cons are mostly old-stock right wing nationalists. These two factions will be of decreasing importance as mass immigration continues to demographically swamp the existing population.
Are there any estimates when this central American migrants caravan will reach the US border?
About one week ago I saw something that said it would take about one month for them to reach the border.
I wonder what will happen then, if the US military shoots some of them, this will probably be presented as some horrible tragedy.
This is extremely unlikely (shooting, horrible tragedy portrayal is a given). The only scenario where this occurs is a Kent State type incident and that is not going to happen.
These people plan to present themselves as refugees. They are not planning an illegal entry. They are not going to storm the border a la recent Gaza protestors.
From Trump’s POV he needs to figure out some way to prevent them from presenting themselves.
I think that he can “close the border,” but that would be major.
I am sorry, but anyone who bought that argument is too stupid to live in Europe. It is not like the comparable levels of civilization were not available to the Moslems in Bosnia.
Alija Izetbegovic was an ideological fanatic. But as it takes two people for a lie to happen, it also takes two to follow a crazy ideology. Anyone who took Izetbegovic and his crazy ravings seriously gets no sympathy. Maybe they can move to Pakistan, the land of the ‘pure’. There is a limit to what one can tolerate as ignorance and stupidity… Same applies to the Western elites that pretended not to see any of this, or even cheered on the worst kind of medieval fanatics in the Balkans because of ‘multi-culturalism’, or a good old-fashioned hatred of Christian Slavs.
I’m well aware of the paleocons being consistent on this issue. Sanders supporters I’m less sure about; mainstream liberals were antiwar during Iraq and Sanders seems like a carbon copy of a euro social democrat who will support “liberal intervention” when push comes to shove.
I’m also well aware of what the Clinton faction says, as it’s unfortunately quite difficult to avoid. The problem is what the trump administration DOES. You could well make the case that his hands are tied, the “good tsar, bad boyars” argument, but you can only do this so many times before it becomes “cucking”. He had complete control of his appointments and chose Randhawla/Haley, Bolton and Pompeo.
You’d have to be increasingly naive to think that he’s done anything other than ride a populist wave into office before getting elected and doing what he pleased. Though I would’ve chosen him, without hesitation, if presented the choice between him and Clinton, continuing to support him after his current record just incentivises this behavior.
In the last few years there have been several cases of “refugees” assaulting border posts in the Balkans or the Spanish territories in North Africa, including the use of violence against border police (iirc in Ceuta Africans even threw acidic quicklime at Spanish police)…but that has never changed anything, the media still always represents these people as if they were poor, desperate refugees just begging for protection. So I wouldn’t count on it that those central Americans won’t use violence, they might well believe that the media will spin it as a justified reaction to US “racism” anyway.
I think Republicans will keep both the Senate AND the House. Not only midterms electorate is whiter, compared to presidential year, the House has been gerrymandered in GOP favor. The effect of gerrymandering is that Republicans can lose popular vote by a large margin, and still have the majority of seats of the House.
Republicans always will be more aggressive in the foreign policy when they have power, than Democrats.
That’s not difficult to predict and will foreseen by all other governments whenever they analyse American elections. Some people might say that Bill Clinton (Democrat president) has bombed Kosovo in the 1990s- but of course Republicans would support and do the same.
Putin is more similar to Republican than Democrat in foreign policy instincts – although fortunately not nearly as aggressive as some Republicans such as John McCain, who are like a non-joking version of Zhirinovsky.
I have about $400 on the GOP keeping the House on PredictIt at 33 cents. That’s about what I won from the Kavanaugh confirmation, so it’s pretty much playing with the house’s money. Have $850 on Ted Cruz winning in Texas at 81 cents — you can buy that at 78 cents now. Not a bad bet.
Big midterm losses of House seats for the party that holds the presidency has been the rule in American history. Between 1840 and 1960, IIRC, it happened every time but twice. That tendency was weaker during the golden age of incumbents from 1960 to 2000 – an age which is now over. The last three midterms have all followed the traditional pattern – including 2006 with a quite swarthy Dem electorate. As for gerrymandering, it has always existed, and courts overturned several examples this time.
Trump wanted to pull out of NATO, but the outcry from the foreign policy establishment was such that he was forced to backtrack. He then said he only wanted the Euros to pull more weight. He also wanted to pull out of Afghanistan, but his NSA and SECDEF somehow convinced him otherwise. With luck, he’ll have more freedom of action after the midterms and the cessation of the Mueller probe.
He’s all we’ve got, so might as well try to be optimistic.
if European nationalists don’t want to get Serbed if they get too successful then what happens in the the US is of critical importance.
I predict that the GOP will increase their majority in the Senate and will hold the House, perhaps increase their majority in the House.
Prove me wrong!
the media will spin it as a justified reaction to US “racism” anyway
No need to harp, this is stipulated.
assaulting border posts in the Balkans or the Spanish territories in North Africa,
We are not the Balkans, Greece, Italy or Spanish NA; we’re different. 🙂
I don’t think that it has been done in modern times, but the only solution would be to close all points of entry, and I don’t think he will do that. If he did close all points then I assume some could be induced to assault the border violently; dollars still work for lots of things.
Wow that’s 60’000 central asians materializing every year.
Gaza protestors are trying to break out, not trying to break in.
Off-topic, but can someone translate this to me?
https://i.imgur.com/ZDMET5a.jpg
The source is the Instagram of a Russian official who’s coordinating the effort to settle Boer families in Russia. I don’t know much about the plan, but it appears the idea is to create small colonies, which will facilitate future settlements. This is a smart move, because Boers will feel more comfortable to move if they live among their brethren in colonies, much like the Mennonites in the past.
They are not really though, certainly not for British people and other North/Western Europeans given how culturally and genetically similar to us they are.
Pretty evil thing to say tbh
A comment like that explains why an Indian officer stationed in former Yugo was known to not like Izetbegovic.
Pakistan was essentially created to form a majority Muslim state out of what had been seen as a part of India. Upon Pakistan’s independence, India has more Muslims than Pakistan’s population.
Among the former Yugoslavs, the Serbs come across as being the arguably most tolerant.
OT, but this article suggests interesting things happening in Kazakhstan:
https://russia-insider.com/en/russian-exodus-kazakhstan-over-nationalist-policies-continues-two-thirds-37-million-russians-wants
What is the average IQ of Kazakhs? Are they able to replace the ethnic Russians who are leaving?
“You know, comrades,” said Stalin, “that I think in regard to this: I consider it completely unimportant who will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this – who will count the votes, and how!”
Joseph Stalin, quoted in ‘Memoirs of Stalin’s Former Secretary’ (1992), by Boris Bazhanov
In DR Congo, strongman leader Joseph Kabila is bringing his jungle village voting base into the future, by purchasing apparently some 100,000 ‘voting machines’ from South Korea for his upcoming December re-‘election’
Congo people will tell you these machines seem very suspicious … All pre-programmed for a stitch-up, said a Kinshasha resident to me the other day
Congolese ask, quite reasonably, how will those machines function in high equatorial heat, in a country where electric power is often down? And where many locals will be confused and lost using this kind of interface for the first time in their lives?
When a model of the machine was publicly demonstrated in DR Congo, it broke down …
Ugh. Gerrymandering.
Here in Pennsylvania, our congressional districts were, indeed, “gerrymandered” by the GOP majority state legislature – acting in accordance with its constitutional duty – back around 2011. The thing is, and what a thing it is(!), a large number of Democrats VOTED YES at the time. I’m not sure if it was a majority, off the top of my head, but it was a plurality of state house Dems.
Then, as if from out of a Soros magic trick, in 2018 a bunch of “redistricting advocates” announced that the map was “illegally gerrymandered” and sued.
The State Supreme Court then took power it didn’t really have to make districts that were “more competitive.” An arbitrary standard indeed. Since they only marginally followed county lines, they created districts that were almost as artificial as before.
Western PA, for example, would offer up only one Democrat congress critter if the map more closely followed county lines. Instead the court gerrymandered the lines so that milquetoast mediocrity Conor Lamb (the name says it all) is likely to win in addition to whomever Pittsburgh elects.
Pennsylvania is like a lot of states. We have a majority Democrat population, but they don’t want to live out here in the rural “sticks” with poor dumb country hicks like me. No, sir, they live more densely in the cities and exurbs. Thus, no matter how you draw the map, Pennsylvania is going to have a GOP majority congressional delegation because of population distribution. Fine by me. Philly sucks. Life isn’t perfect around here, but at least the countryside is pretty and there aren’t as many rainbow flags.
But they’re probably going to manage to sneak in Lamb and a few other dolts. Expect the liberals to use this unconstitutional judicial tactic in other states to try to overcome GOP gerrymandering. (Mind you, I admit that the GOP gerrymanders, but the Dems did the same thing in northern Maryland and would love to do it elsewhere)
I have to admit I don’t quite get how an extreme racist like you (not a values judgement, just an observation) can be so pro-American, when American ideology is fundamentally egalitarian and universalist, with an almost messianic sense of mission. Yes, there were of course other forces in American history…antebellum southerners with their demented dreams of a tropical slave empire, anti-Catholic nativists, later on segregationists, Klansmen, Anglo-Saxonist immigration restrictionists etc. – but these groups always were seen by many Americans as fundamentally un-American and contrary to the American idea, and most importantly, in the end they all lost. Already by the 1840s someone like Emerson could conceive of the US as an universal nation where immigrants from around the globe would mix and create a new civilization…which sounds a lot like the global panmixia fantasies of today’s antiracists and antinationalists. And a decade later you’ve got nutcase terrorists like John Brown, and finally a war with hundreds of thousands dead, waged over the question of slavery and leading to the (temporary) empowerment of extreme antiracists favouring a reeducation campaign for the defeated south. All of this well before malevolent Jews (or whatever else is the standard explanation of white nationalists) had a chance to “corrupt” Anglo-Saxon America.
What a foolish sentiment.
The enemy of my enemy (the FBI, NSA, and CIA) is my friend.
The FBI, NSA, CIA, et al, are the enemies of ALL human liberty.
LOL, the first citizenship law passed by the Framers a few years after the US declared independence only considered white people eligible for citizenship. So much for egalitarianism.
The white share of the population was shy of hitting 90% in 1960.
The reality is precisely the inverse of what you said: for most of its history, the importance of race was such that it played a central role in the development of US laws (citizenship, segregation, interracial marriage, migration).
US universalism is questionable, given the Protestant origins of the settlers and most white Americans, especially prior to 1965. Protestants hated the universalism of the Catholic Church (Papism) and I am eager to say it played a role in creating an in/out group mentality among them.
I am a traditional Roman Catholic (with some fondness for Slavic Orthodoxy) American, so take this for what it’s worth. Unlike DFH, I am not truly “pro-American” except in the Pat Buchanan “loyalty of the heart” sense that America is my home. I’m also lucky to be rural, which means I have some connection to the land itself. And I like John Wayne movies and so forth – who doesn’t love John Wayne?
First of all, I dislike the original American ideal because I think religious liberty is stupid IF you believe that there is one true faith. So I am critical of original America from outside its beliefs. But I am not critical of America from within its intellectual framework: clearly, America never believed that there was one true faith. So religious liberty made sense to it, at the national level, early on. Do note, though, that states were allowed a wide range of autonomy on this question early on. Virginia and Massachusetts, for example, had established religions at the state level.
As David Carlin shows in his book The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America, America’s public discourse agreed on a general consensus that shifted throughout time. First, America agreed between its different Protestant denominations. Then, the Catholics were added. Next, the Jews. But as the 1960s and ’70s went along, this consensus failed and was replaced with outright liberal secularism and all that that entails. Most notably, sodomy and transgender nonsense. (This explains the feebleness of the remaining Americanist Catholics, who accepted religious liberty in toto – they are grasping for agreement with a society that no longer exists. Sadly, these rampantly homosexual nincompoops still have the power of the purse in our decayed American Catholic community, or what is left of it.)
I do not necessarily agree that America was fundamentally messianic from the beginning, but I would agree that it always tended that way. Although I see Union victory as necessary and proper in the American Civil War (despite my having several Confederate relatives), I therefore have some reservations about Abraham Lincoln for the way in which he believed in America as a “shining city on the hill.” But even within Lincoln was a pragmatic, Midwestern streak that cut beyond shiny idealism to seeing America as belonging to its particular sphere – the Western hemisphere.
You mention Reconstruction, but, in truth, the vast majority of Congressional Republicans were opposed to any broad and expansive view of Reconstruction. Hence why the compromise of 1876 (Southerners agree to Hayes’s election; Northerners agree to pull federal power out of the South) was so relatively easily reached among white folks.
As for Emerson, even in New England, he was in the minority. New England’s public intellectual ranks were filled with many like him, but even that region had a very real type of conservatism that would mostly have shunned imperialism and liberal idealism. Daniel Webster fits the bill.
The Republican Party was able to jump-start itself into relevance so quickly in the 1850s largely because it took within its ranks many of the “Know-Nothings” who had strongly opposed crazy idealists like Emerson.
As for the Civil War, yes, it was “waged over slavery,” but that was the longer cause of the conflagration, not the proximate cause. What finally drove Northern men to killing had more to do with their understanding of the nature of the government. After all, they had been willing to ignore slavery for many generations until they felt that its political effects were intolerable. For the majority of fighting men, it was about the Union, not about slavery. That alone – the sacred Union – represents political idealism, but at least it’s not a universal one.
I’m also not sure I’m willing to say that “Anglo-Saxon immigration restrictionists” were defeated by the pre-Jewish American ideal. On the contrary, we limited immigration well into the 20th century. It was not until the mid-2oth century that the unholy, naive, and stupid alliance of Jews and Irish Catholic Democrats in voter-rich Northeastern states finally did in this crucial plank of a more sensible America. Yes, “they lost,” but this was something that can definitely be blamed on the Jews, since they – concentrated in the nation’s most important states and cities – used their media and financial powers to water down America’s resistance to more immigration.
Of course, I’m German, Scotch-Irish, and Catholic, so I hate the WASPs almost as much as I hate the Talmud. One thing you have to understand is that World War 1 in this country – Woodrow Wilson’s folly – was a forerunner of the American social engineering that emerged under and after FDR. Buffalo, New York, for example was home to a banking company called the German-American Bank. They had German-speaking services, and everything, for their clientele, many of whom were recent immigrants from Deutschland. Anti-German pressure during that terrible period forced them to change their name from the concrete and real to the farcical: “Liberty Bank.”
I have heard, though I cannot confirm, that the Ohio National Guard went around that state in 1917-18 burning German-language textbooks in Mennonite schoolhouses. Sounds about right.
World Wars 1 and 2 were an appalling time in this country. In conjunction with the New Deal and post-war consumerism, they really ripped the communal guts out of this country, and sent us all to Gesellschaft Hell.
I love it when Russians joke about the “Eternal Anglo.” I usually nod my head happily in agreement. 🙂
I’m just a dumb good old boy, though a reasonably well-read one, sipping whiskey here and typing this. You’d probably be better off talking to Pat Buchanan than me. I agree with 98.5% of what he says. Like me, he’s a believer in America as a place, less America as a “visionary ideal” that is really just an excuse for Woodrow Wilson’s banker friends to make a killing on war.
Huh? The immigration policy of Anglo countries were implicitly or explicit racist until the 1960s, or the 1980s in the case of NZ.
Thanks, that was interesting. I don’t have time to answer all of your points (and don’t know enough tbh), so I’ll limit myself to just two observations.
I’m currently reading James McPherson’s Battle cry of freedom, which partly motivated my comment above; and the way he represents it, much of the Republican leadership actually despised the Know-nothings and made only some meaningless gestures towards their nativism for purely tactical reasons, without the intention of ever adopting any of their proposals on immigration and naturalization issues,
e.g. this is what Lincoln thought about them (with mention of Russian despotism, which I guess will confirm AK’s views about unchanging Western Russophobia):
There also many similar quotes by other Republicans, e.g. Joshua Giddings called the Know-nothings “unjust, illiberal, and un-American.”
The kind of universalism evident in these sentiments imo isn’t much different from the multiculturalists today who are arguing against immigration restrictions for Muslims and other potentially subversive foreigners.
There was the idea though that the union had to be preserved at all costs, even at the price of hundreds of thousands maimed and killed, because of America’s global role as a shining exemple of republican self-government…which is just insanely ideological imo and in a line with today’s ideology of global democracy promotion.
Pat Buchanan is a great man, it’s unfortunate that Trump doesn’t seem to be interested in listening to him.
If past US policy on citizenship, migration, segregation, and interracial marriage is not enough to convince you that the US was not an egalitarian rainbow republic, then nothing will.
For over 3/4 of its history as an independent nation, the US was for all intent and purpose explicitly ‘white nationalist’.
Jared Taylor talked about this in 2017, pretty good stuff:
What the Founders Really Thought About Race
I think religious freedom had a certain sense to it. In my view, the key to understanding it is that in many places the state had hijacked Christianity. Who, for instance, could consider a possible future King Harry a legitimate head of a one true faith? And the other surviving monarchies of Europe are not much different. Nor is the Pope, for that matter.
There is nothing universal about any of the following. It all relates to a very specific and unique people:
Benjamin Franklin, Observations Concerning the Increase of Mankind
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-04-02-0080
(The slave trade should be abolished, the frontier protected, and trade between Great Britain and colonies encouraged in order to maximally benefit Anglo-Saxon ethno-genetic interests.)
John Jay, Federalist #2
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed02.asp
(Americans are a nation, bound together by common race, language, religion and political traditions)
Congress of 1790 and President Washington, Naturalization Act of 1790
http://www.indiana.edu/~kdhist/H105-documents-web/week08/naturalization1790.html
(Naturalization restricted to free white persons)
Abraham Lincoln, Peoria Speech
https://www.nps.gov/liho/learn/historyculture/peoriaspeech.htm
(United States was created for the benefit of white people, blacks ought to be repatriated to Liberia)
Lincoln was the most “extreme racist” of the bunch. No White Nationalist of our time is as extreme as Lincoln was.
Lincoln changed his mind later though, can there really be much doubt that by the end of the civil war he was in favour of full political rights for former slaves?
Anyway, I know about the nationalist statements by many of the American founders. But I don’t think it can be denied that there were strong universalist strains in US political culture right from the beginning which eventually became dominant. They certainly are today.
Short summary of the Declaration of Independence:
King George III has assembled against us Americans a rainbow coalition of Quebecois, Hessian mercenaries, rebellious slaves, and Indians:
“He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation . . . For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies . . .
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation . . .
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”
Therefore we Americans must reluctantly dissolve our political ties with our British racial brothers:
“Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.”
Universalism? No, the goal was to fill America up with whites, to keep the blacks, Indians, and Mestizos in check. Immigration of Europeans from different countries made perfect sense.
Universalism is what happened in places like Brazil, Mexico, the Dominican Republic, and Paraguay. And then, arguably mainly due to differing geohistory. Geohistory is also what accounts for the differences between America and Europe, not really ideology.
I think that a cryptocurreny-based betting facility is indeed future-proof, but a better option would be to CRISPR your wearable.
Well the 1924 immigration act did not place any legal limits to immigration from Latin America.
The law was crafted to contain what were the perceived threats at the time.
The Western Hemisphere was relatively less populous, transportation was poor. There weren’t hordes of Indians coming up from the Yucatan – if there had been things would have been different.
assume those traits: universalist, egalitarian and messianic, are correct (at least relatively so compared to Europe) what would an America based on those traits look like in the context of believing in race and heredity? (which puts an automatic limit on the extent of the universalist and egalitarian parts).
i’d say the result would be a nation created out of a composite of European nations (and segregated but otherwise comfortable African and native American sub-populations ) with an otherwise highly restrictive immigration policy and a politics that tended towards creating and maintaining a large middle class.
the traits you describe without the blank slate ideology that was introduced in the 1920s would have a completely different outcome to the one we have.
(also if you add the messianic part combined with belief in heredity and more recently knowledge of genetics i could imagine a crusade to colonize the world and impose eugenics)
Is there still a way to fix things without rivers of blood flowing? And what makes you think that blacks were happy in the Jim Crow 1930s, or that East Asians in California were happy being in effect 2nd class citizens, even though they had legal equality with Whites? Or that openly gay males were subjected to mandatory treatment like electroshock therapy or chemical castration?
What about the Amistad case of 1841?
John Quincy Adams, who was a former President and whose father John Adams was also a former President and a Founding Father that had helped draft the Declaration of Independence, cited the Declaration to defend a group of captive Africans. The Supreme Court ruled 7-1 in favor of the captive Africans.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/on-this-day-175-years-ago-the-supreme-courts-landmark-amistad-decision
Not sure about who is in the cryptocurrency market, but otherwise, in the 4chan terms, every site/market/averager there that isn’t PredictIt is fake and gay. Only PI has real users/real volume/counts for anything, I wouldn’t count the rest of the prediction markets or groups for anything. That said on this particular call they all have similar numbers.
PredictIt’s major flaws are the cap on individual user $, which leads to wild longshots (often the stuff that is truly <1%) being overestimated and because of the same factor but somewhat less so tendency towards 50/50 on the most partisan, active topics. (It would take 20 people or more betting against a wild longshot, assume they are even willing to tie up money with money being capped per market, to counteract the one whacko gambler on the longshot, so categories often get pushed up to 5% or more when they shouldn't.) The other major flaw is the arbitrage between it and foreign but local bettors, eg PredictIt constantly has different odds across a whole swath of things than UK bookies (so someone living in London with legitimate access to both can make thousands of $ hand over fist on the arbitrage on major elections, that will probably still be true through 2020 since PI hasn't grown big enough and there apparently aren't enough arbitrage agents).
Otherwise it's been pretty accurate on US-based stuff (the disproportionately US userbase being wholly ignorant of other countries/world affairs is to be expected). Outside the above issues, if anything there is a constant establishment/msm bias, though PI has been closer to the truth than those sources still, so I have to disagree with some other commenters.
Here's an actual curiosity, and since this readership has a lot of Eastern Europeans/people for whom nominal gdp disparities make a big difference it might be worth some checking out:
You can actually make a lot of risk-free money within PI itself, not just on sensible prediction (two different markets implying contradictions) but literally, risk-free, within a market itself.
On any PredictIt market with a lot of mutually exclusive options and high volume, a user can make free money and end up at "negative risk" by taking NO on everything, especially if you're just a bit patient for the right prices, but sometimes in high volume timeframes it'll literally be possible all at once. If you have $1000 dollars around, enough to hit the maximum, you should be able to make 10% returns on anything, sometimes more, so several hundred dollars per election cycle across several markets. The principle applies regardless of the number of shares, of course, works just as well at $10 at a time but that's unnecessary except for testing it out. Some small number of PI users are aware of this negative risk from what I've seen, but for someone where a few hundred dollars per year is worth more, compared to the average salary of your country or whatever, it could be worth more of your time. For best results a little patience and taking about a month to hit buying swings is probably necessary, though in a sense double digit returns for a few minutes of checking up each day for a month is not bad.
(I don't actually know how easy it is to get on PI for non-Americans in general, but anyway, this is a PSA, the relatively high IQ readers of this blog – even Karlin underestimates that I think – being the audience who deserves a shortcut if anything)
Typical markets would be the range of numbers for something like House/Senate seats, but also where there's a wide selection of candidates, on something mutually exclusive, so the mass Pres, VP markets.
It's surprising, and surprisingly honest I think, that PI never automated anything like this for market making and liquidity purposes, and running sockpuppets etc is not what I'm encouraging, but this is still around and might be thru 2020. I wouldn't recommend trying it on the House market tomorrow right away, without experience, and even then the timeframe is short, but it really does work – if you can get NO on everything with enough margin against the constant profit tax you'll get your input money and free profit back right away.
An actual example of something that could be done near term with the currently existing markets would be something like the DEM nom – start buying up NO on everything available, although maybe waiting into the spring for official campaign announcements to boost those who are actually running, and you'd eventually be clearly into negative risk. The typical gamblers never take into account markets that are eventually going to add options and so forth for scenarios like this. The same initial capital can constantly be reused across all markets for anyone who does this process, once you get going.
Anyway, as an academic interest prediction markets still have these laughable problems with liquidity, arbitrage and the like (the crytocurrencies speculating with the non-constant price of crypto itself is hilarious, at least USD is still USD) but for any based Eastern Europeans or anyone who could use the money, nothing shady, one account per person the actual money is there.
I thought they were returned to Africa?
About the movie: it was acclaimed by critics when it came out. I had not watched it until a few years ago – it had some of the most cringeworthy dialogue I’ve ever heard in a movie (especially when they are learning to communicate with the Africans) which is really remarkable because they used Morgan Freeman to blackwash a white abolitionist.
They were.
The point is that John Quincy Adams argued that the principles upon which the Declaration of Independence was based also applied to some random Africans. Moreover, he said that the President of the United States would be a tyrant like George III whom the Founders rebelled against if the President were allowed to violate the freedom of these random Africans and that the liberty of American citizens would be in jeopardy. In other words, if these random Africans are not free, then Americans are not free, and presumably no one else is either. 160 years later, another President and son of a former President would make a similar case by arguing that the spread of freedom in Iraq and around the world would make Americans more free at home.
These are obviously very radical views, but they didn’t just arise in the late 20th century. They were around early on. And once you hold such radical views, other radical or even more radical views can logically follow, as we see today.
sure
by comfortable i mean economically better off than most people on the planet – not necessarily happy
The success of anti-German propaganda and policy in the US during WW I speaks a lot about America but also about Germans who succumbed to it very easily. German cities in the Midwest like Cincinnati, Milwaukee, St. Paul within couple years ceased to look German. Names of the streets were changed and public signs in Gothic script were take down. People began to anglicize their last names en masse. Was the pressure that high that Germans had to succumb that easily? Was there violence or just silly hysterical propaganda against everything that was German like sauerkraut, dachshunds and even German measles. Sauerkraut and dachshunds survived this but Germans did not. What does it tell us about the Germans?
It’s a screenshot of a talk from an academic conference, not a government plan.
They’re Muslim, so very low.
No. But they’re in China’s zone of interest, so they can always invite the Chinese to rule over them. (lol)
Senate: GOP makes at least one net gain, possibly two. They win North Dakota and Missouri, possibly lose Arizona. They could possibly win Indiana but the Libertarian’s good polling there makes that dicey.
House: too close to call. If the Dems win control (or the GOP keeps it), it’ll be by a narrow (less than 15 seats) margin. The court-ordered Pennsylvania redistricting means that the GOP will inevitably lose seats.
State Races: Illinois, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico governorships won by Democrats. Alaska governorship won by Republicans. Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin leaning Dem but not guaranteed. All other seats retained by incumbent party.
The idea of “whiteness” as an identity is as universalist an idea as they come.
All universalist ideologies share the idea of racial equality. White nationalism does absolutely not accept the idea of races being equal.
Came across this, is it true?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/11/05/half-russians-london-spies-claims-new-report/
Having to pay and manage 75000 spies and informants just for the UK seems to be ridiculous to me, but then again I don’t know how the spy world works. Also if they are all spying, what on earth are they spying on?
False. Universalist ideologies erase ethnic and religious boundaries and work towards a one world government. Whether this one world government is based on the ideas of ‘justice’ or ‘racial purity’ is an irrelevant detail.
You are false. Even the Third Reich did not preach a world government, its boundaries would have ended at the Urals. All other racial movements similarly did not adhere to the idea that the entire world was theirs.
Actually I am wrong, there is one notable exception, the jews have it in their holiest book that the world is theirs.
There was a lot of pro-German sentiment in the US before WWI, even by German-American Jews (the wealthiest and most successful Jewish emigres to the US) who owned newspapers. One of the reasons for the Balfour Declaration was to co-opt the American Jewish Community and defuse the threat of such a political alliance to the UK-US WASP power structure.
It worked. The US entered the war, and there was quite a backlash against the German-American population in some areas.
In fact, it was a central argument of John Stuart Mills who though much more extreme, who was not far divorced at all in terms of thinking or attitude in pro-liberal views. He even held Afrocentric views, and argued that black civilization predated European civilization and the Greek philosophers learned of their philosophy from the original insights of Egyptian blacks.
Efforts to portray all of the founders as anything what we think as white nationalists is really a mistake.
One of the clauses of the US Constitution, suggested that the international slave trade might be banned 20 years after the signing. It was, and men like Jefferson had a hand in it. And, I don’t know about JQ Adams, but Jefferson doesn’t strike me as a rabid universalist.
I think that it was a quite sensible position that the international slave trade be banned. It continued in Brazil into the 1860s. Demand in the US was heating up because of cotton. People were smuggling in slaves. It made sense to attack the trade, purely from self-interest, even after it was banned. Freedom is the most powerful rhetoric.
Some abolitionists were clearly crazy egalitarians. I concede that.
But I don’t think America won some war of ideas with Europe. What happened, IMO, was America had blacks because of different geohistory. Since Americans were Europeans, some of them had the same egalitarian susceptibilities that some Europeans today have. It is a power-dynamic strategy based on the acquisition of resources – it is in some people’s DNA for sure.
Why didn’t it collapse right away? Well, there’s a lot of ruin in a country and the technology wasn’t there to accelerate the collapse. Now it is, and it is something of a curveball. If America is just a precursor, there will be civil war in Europe. But technology might change that – it is difficult to say.
Except for ‘white supremacism’ of the American kind that you preach. Also note I’m talking about a one world government, not world domination. You understand the difference?
I agree it is overbroad. I frankly dislike how some people use it to include obviously hostile groups like Chechens and Arabs. “European” even has some of the same faults because some people call the Turks European because that’s where Constantinople is. At minimum, I think genetic distance should be used.
If we are talking new countries in space – why not scan someone’s amygdala, and give them some sort of value survey, in addition?
“Whiteness” worked reasonably well in the US in the past. I don’t think it works in a technologically advanced society though.
Accelerated assimilation of Germans during WWI
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2017/03/11/anti-german-hysteria-city-during-wwi/98895422/
http://library.cincymuseum.org/topics/w/files/wwi/chsbull-v23-n4-cin-229.pdf
After the war, there was no longer a German community in Cincinnati, but an enclave of lonely, bitter men whose relative material well-being could never make up for their basic ineptitude in adjusting to the fate which had driven them here.
The Prohibition that followed WWI had also an anti-German angle.
“the image of Germandom perceived by the Americans was not that of the bearer of culture but the bearer of the beer stein. And with the renewed temperance agitation of the 1890’s which matured into the Prohibition movement after the turn of the century, the defense of their “personal liberty” was to unite Germans far more effectively than the language issue had ever done.”
GOP remains House and picks up several seats in the Senate. Richard Baris has a monster turnout by Republicans and independents breaking Republican. Trump will be bringing some big change to DC afterwards.
right – universalism limited by belief in heredity takes that form
just neocon propaganda
assume that is true
what form would that take in the context of a belief in the blank slate?
-> globohomo
what form would that take in the context of a belief in heredity?
-> colonization* + eugenics
(*physical or cultural)
I do not think that characterisation of America is true, for reasons that have been summarised by previous commenters. Apart from New England eccentrics, the US has been politically and culturally pro-white for almost its entire history and it has done more than any other state, even the British empire, to extend the reach of Anglo settlement and civilisation.
It was key to the destruction of Western civilization and thus the extinction of the white race. I cannot think of another more destructive state to the white race than the USA, can you?
I think you are getting Americans mixed up with Germans
I genuinely don’t get how you can think that.
It was the same thing that happened to Europe: cheap labor/short-sightedness/political corruption/leftism.
You think it wouldn’t have happened without the US? I’ll tell you what, it might have slowed 10-20 years at the most. And 20 is taking a technological view of it, where America adds to the technological creations of Europe, which facilitate invasion. Things like the Polio vaccine, the internet, cheap flights, and cellphones.
If anything, America isn’t to blame. It’s Europe for seeing places like Detroit and proceeding full speed anyway. But that just goes to show you that it is not ideas or arguments, it’s instincts.
My state has a ballot question on trans. Should be an interesting result.
The deadliest disaster in New York before 9/11 killed many women and children and ultimately erased a German community from the map of Manhattan
On June 15, 1904, General Slocum caught fire and sank in the East River of New York City. At the time of the accident, she was on a chartered run carrying members of St. Mark’s Evangelical Lutheran Church (German Americans from Little Germany, Manhattan) to a church picnic. An estimated 1,021 (mostly women and children) of the 1,342 people on board died.
Unlike the Titanic which sank eight years later, where the crew was organized and disciplined in evacuating the ship, most of the Slocum crew of 36 men pushed passengers out of the way and abandoned ship.
Prior to the Slocum disaster, the German-American community was a vibrant and active neighborhood of the working-class and highly educated. The shock of losing so many loved ones devastated families. Suicides and depression resulted from such a loss and many residents moved away.
With the trauma and arguments that followed the tragedy and the loss of many prominent settlers, most of the Lutheran Germans remaining in the Lower East Side eventually moved uptown. The church whose congregation chartered the ship for the fateful voyage was converted to a synagogue in 1940 after the area was settled by Jewish residents.
Remarkably, the Slocum tragedy rapidly faded from public memory, to the point that it was replaced as New York Citys GREAT fire just seven years later when the Triangle Shirtwaist factory burned. There were similarities between the two fires both involved immigrants and mostly female victims and both aroused public wrath. But the Triangle fires death toll was 85% lower than the Slocum just seven years earlier. How then did it become the fire of fires in New Yorks (and the nations) memory?
The onset of World War I likewise contributed to the forgetting process. Rabid anti-German sentiment across the country eradicated public sympathy for anything German, including the innocent victims of the General Slocum fire. Newspaper articles covering the annual June 15 memorial services ceased abruptly in 1914 and did not reappear until 1920. By then the Triangle factory fire was fast achieving iconic status as the citys, even Americas, most famous and memorable fire.
(excerpts from several articles)
My state has a ballot question on trans. Should be an interesting result.
Massachusetts? Governorship in Vermont will be even more interesting, I imagine.
The worst thing that they did with regard to mass immigration in Europe was pressuring West Germany to take Turkish gastarbeitern in the 70s, which the West German government was reluctant to do anyway.
But I think the previous commenter was thinking of the American contribution to stopping Imperial German and Nazi aggression
Fascinating, thanks for posting this.
John Stuart Mill knew what he was talking about:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stuart_Mill
Dubbed “the most influential English-speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century”, Mill’s conception of liberty justified the freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state and social control.
At the age of three he was taught Greek. By the age of eight, he had read Aesop’s Fables, Xenophon’s Anabasis, and the whole of Herodotus, and was acquainted with Lucian, Diogenes Laërtius, Isocrates and six dialogues of Plato.
It belongs in the same category of lies as portraying the Founders of the USA as Christians when in fact the main Founding Fathers were either Deists or Unitarians who would have been burned at the stake as heretics by both Catholics and mainstream Protestants.
There is good reason why the conservative christians of that era called the liberal Enlightened Founders “infidels” and the Constitution a “godless document”.
Trump ran against Pat Buchanan for the Reform Party nomination in 2000 and lost, then denounced him for being anti-black and anti-gay. It probably galls Buchanan that Trump became President by basically stealing his clothes and calling him a racist. Back then Trump’s choice of VP would have been Oprah Winfrey.
Battle Cry of Freedom is an excellent book probably my favourite work of non-fiction. I would recommend the Shelby Foote civil war trilogy series as a follow-up. The chapters on Gettysburg are epic. Also John Keegan’s essay on Ulysses Grant from his book Mask of Command.
The Oxford history of the United states volumes seem to be pretty good in general, at least those for the 18th and 19th centuries. I read the volume about 1815-1848 by Daniel Walker Howe (What hath God wrought) a few years ago and enjoyed it a lot…even if I disliked almost all of its protagonists (apart from Henry Clay who came across like a sensible moderate, compared both with deranged Southerners dreaming of a perpetual slave empire and with sanctimonious New England Yankees). Battle cry of freedom is indeed excellent, a very gripping narrative.
I remember Shelby Foote from the Ken Burns documentary, interesting fellow, if maybe too biased in favour of the south. I don’t think I’ll read his works (tbh military history in the narrow sense doesn’t interest me that much), but thanks for the recommendations.
That’s right. There’s something so strange about seeing trannies on the ballot, especially if your voting place is an elementary school.
I hear the Vermont State House is close to a dem supermajority. Of course, one of the things that happens then is that they don’t record controversial votes. Makes me wonder about the future prospects of national politics, whether the dems will splinter or not.
I’m kind of skeptical of that first. I think the blame has been externalized. Japan was more uniquely at the power of America, but they didn’t bring in a bunch of Indonesians.
I’ll concede the 2nd, but both cases were not handled well at all by the Germans. I know that just comes down to politicians, but that’s the American side too. But Zimmerman and Hitler and a few others were really egregiously stupid.
If Beto wins in Texas it will be a game changer. Texas will become a swing state, like Florida, sooner or later. So will Georgia. Watch the Governors races in these 3 states. The South, the most populous region in the US, is changing.
Indonesia wasn’t an ally of pro-American Japan.
No, American pressure did play some role in the initial decision by West Germany to accept Turkish guest workers in the early 1960s (it was due to desire to stabilize Turkey as an important NATO ally and prevent commie subversion or whatever was the great fear back then), the German employment minister Theodor Blank was initially very sceptical, because he regarded the cultural and religious differences as too great and feared conflict (!). But of course the Americans had no idea then that this would lead to the immigration of millions of Turks to Germany, and the subsequent mistakes which enabled permanent Turkish settlement were made by German politicians, judges and business lobbyists.
I’ll stand by my judgment though that I regard American cultural influence as absolutely toxic…there are now even groups in Germany calling themselves Black lives matter Germany; and a few months ago I read an interview with some black activist, working for the German Social democrats (!), who’s showing that stupid Wakanda movie to other persons of color and already demanding quotas for blacks in Germany. American race discourse is increasingly prominent among lefties. America is exporting its pathologies to the rest of the white world, and imo that’s the logical consequence of the uncritical admiration and imitation of the US which characterized so much of post-war West European history.
The Zimmerman proposal was idiotic and totally unrealistic (kind of ironic though that the American Southwest will be Mexicanized anyway…), and the decision to wage unrestricted submarine warfare was a mistake in hindsight. But that decision wasn’t taken without understandable reasons. American neutrality in WW1 was a total sham anyway, with the US supplying massive amounts of armaments and credit to the Entente powers and tolerating the British blockade, while restricting German submarine warfare through its threats of intervention. The German public was outraged about this and regarded Americans as hypocritical war profiteers who let the British starve hundreds of thousands of civilians in the central powers, but prevented Germany from fighting back effectively and using the submarine weapon (which was believed to be capable of winning the war for Germany by many). And imo that assessment had a substantial basis in reality.
As for Hitler, he was an extreme ideologue of course and obviously I’m not going to defend the war he started. But it’s far from clear to me, that his declaration of war in December 1941 really was a fateful mistake, the US would probably have entered the European war anyway.
According to New York Times, it seems like Democrats will win in the House of Representatives, while Republicans will win in the Senate.
So presumably this means, Nancy Pelosi, leader of Democrat Representatives, will become very powerful for the next 4 years?
Point taken – it’s a forced analogy. Besides which, I do think Germany’s situation was worse in some ways.
But they could have easily said no. What more motivation was needed than history with the Turks? There wasn’t anywhere close to sufficient motivation to compel them to say yes, IMO. Nor does it explain what happened in the rest of Europe. The UK and France had their own nukes.
The initial movements were caused by cheap labor. We don’t even have to look to America for precedence. The Reconquista was arguably complicated by people who wanted to keep the Muslims around for cheap labor.
I think you’re right mentality of America was often distinguished by messianism, and this was since the late 18th century. In the 19th century, motivation of Unionists in the American Civil War, was partly related to America’s cosmic mission, or at least had to be reinterpreted in this way by the end of the war (where Lincoln redefined it in terms of fighting against slavery).
Intensity of political division in America, is amplified by the feeling that direction of their country has some kind of cosmic, moral importance, and needs to constantly break down or restore unthought boundaries.
During the first half of the 20th century, some currents towards isolation, and pressure was subsequently alleviated by the Cold War. Collapse of the USSR has been a kind of curse for them, from the psychological health viewpoint. And there is now constant projection of all kind of views (both positive and negative, depending on their interpretation of the current direction of America) on Russia, as nostalgia for the past when Soviet Union was actually opposing them with a different worldview, and which helped prevent them from turning against each other acrimoniously.
China is not yet felt as real opposition in the American mind – Chinese are perhaps still too alien and foreign to be used psychologically like a negative or positive reflection of themselves, so Russia has to continue being victim of this role for some more years.
She’s pretty old now (b1940). A few of her recent quotes seem to indicate she may be losing her marbles, so I doubt she will be Speaker for that long.
Could be that she wouldn’t even be elected Speaker.
The term for representatives in the US House is 2 years. No telling how long the Dems will hold power of course, could be a long time.
Scary to think of her being so close in the line of succession, but my instinct is they will go with a younger face. She is kind of seen as a loser, for losing the House originally. Of course, there is such thing as political loyalty – the worst kind.
the new game the demorats are going to play if they fail to take the House is to claim that the U.S. Govt + Repubs suffer from a “crisis of legitimacy” because they’re saying the Presidency, the Senate, and the House will all have had more demorat than Republican votes
btw its a canadian jew (ezra klein) making this claim
Who do you think will be the Democrat candidate for the Presidential election in 2020?
I have read so far that Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren might be the candidate.
I guess, Elizabeth Warren could be dangerous because of the women voters (although this plan didn’t get enough votes for Hillary to defeat Trump), while Joe Biden could be dangerous because of working class voters in the Swing States (Ohio, Michigan, etc).
Aren’t they both too old? Biden will be almost 80 in 2020, he would be the oldest president ever.
Maybe they’ll nominate some black radical.
Even politics aside, I find both objectionable purely for reasons of strategy.
Lieberman is a gaffe-machine and kind of a dirty old man. His earliest presidential ambitions were thwarted when it was discovered he was plagiarizing speeches about his family history from some British politician. That was in ’87 though, so not many remember. I don’t think he gets anyone excited, and he is getting pretty old. He’s not a good debater, though I don’t know how much that counts.
Warren does get people excited. I think mostly intellectuals though. For working class men, I’d suppose she comes off a little as “I am woman, hear me roar!” Because she is incredibly shrill and vituperative. She originally had no primary – in Massachusetts! – so I don’t think she really has the chops or the legs to campaign. Massachusetts candidates are usually seen as kind of weak, since it is such a blue (Democratic) state.
I don’t know who I’d pick. Someone younger and more personable, certainly. Many perceive Trump as mean. I wouldn’t say that is his true spirit – on a personal level, he’s really an effusive flatterer. But politics…
https://twitter.com/AriMelber/status/1060001955328806912
Pretty strange to think that this could have a very significant effect on the 2020 elections.
Cruz made this more exciting than it needed to be. If the Dems take the House, I’ll probably end up ~$140 on net. https://twitter.com/dpinsen/status/1060010229688082432
I do think there is a certain cultural push. It’s undeniable really – but, IMO, it’s success is predicated on Leftist instincts, which are already there and fatal to start. If it wasn’t Hollywood, it would be other centers, more of population or finance, like London.
My position on what is happening to the West is shortly summarized as 1.) egalitarianism is an evolved reproductive instinct 2.) which did not evolve in a technologically advanced society 3.) or a racially diverse society. 4.) it is not adapted to modern times and so turns into something really malignant.
Regarding the world wars: discounting the tragic aspects of what happened, the Zimmerman Telegram is laugh out loud funny. Zimmerman must have not understood that Texas won its independence from Mexico all by itself, when it was sparsely settled. Of course, Mexico was very unstable at the time, but it was arguably also true, when he sent it.
I don’t think intervention by the US in Europe in WW2 was inevitable. Hitler could have made it practically impossible, IMO, if he had been serious about it. It would have made more sense for him to declare war on Japan, and wage a propaganda war about how he was ready to help the Allies in the Pacific once peace was declared with England. One of the things he never should have done was bomb England – he should have dropped leaflets, circumventing the British press.
hispanic male with black female as vp
From 538.com:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/race-gender.png
Leaving a comment since I laid out a prediction here and I should be judged on it.
Senate: mostly right. I nailed North Dakota and Missouri, was half-right about Indiana and Arizona (hedged my bets there). Could be proven wrong on Florida and Montana (GOP leading there when I predicted Dem wins) and Nevada (Dems leading there as of this writing). Right on everything else.
House: mostly right. I predicted a narrow majority for whoever won the House, and it looks like the Dems will have 220-230 seats (current NYT estimations: 216 Dems vs. 192 Reps). Thank God Steve King won reelection.
State Races: mostly right. I was dead on with Illinois, Michigan, and New Mexico (not hard with IL and NM, admittedly). Might be right on Nevada and Alaska: Sisolak and Dunleavy are leading as of this comment. Hedged my bets with Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin (predicted they would lean Dem; only the latter went Dem). Was wrong on Kansas (somebody will have to explain this; I simply don’t understand Western states if they’d vote for a Dem over a populist Republican) and Maine (same). Right on everything else.
Prediction/Drunken Hope: President Trump is able to work the inevitable conflict between the Clinton/Obama wing (pro-neoliberalism, anti-socialist, pro-war) and the DSA/Bernie Sanders wing (anti-neoliberalism, pro-socialist, anti-war) of the Dems to his advantage to keep his agenda going.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/race-age.png
So, the Republican Party owes it’s success to whites aged 45 and older. Who constitute 51% of voters.
Lieberman is a gaffe-machine and kind of a dirty old man.
It may well be true, but I think you meant to say Biden.
They defeated “Putin’s favourite congressman”. Bastards!
On a serious note, Republicans are definitely losing the South-West. In Arizona Dems won half of all House seats, and almost won the Senate seat. In Texas Cruz STRUGGLED against the Beto. Many Texas Republicans STRUGGLED to win their gerrymandered districts.
The only regrettable thing about that cockroach McCain dying is that he did not live to see the day when he is voted out by the brown hordes in Arizona he so dearly loved.
The former pretends to not dominate?
Republicans from Arizona were awful anyway: McCain, Flake. Now it’s rapidly becoming the new Nevada.
All the post-war negative exports of American culture that you mentioned are attributable to Jews though
But leading up the First World War and even continuing into the interwar period, the world had been heading in precisely the opposite nationalist/racialist direction
the egalitarian / messianic / liberal streak in the Anglophone world was invested in eugenics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States
it was diverted into globohomo by a combination of the blank slate ideology and media dominance
Oh, man you’re right. I don’t why I said Lieberman. Other than his first name.
That’s a really good point.
WW2, of course, toxified the discussion. Maybe, that was like inhibitory neurons forming in the Leftist hive brain. Causing it to move to blank slate, which sentiments one can find much earlier. But, under my own model, I would put more emphasis on technology. Planes vs. steamships. TV vs. Radio. People owning their own cars vs. riding the streetcar.
I really think of radio, when I see the pozzed stuff on TV. The most popular “black” show Amos and Andy, which was really quite popular, consisted mainly of 2 whites doing different black voices. Of course, they also had movies, but still there’s something about a visual medium which makes it much easier to virtue signal. The smaller budget of TV, and longer run, when compared to movies means that it is easier to push a message. I believe there is a certain amount of imprinting of black faces which didn’t occur previously. Thus more perfectly triggering the egalitarian impulse.
That is extreme compared to most other countries though, that they currently ban voting of “ex-convicts” in America. So these are people who were supposed to be returned to normal society.
In Russia, there is limitation on some prisoners from voting (while they are in prison). But even many types of prisoner are voting, so they establish hundreds of voting booths inside the prisons.
It’s interesting when you discover America is more illiberal in many ways like this.
Biden is a candidate the Democrats might have a higher chance to win with, as focusing on working class voters, then, who are the key to winning Swing States.
Still I think, Trump is probably going to win the election in 2020. (Obama lost more in his “mid-term” election in 2010, and still won easily in 2012.) Having power in House of Repesentatives can also reduce the popularity of the party, as they are mainly blocking proposals there.
This is unless, Democrats present someone very charismatic for President, like they had with Bill Clinton in 1992.
But proportion of blacks and latinos voting in elections, will be significantly lower than their proportion of the population.
for now
what happens when that changes too? whites are screwed
“This is unless, Democrats present someone very charismatic for President, like they had with Bill Clinton in 1992.”
Clinton won because of Ross Perot
Clinton 44,909,889
Bush 39,104,545
Perot 19,742,267
You’re not wrong to be critical of American influence, but please note that we Americans are the first victims of American pathologies. Many of us are desperately struggling to overcome this.
Biggest disaster last night was the defeat of Kris Kobach. He would’ve been an ideal man to succeed President Trump in 2024.
But now that he will not be the Governor of Kansas, he becomes a political nobody.
Probable loss off the House is unfortunate, but really not that big of a deal given the timbre of most Congressional Republicans. It’s likely to improve Trump’s game as well.
The figures the negress Bliss posted show two things:
1 – The media (and school system) must be destroyed
2 – Democracy must be eliminated
We have perhaps twenty years left to get this done.
US, unfortunately, in spite of all its natural resources and incredible potential, started out already in 1776 with a fatal flaw: importing millions of slaves from Africa. That was one of the stupidest and most short-sighted things in human history. It turns out that it is not possible to recover from a catastrophic error of that magnitude. What we have been seeing in the last few decades, after 200+ years of sputtering semi-stability, is the metastasing phase of this original catastrophic mistake.
US started to expand and export its pathologies as a way to stabilise its own domestic (self-inflicted) mess. And because they could, they have been that powerful. In order to live with what they had done they need to pull in the rest of the world into this maelstrom of idiotic unviable multi-everything ideology.
Germany could have managed it better. It is certainly true that Washington used Germany (and EU in general) as a weapon in its endless ideological dreams of conquest. The mass Third World migration in general – not just with Turks to Germany – has been offered as an inducement to Third World elites to side with US geo-politically. You have Hillary Clinton literally flying to India to tell Indians ‘come to America, we want you‘. It was originally developed as a post-colonial tool to prevent leftist radicalism and nationalist policies. It has worked really well and that’s why Washington ruling elite is absolutely unwilling to change it. They fear what would happen if suddenly Third World elites would stop seeing US as a place where they go when they grow up. And they might be right, it could be very destabilising.
There is no solution to this in most of the West. The question is how long before it gradually destroys Western civilisation, what will replace it, and are there going to remain a few places that preserve the best overall culture/technology/system in mankind’s history.
True, and prior to that Soviet sponsored agitators,were the issue.
Clinton was the first of the new left leaders, the West has hurtled downwards ever since. Those results in the SW are really ominous, I don’t see who or how a man of the right can win after Trump.
America desperately needs a nationalist party that will, at an absolute minimum, advocate for immigration restriction and a non-interventionist foreign policy.
Small steps were being made to transform the Republican Party into exactly that before the election of Trump, but the momentum has since been in the other direction.
Jeff Sessions has been replaced by a Democrat as Alabama Senator.
Roy Moore has become a political nullity.
John Duncan has retired from congress.
Kris Kobach, Dave Brat, and Dana Rohrabacher all lost winnable elections yesterday (Brat and Rohrabacher came very close despite being massively outspent, and Kobach would have won if a Republican hadn’t run as a third party candidate).
Not to mention the nationalist activists who’ve been deplatformed, burned out, or even jailed in the past two years.
Cultural Marxist vigilantes, biased media, vast sums of plutocratic money and backstabbing establishment Republicans have, in each case, gotten their way while President Trump hasn’t lifted a finger to help the strongest supporters of the platform he ran on.
There is much work to be done to repair the damage of the past two years, and it is unclear if President Trump will help or hinder the cause.
It’s only in a few states, with Florida having the largest number.
Here’s a semi-interesting article about the issue from a liberal perspective:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/magazine/ex-felons-voting-rights-florida.html
On some level I agree with you…it seems pretty excessive, as do many aspects of the American justice system. But maybe that’s an inevitable consequence of America’s special demographics.
If Jews have as much power in the US as you claim, shouldn’t an antisemite like you conclude that something is deeply wrong with the US, when so many white gentiles in the US hold strongly pro-Jewish views? Doesn’t this indicate that there’s some fatal flaw in Anglo-American civilization?
“Neutral” may have a disturbingly positive view of Hitler and the Nazis, but at least his position on this issue seems consistent…yours not so much imo.
WHAT THE FUCK 😀
https://i.imgur.com/H7ltUt4.jpg
Rightness of the policy depends on the crime. If you did some permanent damage – like killing someone, then not being able to vote is very logical.
But knowing about high prisoner rates in America (which do not match murder rates), we can know most of these “ex-convicts” are people who sold some weed, or have had a drunk fight with a policeman.
Nonetheless to blacks having higher crime rate (where we all know the rate is higher), America is just not in a position to propagandize about being “land of the free”, while having highest rate of population in prison in the world, and (even more) not returning them to normal society after they have been in jail. Statistically, even a much higher crime rate with blacks, cannot explain the high prisoner figures we see from America (with blacks being only 13% of the population).
US, unfortunately, in spite of all its natural resources and incredible potential, started out already in 1776 with a fatal flaw: importing millions of slaves from Africa.
Actually, it is estimated that no more than 400,000 slaves arrived to North America (considerably less than to Barbados alone):
http://www.slavevoyages.org/assessment/estimates
Of course, they subsequently became many millions.
.
That seems to be the position of this initiative 4 in Florida as well…murderers and rapists will apparently still be barred from voting.
I agree that it seems rather excessive to permanently strip people of their voting rights for non-violent offenses connected to marihuana or something similar. The numbers in Florida are pretty stunning.
You don’t need to tell me that…I’m not exactly pro-American 🙂
But yes, if one thinks about it, it’s pretty disturbing how many people get locked away in US prisons, and that apparently there is no other way to keep crime levels at an acceptable level. It’s all the more bizarre that so many Americans still believe that the US is somehow a model which everybody else should imitate.
It’s only in a few states, with Florida having the largest number.
It used to be a lot more. In 1974, for example, the US Supreme Court upheld California’s felon disenfranchisement statute (Richardson v. Ramirez).
The only people who are really obsessively pro-Jewish are the Protestants who fell for the Scofield Bible lies about Christianity supporting Judaism. But that’s a fairly recent (100 years) fluke. It’s not really surprising that they are pro-Jewish when their media is effectively controlled by Jews though. Before that there were efforts to limit Jewish immigration. Previous American openness to Jewish immigration was not really specific to Jews.
I don’t really see which of my views are inconsistent.
There are a few dozen million of such people in the US.
Besides, my impression is most white Americans have a positive view of Jews (e.g. our “Mr. Hack” – who may well be representative of Boomer Republicans – wrote a few weeks ago that much of modern US culture was created by Jews and that this was a good thing). Genuine Antisemitism seems to be a fringe view.
Yes, but from a nationalist perspective all of the mass immigration which transformed the US from the 1840s looks problematic. It certainly diluted America’s original Anglo-Protestant character and paved the way for its self-conception as a perpetually changing nation of immigrants (even if there was a 40-year hiatus after 1924).
I quoted statements by Lincoln and other Republicans from the 1850s, where they expressed their opposition to nativism and “bigotry” (seen as an un-American sin of the Old World)…but imo opposition to Irish Catholic mass immigration was quite sensible from the point of view of old stock-Americans at the time, and I don’t see the fundamental difference between those anti-nativist sentiments and the views of today’s multiculturalists who are against immigration restrictions for Muslims.
I just find it odd that an open antisemite like you is also a vehement defender of the US which is probably the most philosemitic great power in history. It seems like an unusual combination.
It’s a bit lower for blacks and a lot lower for latinos/hispanics. Minorities constitute only 28% of voters. For now.
On the other hand women constitute the majority of voters. What really stands out in that chart is that women of all races/ethnicities vote more than their men. And they consistently vote by a significantly larger percentage for the Democrats than their men.
That bodes well for the Democrats. Women are becoming more and more energized and politically ambitious. There are well over a hundred women in Congress now and they are overwhelmingly Democrats.
I agree with you that America was flawed from the outset for the record.
But it is not written in our fate that this must continue forever.
We will change this, God willing. And we wish you well in your efforts to save your country. A world without Germany would be greatly impoverished.
“Non-violent” offenses that result in imprisonment involving “marihuana” almost always involve drug traffickers captured with a vast quantity of drugs where there were no witnesses willing to testify. Most of these so-called non-violent felons are in fact professional criminals.
And I am an advocate of “marihuana” legalization for the record and enjoyed said product last evening.
Niggers should have ZERO political rights. Prohibiting felons from voting is just the beginning.
It’s not that odd. They are our cousins across the waters. We love them, and they love us.
Mr. Hack, for the record, is a hack. And he doesn’t seem to really care about America. His main love is the incredibly fake Ukraine.
Beto didn’t win. But he still changed the game. He raised a blue wave in Deep Red Texas which turned it Purple. And Beto O’Rourke is now the leading contender for the Democratic nomination for President in the next election:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/betomania-put-texas-in-play_us_5be35dc8e4b0dbe871a66fd7
Democrats also actually won two key races, ousting previously entrenched GOP incumbents in two U.S. House districts ― one in the Houston area, the other part of the Dallas metroplex. None of this is good news for Texas Republicans. Heading into 2020, the state is now far more competitive than it has been in at least a generation. And O’Rourke, at the start of the year an obscure House member from El Paso, gets the credit. “The long-lasting impact that he will have is that more very high-quality (Democratic) candidates will choose to run and I think more Texans will believe that their votes will really count,” Austin City Councilman Greg Casar told HuffPost. “And now nationally, people really have to talk about Texas as a purple state.”
Essentially, there was a … blue wave” inspired by support for O’Rourke and antipathy toward President Donald Trump, Rice University political scientist Mark Jones told HuffPost.
The impact of O’Rourke’s underdog campaign stretches beyond losing by fewer points. His aggressive ground game, anchored by his visits to each of the state’s 254 counties, offered a new model for spurring enthusiasm. He leaves the state party with a healthier infrastructure and a battalion of volunteers who saw their work make an unlikely impact.
Disraeli was Prime Minister in 1868, and pursued a pro-Ottoman policy.
Another Sephardic Jew from Italy, Don Pacifico, had the British blockade Greek ports in 1850 while Palmerston ridiculously invoked “Civus Romanus Sum” to justify himself, and the large means mobilized in defense of Pacifico’s interests- he, some merchant with a very tenuous and fresh history as a British subject (incidentally the turkophilia of Sephardic Jews is a well-known historical fact, of course).
If at the height of British power, Jews could be as influential and high-profile and shape events as consequential as described then it’s much deeper than a recent 100 years fluke. Arguably the times of Richard I and the spirit of Crusade were several centuries away, but the chasm in values was even greater. It’s not just some change in religious denomination. For a Pacifico or Disraeli, or Rothschilds to have their way like that in the 19th century, there is a long preparatory groundwork from the resettlement period in the mid-17th and on.
Yes, we are. We had a war about this.
But thanks for that.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a24786694/midwest-blue-wave/
When you shift your focus…….to the Midwest you see the real results of the Blue Wave.
Wisconsin ousted Scott Walker from the governor’s mansion. Illinois and Michigan replaced their Republican governors with Democrats. Michigan legalized weed. Kansas rejected the harsh conservatism of former governor Sam Brownback and his torchbearer, Kris Kobach, a prolific race-baiter and vote suppressor. In the aftermath of the 2016 election, it appeared the Upper Midwest was tilting towards Trumpism, a shift that would dramatically recast presidential elections and give Republican candidates an almost insurmountable advantage. Now the region is rejecting Trumpism.
It wasn’t simply the big races in the Midwest, either. Once you look beyond the gubernatorial contests, you see the breadth of the Democrat’s gains in this region. For instance, women now hold the top three election positions in Michigan for the first time in the state’s history: governor, secretary of state, and attorney general. The state is also sending three new women to Congress, according to the Detroit Free Press.
In Wisconsin, Tony Evers, the Democrat who defeated Scott Walker, leads the state’s public education system, which Walker had sought to dismantle. Ever’s running mate, Mandela Barnes, a former state rep, becomes the state’s first African-American lieutenant governor, Illinois flipped a number of House seats blue. Minnesota, a blue state that’s becoming more purple, elected the nation’s first Somali-American woman to Congress in Ihan Omar.
Kansas…….was the original laboratory for the strictest dictates of modern Conservatism and really the precursor for Trumpism. Tuesday’s election determined whether voters, who’ve now seen the full effects of these policies, would endorse this path or seek a new way. And indeed, they sought a new direction, electing Democrat Laura Kelly to governor as well as Sharice Davids to the House. She is now the first Native American elected to Congress and Kansas’s first openly gay representative.
What happened in Kansas? Why did it reject the race-baiter Kobach? Why did it elect a native american lesbian to Congress?
I am willing to bet that Mahomes, the bi-racial quarterback Phenomenon who has taken the NFL by storm this year, had something to do with the rejection of racism in Kansas this Tuesday. Here he is with his parents, his younger brother, his little sister and his girlfriend from high school:
https://answersafrica.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Patrick-Mahomes-and-family.jpg
https://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/vahe-gregorian/article219253730.html
Mahomes Mania seizes Kansas City
Before the version of the future in which a Patrick Mahomes monument stands alongside The Scout overlooking Kansas City and a roofed Arrowhead Stadium is better known as the Mahomes Dome and State Line Road is renamed Mahomes Pass, the reality actually already is this: Entering just the fourth game of his era as the Chiefs’ No. 1 quarterback Monday night at Denver, Mahomes has emerged as a rare sensation in Kansas City sports lore.
there are the countless Mahomes Memes, including the one with Mahomes dubbed in as Adam given life by the touch of God in the Michelangelo fresco (not to be outdone by the T-shirts at Hen House on 135th and Metcalf depicting Mahomes and reading PROPHECY FULFILLED on the front and SHOWTIME on the back.)
on the field and off, Mahomes somehow seems to be navigating with remarkable equilibrium the rabid expectations of a fan base starved for its first Super Bowl in nearly 50 years.
In every discernible way, at least from the outside looking in, Mahomes remains grounded, owns his mistakes and seeks to improve and exudes confidence without a trace of cockiness. He deftly shares credit, is polite to a fault and looks interviewers in the eye.
there also is little doubt that Mahomes is a prodigy of sorts, both in terms of his capacity for the game and his sense of self-awareness and perspective. And he has brought not just real hope, but true belief.
So why can’t he be the stuff that dreams are made of … and just maybe become the first Chief to be NFL MVP … and perhaps take them to a Super Bowl … and ultimately even have a monumental legacy?