Changing America's Electorate

The Prog’s are rejoicing at what they believe is their success in changing the makeup of America’s electorate. The goal is to make White Americans as a whole less than a plurality of the electorate. White Americans make up the majority of the American middle class, and it is the middle class values that embrace normal human nature are what Progs seek to crush. The strategy is to ally the relatively small percentage of radical transformationist Progs with what Steve Sailer terms the “coalition of the fringes”—a grand coalition of composed of Progs and every conceivable combination of non-White, non-Christian, and deviant demographic—ethnic, racial, religious, sexually deviant—to take the levers of control and fundamentally transform America from what it has been. This is the importance of the Trans movement. It’s the spearhead of deviancy at its most extreme in the struggle to suppress normal human nature and its expression in the nuclear family.

The fundamental assumption in this Prog grand strategy is that all these groups who, according to Cultural Marxist ideology are alienated from and oppressed by the Normals, really are ideologically invested in the Prog agenda. There have always been grounds for doubting this simple equation of social marginalization (to one degree or another) with willingness to dive down the Prog rabbit hole. Most notoriously, the core non-elite demographic of the Dem party has for decades now—since the Reagan Revolution of working class Whites—been Black Americans. And yet poll after poll has shown that Blacks embrace values that line up much more closely with middle class White conservatives.

The same is, to varying but significant degrees, of most other minorities. A simple example that is currently in the news would be Arab and Muslim Americans. These are voters who have overwhelmingly voted Dem, but are desperately seeking an alternative as they belatedly awake to the reality that the Dem party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Anglo-Zionist Empire. One is left with the supposition that Arabs and Muslims assumed—perhaps understandably—that Republicans were the party of Zionist fanaticism, only to wake up to the fact that they had voted for a regime that supports straight up genocide of non-Jews in Palestine and even in neighboring regions at the option of Zionist perceived needs. But, in terms of domestic social values, Arabs and Muslims have always been in tune with White conservatives.

The same has long been true to varying degrees in the cases of two demographic grab bags of peoples, but who share the common characteristic of coming from traditionally aligned societies: Hispanics and Asians. My guess is that the attraction of Prog ideology at the voting booth for these groups comes from a sense of exclusion by the power brokers of American society, the corporate elites, who are usually but mistakenly identified with “conservatives”. Rather than joining with conservatives to transform the GOP, to wrest control of the party from those corporate elites (who often share values with the Progs), the temptation has been to follow the Prog rhetoric of identity politics and group hatred.

This leaves the Progs with the strongest support coming from the most socially deviant and destructive forces in American society. That will always be a minority. The question is whether conservatives can present an electoral alternative that can draw non-Whites to a party that both Whites and other demographics can identify with. The spectacle of Netanyahu’s triumphalist presentation to a groveling Congress, led by the shameless GOP leadership, wasn’t a good start—the only demographic that, as a whole, favors Zionist genocide is old White people (yes, my people).

However, another electoral transformation of America—and not at all of the kind that the Progs are anticipating—may be underway. This is a transformation that is very much a part of Trump’s populist heritage. Contrary to the assumptions of both Progs and RINOs, Trump is—again, in varying degrees, probably conditioned by cultural factors—showing success in expanding the GOP base. That, of course, is not necessarily what the GOP ruling elite wants—they liked their party the way it was.

Edward Ring makes a case along these lines—not identical, but similar lines.

The Demographics of Realignment

This election, non-white voters, along with their non-Hispanic white counterparts, will have an opportunity to decide between two visions of the future.

What makes Ring’s presentation effective is his use of readily available statistics.

First, he shows with a simple picture, as it were, that the Progs are right to regard White Americans as their enemies. The Whiter a state, the higher the percentage of GOP voters. Case closed:

He then presents some simple stats that cast doubt on the notion that importing millions of non-White voters will give Progs a permanent majority. The problem is—and this is something that Ring doesn’t directly address—is that the importation process is alienating even more non-White Americans than the number of those who are imported. This is true basically across the board of American demographic categories. How that works out, whether it can overcome the margin of fraud that Progs hope will be put on steroids, remains to be seen. However, consider:

Democrats today are comprised of two very distinct groups. At the top, there are donors and constituents who are white liberals who are either affluent enough to be exempt from the economic challenges that most Americans face today, or they are actively profiting from it. At the bottom are millions of Americans who have become dependent on government aid to survive. But will America’s non-whites continue to believe that their poverty is caused by Republican racists, and that only by voting for Democrats can they hope to survive economically?

According to voting data over the past few elections, this narrative is wearing thin. In 2012, the Latino vote for uniparty stooge Mitt Romney was 27 percent. In 2016, Trump increased that to 29 percent, and in 2020, Trump got 32 percent from Latinos. After surging earlier this year, the Kamala Harris candidacy has allegedly derailed Trump’s momentum with Latinos, but even so, as of August 5, Trump’s support in battleground states among Latinos was up to 37 percent. Some polls earlier this year had Trump ahead of Biden among Latinos.

Even the almost universal support for Democrats among blacks has been eroding. Romney attracted a dismal 6 percent of the black vote in 2012, and Trump increased that to 8 percent in 2016. But by 2020, Trump increased his share of the black vote to 12 percent. As for this election, until Kamala Harris replaced Biden as the Democratic nominee, polling was consistently estimating that Trump’s support among black voters had risen to 23 percent.

Asian voters are also defecting, and some indicators suggest by a lot over the last few elections. Exit polling in 2016 had Asian support for Trump at 18 percent, whereas in 2020, that had risen to 31 percent. A July 2024 poll reported Asian voter support for Trump holding at 31 percent, although that was before Harris replaced Biden as the Democratic candidate.

Overall, recent decades of data on voter behavior confirm that non-whites overwhelmingly support Democrats, but the data also shows that support dropping every election cycle. …

Nothing in politics is guaranteed. Can Trump close the deal with a significantly increased portion of non-Whites—and do so with coattails? Ring makes a claim that many conservatives will find difficult to accept:

… since 2016, something fundamental has changed. Republicans in 2024 are a fully transformed party, capable of offering a genuine choice. RINOs are now the exception, not the rule.

There are at least two conclusions we can posit:

1. American politics, like American society, are in a state of flux; and

2. The dynamics at play, based on fundamental values, offer great opportunities to conservatives—if they can free themselves from the dead hand of the RINO past.

One thing that I’d like to see happen. A week or two ago I listened to a lengthy interview with Tulsi Gabbard—over an hour. I fully understand why some conservativs are leery of her. Nevertheless, in the interview she continually worked on two themes: Family vs. the Trans Agenda, and recapturing Education for our young people, wresting it away from the Progs. She makes an excellent presentation and I’d like to see the Trump campaign use her as a messenger.

One way or another, we shall see. I’d greatly prefer to see a Trump win based on a positive platform for the country rather than a win based on the appalling lack of fitness of the Prog candidate.