Wednesday, August 12, 2026
Black Voter Suppression?
If Republicans were doing this, there'd be a civil rights investigation.
Ahead of the Michigan Senate primary, the media pushed polls claiming that Abdul Mohammed El-Sayed was far ahead of Haley Stevens when it actually out to be a fairly close and narrow race.
Now we had a repeat of that in the Wisconsin gubernatorial campaign where polls were projecting a Hong win by between 18 to 25 when Crowley narrowly defeated her in the actual race.
The pollsters will claim that they ‘dropped the ball’, but these are very similar ‘errors’ involving vast leads being assigned to socialist candidates right ahead of the election. The net effect of these polls was voter suppression against Crowley and Stevens voters who were seen as less motivated and driven than the socialist candidates. It worked in the Michigan race, but didn’t in the Wisconsin race.
It’s easy enough to manufacture such a swing by undersampling black and working class voters, the Stevens and Crowley base, while oversampling white leftists, suburban woke moms, college students and so forth
What that amounts to, ironically enough, is the very thing that Dems and the media accuse Republicans of, black voter suppression.
This is the second Dem primary race in which the pollsters engaged in black voter suppression by oversampling white leftists in an attempt to depress black voter turnout for the non-socialist candidates.
If Republicans were doing this, there’d be a civil rights investigation.But it’s leftists doing this and so it’s treated as some sort of innocent error.
---
Sundance, "Surprise Defeat for DSA Communist Francesca Hong in Wisconsin"
The DSA Communists are claiming election rigging in Wisconsin as Francesca Hong has been defeated by DNC party approved candidate David Crowley.
The current status of the race is Crowley with 39.78% (313,321) and Hong with 39.37% (310,110). Crowley leading by more than three thousand votes
The reason for the apoplexy is that all polling showed Hong with an easy 20-to-25-point lead heading into election day.
State Navigate polling had Francesca Hong +22, Public Policy Polling had predicted Hong +18, Marquette University polling (the gold standard) had Hong +25, then State Navigate polling had Hong +29, and finally Public Policy Polling had another easy win at Hong +20.
Therefore, the only way the DSA Communists can reconcile the outcome of Hong losing is to believe that some other malevolent force was involved in the actual counting of the ballots.
Malevolent force below the fold:
Monday, August 10, 2026
Friday, August 7, 2026
Wednesday, August 5, 2026
Maryland State Democrats Ignore Own Rules and Vote to Disenfranchise 49% of Maryland Voters
A Racial Crossroads, or Wishful Thinking?
American race relations are at a crossroads. In the years since our current racial bargain was struck in the 1960s, our country has coped with its contradictions and imperfections by the very American method of muddling through. That has worked for a long time, but soon it won’t work anymore. We will have to choose between one path and another. There are two reasons for this, and they are unavoidable.
The first reason is demographic. Our racial bargain was made for a country that was biracial and almost 90 percent white. It will no longer work for a country where white people are a minority and the non-white population includes multiple races, including some that were hardly present in the United States when the racial bargain was struck. There were fewer Chinese Americans in 1960 than there are Egyptian Americans today and fewer Mexican-born Americans then than Venezuelan-born Americans now.
For Generation Z, the beneficiaries of our system of racial benefits are no longer a marginal 10 percent of the population. They are a demographic majority. Non-white Zoomers—and, to an extent, white women as well—benefit from both demographic predominance and an explicit or tacit boost in any head-to-head competition with white men, which, in combination, means that affirmative action is no longer a matter of white Americans sacrificing the occasional promotion. It means white men in particular are effectively shut out of many prestigious fields and institutions, especially in the lower rungs.
This is both unfair and unworkable. Unfair, because a white Zoomer does not feel toward the son of an Indian computer programmer or the daughter of a Mexican illegal immigrant the same moral obligation he feels toward the descendant of slaves. Unworkable, because the challenge of making every institution match our national demographics becomes more difficult as our diversity gets more diverse. Diversity used to mean making sure there was a black person in the room. Now it means finely calibrating multiple demographics, which requires putting race at the forefront of personnel decisions.
The second reason race relations are approaching a crisis is that our racial bargain was supposed to be temporary. When the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed, it was quickly agreed that some racial favoritism was justified to compensate for the black minority’s unequal starting point. The temporary nature of this favoritism was crucial to the deal. The imperative to treat citizens equally under the law was the moral claim on which the whole civil rights movement was based. Race-based remedies were only “transitional,” promised one chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and would “fall into disuse once the job is done.”
At the time, it was sincerely expected that black and white outcomes would converge. A study by the Urban Institute in 1971 extrapolated black progress over the previous eight years and predicted exactly when the catch-up would occur for various metrics such as poverty rates, college completion, and infant mortality. The one that would take the longest, life expectancy at thirty-five years, was predicted to reach white levels in 2019.
In 2003, Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O’Connor famously wrote, “We expect that twenty-five years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today,” in her decision in Grutter v. Bollinger upholding affirmative action at the University of Michigan. There were a handful of conservatives at the time who would have told her that this was optimistic, based on the available data, but these voices were marginalized as politically incorrect. The conventional wisdom was with Justice O’Connor.
Today, two years away from Justice O’Connor’s twenty-five-year deadline, the conventional wisdom has changed. Everyone can see that the long hoped-for convergence has not materialized. Affirmative action is still necessary to achieve colleges’ desired racial diversity. We have created a black middle class, but blacks from wealthy households on average still have lower SAT scores and lower credit scores than whites from poorer households. Large disparities in violent crime rates still persist, as do disparities in wealth, in part because houses in black neighborhoods still have persistently lower home values.
Both the left and the right have registered the stubbornness of these racial gaps. The recent popularity among liberals of radical authors such as Ibram X. Kendi, who proposed an amendment to the US Constitution prohibiting “racial inequity” and a new government agency to implement it, was a symptom of this disillusionment. As equality of opportunity recedes as a plausible goal for the civil rights regime, having failed to arrive after three generations, there is a growing market for pessimists like Kendi who want to shift the goal to equality of outcome.
So that is the situation we face: The old racial bargain is breaking down, due to a combination of changing demographics and a dawning realization that racial outcomes are not going to converge any time soon. One possible path forward is to throw out the old racial bargain and establish a new one based on equality under the law. The other possible path is to accept permanent racial favoritism at every level of society.
“The old racial bargain is breaking down.”
Monday, August 3, 2026
Sunday, August 2, 2026
Thursday, July 30, 2026
Wednesday, July 29, 2026
Tuesday, July 28, 2026
Monday, July 27, 2026
Trump's WWIII Crazy Train is Headed towards Moscow and Gaining Speed
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — Laura Loomer became infamous for spreading conspiracy theories online. Now, as she travels across Ukraine to see the damage inflicted by Russia in its yearslong war, she wants to admit that she fell for some falsehoods of her own.
A close ally of President Donald Trump, Loomer has completely reversed her longtime criticism of Ukraine and is urging fellow conservatives to be wary of Moscow's propaganda, which she blames for duping large swaths of the American right.
"You don't need to listen to a podcaster and let them influence your opinion about a country. You can look at those facts yourself," she told The Associated Press in Kyiv shortly after returning from a trip close to the front line in Ukraine's east. The interview was supposed to take place in Loomer's hotel, but it had to be moved to the building's underground bomb shelter as the city faced another ballistic missile attack.
Loomer has remained influential with Trump despite not having an official role, and she said they spoke over the phone after she sat down with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. She also said that she expects to meet with Trump after returning from her trip.
Loomer's turnaround on Ukraine has been welcomed by the country's leaders, whose relationships with Trump have been strained at times. But it has also stirred confusion, surprise and suspicion in the United States. She continues to insist that Ukraine is not paying for her travels.
As Trump and Zelenskyy prepare to meet on Tuesday in Washington, Loomer said it's clear that her trip has already made a difference, refocusing attention on the war as Congress debates new sanctions intended to punish Russia.
"It's looking good for Ukraine, right?" she said. "Going into this meeting next week at the Oval Office is looking pretty good."
Loomer says she was 'bamboozled' to oppose Ukraine
Loomer had spent years minimizing the war and amplifying Russian propaganda until she made a dramatic reversal this week.
"I've come to realize I was bamboozled by Russian propaganda and I came to believe a lot of untrue things about Ukraine. I used to think that this was a country full of Nazis," Loomer told Zelenskyy as she interviewed him for her show on Rumble, an online video platform.
Loomer blamed her indoctrination on getting banned by American social media platforms, leading her to try Telegram, where Russian media is widely shared.
"The Russians," she added, "are very good at capitalizing on people's rage. And I was very angry," she said, recounting her feelings about the 2020 election, which she falsely maintains was stolen from Trump despite all evidence to the contrary.
She said her change in perspective had been gradual as she started to see podcasters like Tucker Carlson "turn on President Trump" while having their rhetoric amplified by Russian sources.
Loomer, who casts herself as an independent journalist, told the AP she believed her reversal was already changing minds within Trump's "Make America Great Again" movement.
"Oh, 100%," she said. "I've received messages all day from different people and media and politics and people just who follow me online who said, 'Wow, I didn't realize how much we've been lied to.' 'Wow you really opened my eyes.'"
Loomer was welcomed with open arms
Ukrainian officials seemed to recognize the opportunity to win over an ardent Trump ally with a large online following. In addition to her interview with Zelenskyy, Loomer had audiences with top Ukrainian officials and the country's chief rabbi.
"It takes courage to come to Ukraine and not be deterred by Russian propaganda or air raid sirens," Zelenskyy's office wrote on social media.
Loomer also got a tour of Dormition Cathedral of Kyiv-Pechersk Lavra, a monastic complex that came under Russian attack last month.
"Laura is very powerful and she's very authoritative in the U.S., so I hope that everything she has seen by her own eyes will help her to spread the truth when she is back at the U.S.," Tetyana Berezhna, the deputy prime minister and Ukrainian minister of culture, told the AP. "I do really hope and I believe that her visit will have a huge impact on relations with the U.S. administration."
While some have tried to downplay Loomer's influence with the president, he has often followed her advice. She occasionally traveled with him during the 2024 campaign, and last year he purged his National Security Council staff after she raised concerns about their loyalty in an Oval Office meeting.
Trump appears to be tracking Loomer's trip, sharing video of her conversation with Zelenskyy on social media.
"Very good!!!" he wrote on Thursday evening.
The conspiracist denounces conspiracy theories
Loomer has a long history of spreading conspiracy theories. She once shared a video that called 9/11 an "inside job" and amplified a lie about Haitian immigrants eating dogs and cats in Ohio, which Trump went on to repeat during a presidential debate with Kamala Harris.
Although Loomer may have changed her mind about Russia's invasion, her bigoted views have not budged.
"One thing I really love about Ukraine is I haven't seen a single Muslim here," she posted on Saturday. "It's so refreshing."
But in the interview, she bemoaned how influential podcasters can spread misinformation.
Thursday, July 23, 2026
Outting Mamdani's Socialist Neo-Racism
