United against free speech

The following graph shows the percentages of adults under 40 years old--the cohort that shapes the zeitgeist--who are opposed to allowing a racist to speak publicly, by political orientation and over time:

Note: Y-axis runs from 20% to 50% in the graphic

We're increasingly a nation united when it comes to stamping out HateSpeech! in the public square. This petition on Change.org is something putative moderates at The Hill and True Conservatives at National Review are presumably on board with.

Given the runaway inflation in what constitutes racism (specifically that blacks are "inferior" in the context of this GSS question) since the seventies--to the point that tens of millions of Americans now believe voting for the winning presidential candidate is evidence of it--we might expect support for a blanket restriction on it to have lessened over time.

To the contrary, it appears we're a decade or two away from an outright majority opposing the first amendment. If you're relying on centuries-old parchment to hold the line against civilizational collapse, you're clinging to straws while drowning.

On the other hand, this data only runs through 2014. There's plenty of reason to think that 2016 is the year everything changed. When the GSS releases results from the Current Year just ended it will be interesting to see if we're able to detect a reversal in the trend towards restricting free speech.

GSS variables used: SPKRAC, YEAR(1970-1979,1980-1989,1990-1999,2000-2009,2010-2014), AGE(18-39), POLVIEWS(1-3,4,5-7)

Golden State's Core America hate

SurveyUSA commissioned polls in California and Minnesota after the 2016 presidential election. Both asked Clinton supporters if they thought Trump voters were racist and also if they thought Trump voters were sexist. The wording of these questions were identical in each survey.

Perceived racism, by state:

Racist?	Yes	No	Unsure
California	65%	16%	19%
Minnesota	40%	20%	40%

Clinton voters in California describe the basket of Trump voters as "racist" by a 4-to-1 margin. Among Clinton voters in Minnesota, it's 2-to-1.

Hillary dominated California 61.7%-31.6% while narrowly winning Minnesota, 46.4%-44.9%, so it's not just that California's leftists more viscerally hate Core America than Minnesota's leftists do, it's that there are a lot more of them, both relatively and absolutely.

The survey indicates that more than 40% of all Californians--not just among those who voted for someone other than the god-emperor!--think Trump supporters are racist. Putting aside the vapidity of that term as a normative descriptor, consider that it is about the worst thing someone can be called in contemporary America.

It's not as if Minnesota serves as a generic red state stand in, either. It was the only state primary or caucus contest Rubio won (he took DC and Puerto Rico as well). It was also the only state in the country to vote for Walter Mondale in 1984. It hasn't voted for a Republican since 1972--only the Imperial Capital itself has a longer blue streak. Californians' hatred for heritage America is truly in a league of its own, as was amply evidenced during the primaries.

Perceived sexism among Trump supporters, by state:

No white fecundity in Cali

Sexist?	Yes	No	Unsure
California	61%	18%	21%
Minnesota	41%	23%	35%

More of the same, albeit marginally milder at more than 3-to-1 in California and less than 2-to-1 in Minnesota.

California is only going to get worse. It is one of 17 states where whites are dying off faster than they're being born. Those who don't kick the bucket are heading for the hills--only New Jersey and Rhode Island are losing whites at faster rates than California is. Additionally, it's one of the least fiscally solvent states in the country.

Hadrian knew Trajan's gains in Mesopotamia would cost more than holding them was worth. Giving it up wasn't an easy thing to do but it had to be done. There are times when a body part must be amputated so that the entire organism doesn't die. Let California go.

Dave Matthews wishes he was a socialist

I'd meant to pass comment on this last year but let it get lost in the sauce. It's an illustration of leftist logic at its finest. Dave Matthews in a Rolling Stone interview:

[Bernie Sanders is] a guy who is talking about something real and that isn't insulted by being called a liberal. Someone could call me a liberal, and I'd say, "Thank you." Someone could call me a socialist, and I'd say, "I wish I was a socialist." I should get a shirt that says, "Tax me! Tax the fuck out of me!"

We have the front man for the most successful touring band in history, his net worth is estimated at $300 million, claiming to support the idea of wealth equality through mandatory confiscation and redistribution while incapable of voluntarily bringing himself to redistribute a sizable chunk of his own massive fortune, something the state would graciously allow him to do if he so chose.

That is, he favors the state taking for the purposes of redistribution from those who don't have one-tenth of one percent of what he has even though he refuses to voluntarily offer a share of his pile of gold, a pile that is 1,000 times larger than theirs. He'd be a good person if only someone would just point a gun at him already!

HillBot

I decided to check in on Hillary Clinton's social media feed, doing so for the purposes of trolling having fallen out of my daily routine nearly two months ago.

This post, with the two leading comments from the same bot engine aside a creepy robotic head shot, is uncanny:

Is there anything about this woman at all that is authentic? Anything?

Don't forget how narrowly we avoided, at least for the time being, a future characterized by a dried out roast beef sandwich (NSFMH--not safe for mental health) sloshing over a human face--forever.

Cutting out Cali

Calexit would take the country's racial demographics back 15 years. The US' racial demographic breakdown as of 2015 as a whole/without California (Calexit change):

White (non-Hispanic) -- 61.6%/64.9% (+3.3)
Black -- 13.3%/14.2% (+0.9)
Hispanic -- 17.6%/14.7% (-2.9)
Asian -- 5.6%/4.3% (-1.3)
Other -- 1.9%/1.9% (0.0)

Not only does this take us back about a decade-and-a-half in terms of the racial distribution of the country, it also takes the total population back by about the same period of time.

Put in another way, in the last 15 years we've added the contemporary population of the state of California into the US! Another California has been glommed onto the country since Bush-v-Gore.

The country is too linguistically, ethnically, religiously, culturally, economically, racially, morally, and geographically divided to make sense as a single political entity. And there are simply far too many people for it to work. Increasingly the only argument in favor of holding the thing together is a mix of complacency and economic expediency.

A SurveyUSA poll conducted in November showed Californians opposing Calexit 57%-23%, with 20% unsure. That's a high mountain to climb, but with three years' of lead time it's not an insurmountable one. Hispanics are more supportive of it than any other group is, so it already enjoys the Diversity! seal of approval.

Speaking of Californians, the majority of those who voted for the wicked witch think Trump voters are indeed deplorable. Among Hillary voters who were asked if they thought Trump voters were good people or bad people, the distribution is as follows:

Good -- 27%
Bad -- 47%
Not sure -- 26%

It gets even better when the deplorability is put in precise terms. When Hillary voters are asked if Trump voters are racist:

Yes -- 65%
No -- 16%
Not sure -- 19%

Sexist:

Yes -- 61%
No -- 18%
Not sure -- 22%