Monday, August 06, 2018

White male overrepresentation among congressional Democrats

Shocking. Unconscionable. Despicable. Retrograde. Embarrassing. Hidebound. Anachronistic. Bigoted. Troubling. Problematic.

These are just a few words that spring to mind upon discovering the gross overrepresentation of white men among Democrat leadership.

The first graph shows the distribution of the Democrat electorate in the 2016 presidential election among white men and among minorities*:

The second graph shows the distribution of congressional Democrats following the 2016 election among the same:

Member of the Hispanic
Congressional Congress
Barely 1-in-5 Democrat voters are white men but nearly half of the Democrat leadership are white men. And that's with letting people like this get away with pretending to be other than white men.

It's [insert Current Year], people! How is this even possible?!?!!!11111

It shouldn't take costly, stressful, triggering primaries for the Joe Crowleys of the world to be dragged off kicking and screaming from their positions of patriarchal privilege. The white men in the Democrat party who are blocking the progress of women and minorities finding proportional representation in the country's highest legislative bodies need to act immediately--like, yesterday!--to have a shot at squeezing, barely, onto the right side of history.

The long arc of the universe bends towards ¡Ocasio-Cortez!, nazis.

* Yes, I know women are, technically speaking, a majority, but intersectionality, oppression, patriarchy!


thekrustykurmudgeon said...

It feels we have too much choice in society at every level EXCEPT for politics. We need and extra one or two parties and switch from first-past-post to a proportional representation system.

Looking at the coalitions now you could have four parties

1) Constitution Party - big on words like "grassroots" "bedrock" "principles" or some foundation thereof. Certain groups like Club for growth, madison project, heritage action would probably fall under this umbrella and would attract the homeschooling crowd and demos like dutch or lds (although rich diaspora mormons like Romney would be tory).

2) Tories - chamber of commerce and many establishment business organizations. Supportive of free-trade and what not. It would be mostly mixed on social issues. Mitt Romney is probably a good representation of this party.

3)it would be wide ranging from a lot of southern populists, all the way to Jeremy Corbyn style socialists. It's mostly mixed on immigration and on social issues. Strong advocates for firefighter, police and the older unions like the AFL-CIO

4) People's Party. A lot of non-profit and ngo members would support this organization as well as certain labor unions - (SEIU, Fight for Fifteen, ACORN, some teachers unions).

In this way, both parties would rid themselves of the more cancerous elements. In a system like this, I would probably be a swing voter - sometimes voting for party 2 and sometimes voting for party 3.

thekrustykurmudgeon said...

edit: some combination thereof

thekrustykurmudgeon said...

edit again: 3 would be called the Labor Party

Joe Suber said...

Valley girl Puerto Rican nationalism is the way of the future.

Anonymous said...

Would you rather: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez vs Tomi Lahren vs Tulsi Gabbard

Kirkland said...

Albio Sires isn't the only "old white man" who's an Honorary Minority among the Democrats. G.K. Butterfield is a guy who looks very much white but since he had mixed race parents he's part of the Black Caucus. The Dems are happy to use blood quantum standards when it's convenient to their politics.

To say nothing of outright inventing non-white ancestry, like Elizabeth "I'm totally an Indian princess" Warren.

Indeed as the Democratic Party becomes more and more the Explicitly Anti-White Party (which, let's face it, at this point is pretty much inevitable) I expect that more and more Dem bigwigs will start to identify as non-white oppressed minorities.

Jews can still claim oppression on historic basis after all, so Chuck Schumer or Ben Cardin can throw off the mantle of the Oppressive White Male to become Oppressed Jews.

Sid said...

We also see a lot of white male fragility when we see white male Democrats running to keep their seats. I'm sorry but it was deeply problematic when Joe Crowley actually RAN against Ocasio-Cortez. He should've checked his privilege and endorsed her as soon as she ran!

(I bet I could copy and paste this comment on a lot of social justice forums, and there'd be no appreciation of the sarcasm, just a lot of upvotes! But I'm not being sarcastic - if white male Democrats are happy to sign off on anti-white policies, then it's time for them to stop being selfish hypocrites and make way for their replacements.)

Kirkland said...

Incidentally seeing the stats in the post has convinced me that Kamala Harris is very likely going to become the next Democratic candidate to the presidency. The Dem Donors love her, Wall Street loves her, and as a Threefer Oppressed Person (woman, black father, Indian from India mother) she'll be adored by Brown-Black America and by white liberal women.

Sanders and Warren aren't chummy with the donor class and don't have any Minority Points, so the Harris campaign will easily portray them as Unwitting Enablers of White Supremacy. Doubly so for Sanders, since the interview of him calling open borders "a Koch brothers proposal" is still floating around.

snorlax said...

Kirkland -

Sanders and Warren aren't chummy with the donor class and don't have any Minority Points

Elizabeth Wawawa-warren is a proud member of the Cherokee People!

Kirkland said...


Heh, that's a good one. Her real Native American name is Shitting Bull.

More seriously, Harris will likely exploit Warren's stupid Pocahontas fantasy if they come to blows.

Aeoli said...

Checkmate, Nazis!

Passer by said...

This is no longer the case, the democratic party is becoming the party of women.

"The Democratic Party is nominating more women than ever, while the Republican Party moves in the opposite direction"

"The wave that’s building for November may not be blue so much as pink"

Female donations for the democratic party are at an all time high. Female support for the democratic party is at an all time high. Women running for Congress are at an all time high, almost all of them Democrats.

This is leading to all time high gender polarisation of US society.

My guess is that the Me Too movement and constant sexual harrasment stories radicalized women to move to the left.

Anonymous said...

Related reading. These two articles look at the racial trend for the Democratic party overall, the party stats in each state, and the future for the US. Would love to see Audacious Epigone comment on this.

The Racial Realignment of American Politics

America’s Coming Political Realignment

Kentucky Headhunter said...

"Would you rather: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez vs Tomi Lahren vs Tulsi Gabbard"

Foxy boxing or mud-wrassling?

IHTG said...

White male Democrats might be overrepresented in Congress for the same reason Republicans are overrepresented in Congress - regional clustering and gerrymandering.

snorlax said...

ICYMI: Trump endorses Kobach.

Probably too close to the primary (today!) to move many votes, but it means Kobach must have already had a significant lead in the internal polling.

Anonymous said...

How many of those "White men" are really (((White))) men?

Lance E said...

More political parties would make things worse, not better. Division of power is what causes power struggles, which is what causes leftism, which is the source of intersectionality, mass migration and all of our other wonderful modern benefits.

In practice, it probably wouldn't make much of a difference since elected officials don't have any real power. We don't use the spoils system anymore.

Anonymous said...

I'd guess less than 1/6 of the 2016 Dem voters have no Pokemon points at all. (Straight, non-Hispanic White, male citizens by birth, gentile, non-handicapped.) Count only those in full-time private-sector employment and you'd likely be at a little over 1/8th. (Of course 0% of the congresscritters meet that last requirement.)

Take out those with IQs below 100 as well and that's 11/12ths of the Democrat base gone.

Dave said...

"My guess is that the Me Too movement and constant sexual harassment stories radicalized women to move to the left."

Worse for the Democrats, fewer men in any field leads to more "sexual harassment", not less. In oil boomtowns, women rule the sexual market, so they can get whatever they want without accusing anyone of anything. But where many women pursue few men, their feelings tend to get hurt, which counts as "harassment". This creates a positive-feedback loop that drives out the few remaining men. No sense investing huge amounts of time and money in a career or political party where any female colleague could make you unemployable in an instant.

216 said...

Open Border Blacks

Question 22, gender gap, ouch

Question 18, strange results, WMAF causing the white gender gap?

216 said...

OH-12 turned in our favor, but by a narrow margin. The white college women are moving into the Dem column, and no one has any clear understanding of what the hell is to be done about it.

No real movement by Trump or Congress to move working class voters into the GOP column, no infrastructure bill, taxes were cut for corps and the rich, foreign policy has yet to produce anything tangible. The public wants to see ICE arresting white business owners instead of noble brown invaders. Liberal threats that trade war will cause a recession is quite salient in a culture that hasn't really recovered from the last recession. (40% of people don't have 400 dollars for an emergency).

Replication of these numbers in November means Dem Governors in MN, WI, IA and MI. All of whom will enact sanctuary policies and annihilate the 2nd Amendment. The numbers also mean a Dem House that will impeach, followed by the Senate cucking out.

216 said...

Something I haven't seen commented on here. Rick Scott is somehow leading in most polls for Senate in Florida. The GOP might also hang on to the Governorship for the sixth time in a row. At the same time, felons will likely be re-enfranchised, which bodes ill in 2020 and in perpetuity thereafter. A serious movement to partition the state should be looked at in order to prevent the imposition of an income tax on the rural GOP base by the votes of the Third World urban majority. The only way I see the state staying in the GOP column post-2020 is for the 2% in Broward/Palm Beach to start voting like the evangelicals they despise so much.

Audacious Epigone said...

Running a massive sleep deficit at the moment. Will be back in action in a day or two.

Still a nail biter at the moment!

DreamEater said...

actually if you count gays and jews as minorities , the percentage of white men democratic voters is below 20%

snorlax said...

Kobach leads by 191 votes with 100% of precincts reporting. Will go to provisional ballots and late-arriving absentees now, and then probably a recount.

snorlax said...

Provisional ballots and late-arriving absentees will probably favor Colyer, but OTOH in a recount, it helps a great deal to be the SoS.

216 said...

Looks like KS-3 will soon be represented by the maximum Pokemon Points Dem to ever exist. No point in voting for Kevin "H-1B" Yoder. Its disgusting that 2/3rds of the primary electorate renominated an open traitor.

CJ said...

Doubly so for Sanders, since the interview of him calling open borders "a Koch brothers proposal" is still floating around.

The smartest thing he ever said.

Feryl said...

Hey, it's only a matter of time......

I'm assuming that cuckyer cleaned up with voters over 40 (or perhaps over 45), while Kobach did much better with the New Right.

I just got a magazine from "The American Thinker" (or somethin'), and I swear, they didn't make any effort to hide how elderly the writers and readership must be. Insanely, they said that the 70's were "good" for conservatism (!?!), as proven by the growing backlash toward the counter culture* and New Deal alike that paved the way for Reagan's America. They also cite the tame nature of much 60's and 70's pop culture, without acknowledging that it was the product of GI Gen and Silent values. As soon as Boomers made inroads into higher level management of media in the 80's and 90's, that's really went the decay set in.

It seems to me that Boomercons still are clueless about stuff. America was run more conservatively (as defined by fealty to tradition and security) from the 1920's-1970's. Which is when Democrats (yes, those guys) were more in charge. The libertine/libertarian mindset that took off among younger people in the 70's, who then demanded that more and more older people accept their "fuck the government", "Fuck social responsibility", "fuck tradition" attitude lest Boomers refuse to stay quiet, shower, and show up to work with a half-way decent attitude.

The utter collapse of tribalism in the 80's and 90's (which Boomers cashed in on, what with the despicable sell out to "diversity" in the name of greater profits) has been ruinous to Western Civilization.

Also, that retarded article didn't make any distinction between paleo conservatism (which largely despises the rising trends of the last 50 years) and LOLbertarianism that's a-ok with the abysmal ethical and cultural condition of the modern West as long as the tax cuts are deep enough.

Kobach and the others of his generation just need to be patient. 10-20 years from now Republicans will be able to get away with saying that New Deal America which lasted in earnest from the late 1930's-early 1970's was vastly preferable to the free for all that broke loose under Reagan and Gingrich. After all, what material gains do the vast majority of Millennials and Gen Z have to show from the 80's, 90's, and 2000's? We've got no reason to defend the post-Reagan GOP (and the post-Clinton Left).

*the Counter-culture eventually transmogrified into a SWPL freak parade on the Left (seriously, the neo-Pagan viking warrior types of the 60's and early 70's, whose only remaining descendants are heavy metal bands and fans, woulda kicked the shit out of the faggy SJW dipshits of today), and go figure, the anti-government cranks of the Right (such sentiment by Barry Goldwater in the 1960's resulted in him being the first pres. candidate whose sanity was questioned by mental health experts).

Audacious Epigone said...


Up until about last year, my stock response was that in European parliamentary systems, identitarian parties, even when they control a plurality of seats, get coalitioned out of being able to do anything. But then Austria and Italy happened, so it may be time to revisit that abstractly.


Ha! And I thought listening to Obama was bad. At least she can't be president in 2020 or 2024. Or maybe she can--in late Republican Rome, age violations started happening with increasing frequency. Accelerationists, you have your woman!


Lahren, Gabbard, Ocasio. In that order. Because I'm racist.


I looked at the bios of every single current D in congress in putting this post together. At some point I'll go back and gather the whitest 'non-whites'. There are a lot of them.

Could this be an avenue for getting the left--the non-white left, anyway--to embrace genomics? That could be fun!

I bet on Harris as the Dem nominee a year ago. Cory Booker isn't going to get there and it doesn't look like Deval Patrick is in, either. Which white Dem is going to compete with all the boxes Harris checks off? She's dumb, but even she will be able to be coached to use this against her white primary opponents in ways that will rip them to shreds.


Right. What we really need is someone to, with the appearance of total earnestness, ask a Joe Biden or a Bernie Sanders if it's time for white men to get out of all the leadership positions they are taking up in the Democrat party. If one of /our guys/ could get into a townhall forum and ask the question, it could be a watershed moment.

Passer by,

Exactly. And we should do everything we can to accelerate the transition.

Without white men playing a significant role, the [insert whatever institution you'd like--in this case, the Democrat party] will run itself into the ground.

Audacious Epigone said...


In the Democrat party we will see our broader future a little bit ahead of time. Before the country becomes majority non-white, the Democrat party will become majority non-white.


Certainly. But white Dems can be shamed into voting for non-whites. Non-whites voting for whites, though, not so much, not when there are other options.

Majority-black districts for black candidates, majority-Hispanic districts for Hispanic candidates, majority-white districts for everyone!


About 1-in-7, roughly. But you see the rhetorical utility in counting Jews as whites, right? If we restrict voters and representatives to gentile whites only, the overrepresentation isn't as striking. It's still there, but it's more like 20% to 40%--double instead of 2.5x.


And that's the sliver it is most crucial for us to remove for the Democrat party to become a totally dysfunctional, hysterial, risible shitshow. Imagine Maxine Waters calling the shots instead of Chuck Schumer. Speaking of, how fun would it be to pour truth serum down Schumer's throat and talk to him for half an hour about fellow some of his colleagues in congress?


Yep, and that's good for us, as noted above.


Even more evidence that the idea that blacks hate illegal aliens is a boomercon myth. As Z-Man notes, black identity is a negative one that exists entirely in opposition to whites.


My bet is that they'll favor Kobach, actually as noted in my most recent post.


I'll be voting for Squaw Munching Carpet in November for accelerationist reasons. I voted for Trevor whatever his name is in the primary against Yoder, but the attempt to primary Yoder was feeble. There were two candidates who went up against him and I never saw anything about or from either of them over the previous several months.


Hopefully he will be asked about it again if he runs in 2020. He will cuck horribly on it, of course, but it'll be good to dispel so spectacularly Agnostic's notion that there is an ounce of tolerance for anything other than open borders with immediate, unlimited gibs on the contemporary American left. There isn't.


Yes, exit polling is something I'd kill for from Tuesday. There wasn't any, though. The assumption about how the distribution of votes would shake out by county didn't really materialize at all.

I'm going to run some numbers on an interesting correlation I'm sniffing out, though. I hope it holds--it'll be newsworthy if it does.

216 said...


Do you think the long term trend of US Jews is going to follow the pattern of Jews in the UK/CAN/OZ where they increasingly identify with a liberal-nationalist trend as a response to pro-Palestine/Islam sentiments in the left? Or is the US fundamentally different in the size of the Jewish community being large enough to create ethnoburbs and even ethno-counties that insulate them from multikult?

I think black stances on immigration result from Dem party loyalty and anti-police sentiment, there is also some awareness that more black immigrants means more black political power. If ICE was arresting white business owners I think blacks would be more supportive of a crackdown, but that runs headlong into the GOP establishment that won't pass E-Verify and lauds the small businessman landscaper that employs foreigners.

In private behavior blacks are rather fond of self-segregation, BW never seem to notice that losing weight would get them some WM privilege. I wouldn't say the entire identity is founded in negativity, black monolithic tribalism in politics is the result of deindustrialization that ended well-paying jobs for the un-credentialed. Blacks are the most consumerist demographic in the US, I'd think a truly anti-white identity (NOI) would reject this.

Audacious Epigone said...


Best guess is Jews will trend towards the latter over time not so much because of the anti-Israel stuff but because orthodox Jews marry other orthodox and reproduce while non-orthodox ashkenazis marry non-Jews and don't have any kids anyway.

When we start getting calls for the US to take the African huddled masses because Europe won't, we'll really get to see black support for open borders on full display.

216 said...


Wrt to Africans. In my experience African immigrants tend to be from the upper crust of their homeland, and displace the legacy blacks. I noticed this during college, and there were more foreign black academics than legacy blacks. (Of course all of them were far-left).

The likeliest cause of Les Camp du Saintes has been predicted as a Sahelian famine. I have heard that rising CO2 levels are leading to higher levels of "water efficiency" in plants, this famine fear might be misplaced. There hasn't been a surge of Yemini invaders (yet) despite the ongoing Saudi bomb-a-thon.

I've noticed a neoliberal trend that complains the US is "ignoring" Africa and allowing China to muscle its way in. I wonder if this is a trial balloon for a "TiSA Africa".

(His videos are very good, probably familiar to some here, but he's a dyed in the wool neoliberal)

Mr. Rational said...

There hasn't been a surge of Yemini invaders (yet)

Nearly a thousand in S. Korea because of a stupid visa waiver program:

Audacious Epigone said...


That's a different beast than the aspiring African boat people, though. What does a president Kamala Harris do with a vessel that makes it to the eastern seaboard from West Africa? If our only reliable defense is "those things are too precarious to make it across the Atlantic", we're screwed. Yeah, the Atlantic trip is a lot farther, but it's also a smoother sail mile-for-mile.

216 said...


Most West African countries are French-speaking rather than English speaking. That affects the "aspirations" presented in popular media. Haitians prefer either France or Quebec rather than the next door DR/Cuba or Florida.

Brazil is an easier(cheaper) boat ride than Florida. They'd take the land route up through Mexico, or use the calmer Caribbean. (A Venezuela crisis is likeier, if not certain, and cucks will call them "refugees from communism" that are "natural conservatives")

Audacious Epigone said...


Agree. Steve Sailer has been arguing that for years--might be nice to have a wall before our own Latin American "refugee crisis".

But the longer-term threat is from Africa, where the median age in these population explosions are in the late teens and early twenties. They're coming somewhere. Western countries who don't explicitly and forcefully reject will end up finding themselves accepting.