Should Republicans Just Focus on White Voters?

Thomas B. Edsall, New York Times, July 3, 2013

For two decades, from 1972 to 1992, the Democratic Party agonized over its loss of support among whites, especially those in the working class. Over the next two decades, from the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 to the re-election of Barack Obama in 2012, the party slowly came to terms with its loss and learned how to win the presidency with a minority of white voters.

Now the white vote has become a Republican problem. White voters cast 72 percent of all votes in the Obama-Romney election of 2012 compared to 87 percent in the Nixon-McGovern contest in 1972. Should the Republican Party accept the fact that the white majority in the United States is getting smaller or should it bet on boosting Republican margins and turnout rates among whites to record levels?


{snip} Pat Buchanan wrote in the American Conservative on June 14:

In political terms, this is depressing news for the Republican Party. For nearly 90 percent of all Republican votes in presidential elections are provided by Americans of European descent. In 1960 white folks were close to 90 percent of the entire U.S. population and 95 percent of the electorate. Nixon’s New Majority was created by pulling Northern Catholic ethnics and Southern conservative Protestants, white folks all, out of the Roosevelt coalition and bringing them into a new alliance that would give Nixon a 49-state landslide in 1972, which Reagan would replicate in 1984.

Buchanan continued:

What are the Republicans doing? Going back on their word, dishonoring their platform and enraging their loyal supporters, who gave Mitt 90 percent of his votes, to pander to a segment of the electorate that gave Mitt less than 5 percent of his total votes? Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.


Sean Trende, the senior elections analyst for RealClearPolitics, who has written a four-part series that seeks to broadly address the problems and alternative choices facing the Republican Party;

Timothy Carney, a columnist for the Washington Examiner, who makes the case for an anti-elite Republican Party, a “free-market populism and a Republican Party that fights against all forms of political privilege—a party that champions all who want to work and take risks in order to improve their lives and raise a family”;

And Karl Rove, the Republican strategist who needs no introduction, argues in the Wall Street Journal that “the nonwhite share of the vote will keep growing” and that if “the G.O.P. leaves nonwhite voters to the Democrats, then its margins in safe congressional districts and red states will dwindle—not overnight, but over years and decades.”

Trende provides the most detailed analysis. He is in fundamental disagreement with political thinkers who posit that demography is destiny, that the steady decline in the white share of the electorate, combined with the rising share made up of Hispanics and Asian-Americans, assures a secure Democratic majority in the foreseeable future. The demographic inevitability argument was most fully developed in the book “The Emerging Democratic Majority” byJohn B. Judis and Ruy Teixeira.

Trende countered the Judis-Teixeira thesis in an email to the Times:

You can’t establish long-lasting majority coalitions in America. Part of this is because parties adapt. You can already begin to see this starting with the G.O.P. on marriage equality, which will probably have a pro-gay marriage nominee at some point in the mid-2020s and might have a pro-civil unions nominee in 2016. The simple truth is that “coalitions of everyone” inevitably fall apart, quickly. You can see the reasons why in the immigration debate itself, where, even if we’re only being reluctantly honest, the interests of some core Democratic and Republican coalition groups are at loggerheads with one another (Hispanics vs. working class whites and blacks; upscale whites vs. downscale whites).

Trende explores different future scenarios for the Republican Party: these range from a “racial polarization” strategy at one extreme to an all-out effort by the Republican Party to win Hispanic and Asian support at the other.

Trende takes each scenario and describes what Republicans would have to achieve, in terms of vote margins among major constituencies, to remain competitive in presidential contests.


Trende’s most controversial assertion is that from a purely tactical point of view, Republican dependence on whites is not necessarily a liability, despite the decline in the white share of the electorate:

Democrats liked to mock the G.O.P. as the ‘Party of White People’ after the 2012 elections. But from a purely electoral perspective, that’s not a terrible thing to be.

The core of Trende’s case for his “racial polarization” scenario, as he makes it on RealClearPolitics, is his analysis showing a 6.1 million drop in the white vote from 2008 to 2012. Trende draws his data from the Census, exit polls and county-by-county election results.

By Trende’s calculation, voters who failed to turn out in 2012 were disproportionately Republican-leaning, “largely downscale, Northern, rural whites.” If all 6.1 million had cast ballots in 2012, it would not have been enough for Romney to win, but the election would have been much closer.


Carney advocates another alternative, a hybrid of the populism advocated by Huey Long and Teddy Roosevelt:

Republicans need a new coalition and a new message. The heart of that coalition should be the working class. The message should be populism.

Carney expects that Republican efforts to build more substantial margins among well-educated affluent whites will fail:

Upscale white suburbs have steadily trended Democratic. Montgomery County, Maryland, was one of the first. Westchester, New York, and the North Shore of Chicago followed. Philadelphia’s white-collar counties and Northern Virginia soon joined the club. In 2008, Obama made huge gains in the suburbs, pulling in 60 percent in Fairfax County, for instance, and winning the vote of those voters earning over $100,000, according to exit polls.

Carney writes that in 2012, “Republicans couldn’t have picked a candidate better suited for highly educated, upper-middle-class suburban voters. Romney was successful, risk-averse, smart and non-ideological,” but his “suburban strategy fizzled.”

These setbacks suggest that it “is time to give up on building majorities on a suburban foundation.” Instead, the Republican Party, in Carney’s view,

needs to play to the disaffected. The disaffected are not the wealthy, an obvious point that conservatives can’t seem to understand. The wealthy got wealthier under Obama, and corporations earned record profits while median family earnings fell. Obama uses these facts to defuse the charges he’s a socialist. Republicans should use them to show that Obama’s big government expands the privileges of the privileged class.

Carney’s views are shared, at least in part, by a wing of conservatism that includes my colleague Ross Douthat, who, along with Reihan Salam, a contributing editor at National Review, in 2005 proposed a “downscale” or “Sam’s Club” Republican strategy in The Weekly Standard, an argument which they elaborated upon in a 2008 book “Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream.”

Carney’s proposal would require an upheaval of the Republican hierarchy. Currently, the party has substantial support from the white working class, but its agenda, particularly its economic agenda, is set by an elite with century-old ties to corporate America. At the policy-making level, the Republican Party has represented the interests of society’s winners, not its losers.

This brings us to Rove, the most prominent of the three strategists under discussion. Rove planned to use the two-term presidency of George W. Bush to entrench a sustained Republican majority. Rove is an advocate of a version of Trende’s “full Rubio” strategy, as witnessed by Rove’s oversight of Bush’s success in winning over 40 percent of the Latino vote in 2004.


Rove cited some dramatic statistics to argue that the Republican Party disregards Hispanics at its peril:

The Hispanic population in Georgia’s Gwinnett County increased by 153% from 2000 to 2010, while the GOP’s presidential vote in the county dropped to 54% in 2012 from 63.7% in 2000. In Henry County, south of Atlanta, the Hispanic population increased by 339% over the same decade. The GOP’s presidential vote dropped to 51.2% in 2012 from 66.4% in 2000.

Rove’s solution is less a coherent strategy than a call to arms: “Republicans must now do two things: turn out more white voters and improve their performance among Hispanics, African-Americans and Asian-Americans.” In other words, the Republican Party must be all things to all men.

In an email, Trende described his own strategic preferences to me as a moderate effort to reach out to Hispanics, combined with a degree of focus on low and middle income earners:

To the extent I have suggestions, they were for more economic populism. These include a lot of changes Democrats would presumably enjoy; jettisoning the upscale, Club-for-Growth-style conservatism that characterized the Romney campaign for something authentically more geared toward downscale voters.

Right now, the Republican Party is caught in a vise: it is dependent on support from a diminishing but still powerful constituency of socially, culturally and morally conservative whites from across the economic spectrum, many of whom oppose gay rights and immigration reform. But the party must also deal with two ascendant constituencies: culturally tolerant—indeed, permissive—young and suburban voters of all races, along with Hispanic voters who place a priority on immigration reform that gives undocumented aliens a path to citizenship.


These dilemmas are characteristic of a party undergoing a seismic transformation. The Republican Party will likely replicate the experience of the Democratic Party in the 1970s and 1980s, changing only after repeated rejection of the party’s presidential nominees. There is too much at stake for key players in the Republican coalition to allow the party to fail to adapt. The question is, how long will it have to suffer the humiliation of defeat before it begins the process in earnest?

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • “Should Republicans just focus on white voters?”

    If you take to the prom the only girl in school who let you take her, should you dance with her?

  • Manaphy

    Contrary to the constant whining and b*tching from the likes of John McCain and Michael Medved, If the Republican party adopted pro-white policies, and actually represented the people who elected said party’s candidates to the House, Senate, State Legislatures, and Governor’s Mansions, then they will not only win and keep winning elections, they would also be able to bring about the end of the Democratic Party (as we know it) and establish a permanent majority. If whites remain an absolute majority of the population and vote 60-70% for Republican candidates, then the Democrats (in their current state) would cease to exist, just as the Republicans would if Amnesty passes. Unfortunately, the party is lead by people like Karl Rove and John Boehner, who are either to cowardly or to incompetent to represent the interests of a certain ethnic group which gives them 95% of their electorate. On a side note, my message to the Republicans is simple, if you don’t start representing our interests, and if you don’t stop being liars and cowards, then we, your white conservative voter base, will abandon you, just as white Southerners abandoned the democrats in the mid-sixties.

    • The__Bobster

      I’ve already abandoned them. When they call me asking for money, I tell them they won’t get a dime until they prove they’re looking out for my interests, but if they really need funding, just ask Sheldon Adelson for it.

    • Erasmus

      I have decided Medved became a “conservative” talk show host to fill a market niche.

      Medved markets himself as a conservative in Hollywood, where conservatives are outnumbered about 50:1 but every now and again, the mask slips, and it’s impossible to ignore what’s beneath.

      When Medved shilled for GW Bush’s amnesty in 2007 I turned him off, stopped wasting my time reading his columns and will never listen to him again. When the man with the “encyclopedic mind” (too many facts to see the forest through the trees?) advocated in 2007 pursuing the same policies that had been such an abysmal failure in 1986, I knew he was no conservative.

      • Manaphy

        His entire audience is composed of people yelling at their radio. I stopped listening to him last year when he started doing these civil war history segments, which turned out to actually be an excuse for him to vilify southerners and launch ad hominem attacks on Confederate sympathizers. The only times that I intentionally listen to him are when I call in to tell him that he is wrong about amnesty, at which (not to brag) he usually feels cornered because he has no answers, so he doesn’t let me talk, yells Chuck Schumer talking points at me, and then goes to a break.

        • Erasmus

          Good for you for standing up. NO ONE can defend amnesty rationally. This is why Medved is reduced to shouting Chuck Schumer talking points. I am glad I stopped listening to him long ago. Support of amnesty is such a deal-breaker for me, that I couldn’t care less if the same person opposes gay marriage or wants to bring back prayer in public school. If he supports amnesty, there’s nothing that can redeem him as far as I’m concerned.

          Even that idiot George W. Bush is on the same page as the leftists, talking about a “broken” system and never addressing legitimate questions.

          Some issues are too important to compromise on. Conservatives know this. (In fact, everyone who’s honest knows this Betrayal of this country and our American experiment is to me the unforgiveable sin, and barring an unforeseen attack from outer space, I will never again make political common cause with any American of any party who commits treason by supporting amnesty.

          Perhaps, betrayal of the country comes easy to people like the Schumers, Bushes and Medveds of the United States. Perhaps, they’ve committed it already in so many different ways by thousands of tiny betrayals that taking that last step of surrendering to a de facto invasion and betraying the people they’ve shared an implicit social compact is, in fact, quite effortless.

  • IstvanIN

    They wouldn’t need to concentrate on white voters if they concentrated on issues that are important to the white population and affect the white population, especially the one’s that have a negative affect on the white population. The votes would come easily. i am tired of Republicans that want my vote and then forget about me after the election.

    • The__Bobster

      Romney forgot about us right after the primaries. Small wonder he lost.

      • JohnEngelman

        He remembered, but he did not care. The people he cares about are people like him, with multi million dollar investment portfolios.

    • JohnEngelman

      Don’t feel alone. The Republicans have been doing this to the religious right since it began convincing evangelical Protestants to vote Republican in 1980.

  • EuroAmerican

    We’re screwed either way. If the Repubs start to cater to non Whites then the Republican Party will no longer represent conservative traditional Americans. Is it not clear that non Whites want to be led and fed by the government while libertarian/conservative minded Whites want the government to stay out of their lives? Demographics equal destiny…The fact is that we (White people) are starting to be outnumbered in this country and eventually will no longer have a political voice. I for one do not want to live like the Whites in South Africa are living now. What is the answer? Separation? Racial secession? Emigration? It’s not looking good.

    • The__Bobster

      We wouldn’t be screwed if Whites voted like their future depended on it….because it does

  • MekongDelta69

    Rick Perry said he’s not running for another term for Governor of Texas in 2014. He hasn’t said whether he wants to run for President in 2016 (as yet).


  • dave

    the republicans are no different them the democrats. they are both controlled by special interest groups and lobbies. we need new blood in the republican party who are not fraid to tell the truth and show a backbone. the type of candidate thats not afraid to attack illegal immigration, white issues,crime against whites,gay marrage,borders,language and culture(white). we need a candidate who only cares about this country and not foreign needs of other countries. we need a candidate who will put men and testosterone back in the military,real generals like patton and macarther.not just yes men. until we get a candidate like that i will not be voting in any elections. i will not vote republican just for the sake of it. if they want my vote i want something for it. if we the people stand our ground,tell these guys they will not get our vote unless we get what we want. thats how its supposed to work. they work for us,not the other way around.

    • MBlanc46

      You won’t get that kind of candidate because the Repubs (like the Dems) are controlled by special interest groups and lobbies. There’s no hope in the political parties.

      • dave

        i said that. thats why i wont vote until we get one if we ever do. i will not waste my vote on another RINO. period.

  • The__Bobster

    On another related note:

    WASHINGTON – Former President George W. Bush today cheered on the “progress” in pushing comprehensive immigration reform through Congress.

    “The legislative process can be ugly,” Bush said with a chuckle in an interview aired today on ABC’s “This Week.” “But it looks like they’re making some progress.”

    “It’s very important to fix a broken system, to treat people with respect, and have
    confidence in our capacity to assimilate people,” said the former president.
    “It’s a very difficult bill to pass because there’s a lot of moving parts.”

    Bush’s 2007 immigration reform bill, which included a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, was killed by his own Senate Republicans who denounced it as “amnesty.”

    The same “amnesty” charge has been leveled at the current bill that overwhelmingly passed the Senate but now faces an uncertain fate in the GOP-run House.

    “I understand sometimes you can’t get legislation through that you want. I was also frustrated we didn’t pass social security reform,” he said. “ I thought the plan
    I’d laid out on both was reasonable. But sometimes it takes time for some of
    these complex issues to evolve. And it looks like immigration [reform] has a
    chance to pass.”

    • And therefore, he reminded people why he left office with a 5% approval rating. The good part is that this also reminds people that politicians named Bush are for amnesty and open borders, and hopefully this stench will land on Jeb.

    • Erasmus

      I used to think Bush was an idiot. Now I think he is just a sociopath. When he’s not reading from is Bible, he’s betraying his country to the globalists by selling the American middle class into slavery or sending them to die in bankruptingly expensive wars of new use to the United States.

      Bush is the Republican Party’s last president. Only a party that’s already on life-support wouldn’t see the value in distancing itself from that rat.

      • He’s never had to work a real job any day in his life. What would Shrubya know about how real people earn money to pay for things like groceries, mortgage paymens or (shudder) rent and insurance?

  • The__Bobster

    Over the next two decades, from the election of Bill Clinton in 1992 to the re-election of Barack Obama in 2012, the party slowly came to terms with its loss and learned how to win the presidency with a minority of white voters.

    They didn’t need to learn squat. The increasing momentum of the brown flood resulting from the Immigration Act of 1965 did it for them.

  • bigone4u

    Realistically, blacks and many Hispanics will fail to thrive in a free economy. Thus, the choice is simple for Republicans: Policies that promote a prosperous free economy where whites get a bigger slice of a bigger pie or policies that pull down the economy, increasing the black and Hispanic slices, while shrinking the pie because of the extra special help provided to blacks and Hispanics. The USA is already well on its way to third world status since the pie has been shrinking for 30 years while the feds play number games with wages, GDP, etc. These are serious matters of monumental importance, but I doubt that Republicans fully understand the issues.

    • MBlanc46

      And shrinking the pie by sending hundreds of billions of dollars worth of jobs to Asia (and importing Latin Americans to do the jobs that can’t be exported).

  • Nathanwartooth


    I would love a Republican candidate say “non Whites are never going to vote for us so we are done looking after your interests”.

  • Joseph Bryant

    As long as Republicans are enthralled to the interests of big business they’re useless to the vast majority of Whites. Free trade has destroyed the White working class in this country just as badly as the Democrat’s social policies. And as we can see when push comes to shove (amnesty) the GOP goes with what big business wants every time. The road to the country club is a dead end.

    • JohnEngelman

      Ever since the Republican Party was founded in 1854 the business community has been its most important constituency. This will never change.

      • Joseph Bryant

        Pat Buchanan came close to challenging this outlook in the 90s. We need another person like him.

        • MBlanc46

          And Pat Buchanan sank like a stone, as will anyone like him.

    • MBlanc46

      “The road to the country club is a dead end.”

      But it’s the only road that the Repubs can or will follow, And for the last 25 years or so, the Dems have followed it with them.

  • Dave4088

    I thought the GOP already decided after the 2012 election to become a cheap imitation of the Democrats by pandering to blacks and browns (mostly browns) and relegating whites to third class status? We are one step above persona non grata for the time being.

    • We are already persona non grata.

      Why else would every application I make for employment require me to divulge my race, since I am male, my gender. They say it is voluntary, so why did Uline send me this email after I chose not to disclose:

      Thank you for your interest in a position with Uline. Please take a moment to provide us with the following information.
      Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Information
      We strongly support the spirit of affirmative action and we value diversity in our workforce. In addition to submitting your resume online, we ask that you complete the race and gender demographics. The information you provide will be kept confidential and will not be available to hiring managers. If you choose not to provide this information it will not affect your eligibility for employment.
      1) To provide Uline with this information, please access your Uline candidate profile at recruit(dot)uline(dot)com/ENG/candidates/default(dot)cfm
      2) Enter your email address and password to access your profile. If you do not know your password, click on the “Forgot your password?” link, enter your email address and the password will be emailed to you.
      3) Once you have access to your Uline profile, click View Profile, then Edit Profile. Scroll down to the EEOC section, make your selections, then click SAVE.
      Thank you!
      Uline Human Resources

  • sbuffalonative

    The message Republican/Conservatives should be sending out to everyone is that they are the party of fairness based on merit and not handouts for alleged and imagined grievances. This is where the problem gets bigger than just white and non-white.

    ‘Progressive’-liberals whites are just as out of reach as are most non-whites.

    Conservatives will win the conservative vote and they are majority white. Conservatives won’t win the ‘progressive’ white vote. Neither will they win a sizable number of non-white votes.

    It’s not just white and non-white. It’s ‘progressive’-liberal vs. conservative and conservative ideals are increasingly becoming unfashionable.

  • JohnEngelman

    Rich whites have benefited enormously because of Republican policies.

    • AutomaticSlim

      And muggers, home invaders, carjackers, and gang rapists all benefit enormously from Liberal Democrat policies.

      I know the Rs do not have my best interests in mind, but if I have to choose between billionaires or gang rapists, I will go with the billionaires. Every time.

      • Romulus

        Or the trash behind the scenes of the Hollywood propaganda machine,the certain fellas that rub the reserve and wall St., the publishing industry and according to the occidental observer the $plc.(with money from the greatest thief in American history)

        • Hollywood should not be allowed to participate in the political process in my opinion.

          • Romulus

            Agreed. There pockets are now deeper than the old GOP money. Not to mention the taxpayer piggyback that is the govt till.

      • Erasmus

        I know the Rs do not have my best interests in mind, but if I have to choose between billionaires or gang rapists, I will go with the billionaires. Every time.

        Your philosophic nuance escapes me. When R billionaires are working to bring in gang rapists for their economic well being, it’s difficult for me to see much difference between the two parties.

        I had always believed in letting people keep more of their money, but if billionaires have so much of it that they can subvert the popular will, perhaps, then, there reaches a point when it’s not safe for leaving them with too much financial wherewithal.

        They’ve bought diamonds, yachts, estates and penthouses and now the only thing left to buy are politicians.

        Ironically, when the billionaires help flood this country with poor people from the 3rd world, those brown masses are going to be among the first to support politicians who’ll tap into their private wealth.

        • AutomaticSlim

          Hey, I’m all for 3rd parties.
          I voted for Badnarik in ’04.
          And I voted for Buchanan in the ’96 primary.
          And Dr. Paul in the ’08 and ’12 primaries.
          Are you suggesting we not vote at all?

          • Erasmus

            Oh, by all means, vote. But when the two parties are both in favor of the same bad policy, voting 3rd party, then, becomes the only real option.

            When the GOP comes out in favor of amnesty, I’ll begin voting 3rd party most of the time.

    • Cville

      Who says they shouldn’t if done competitively. All those Kennedy type bums are the issue.

  • Joseph Bryant

    Yes, I am very sick too of what Ralph Nader rightly called “gonadal politics”.

    • Sure, because the crowd that wants gay “marriage” and aborticide more than anything else in the whole wide world is just banging down the door to help us.

  • Erasmus

    I truly believe that the GOP will not adopt this strategy until the 11th hour.

    I fear you are right. it’s not for nothing we conservatives call the GOP the stupid party.

    On a brighter note, by drawing out policies that don’t work, Karl Rove will enjoy greater opportunity to line his pockets by giving GOP big-wigs advice most morons know is wrong.

  • Luca

    Whites are divided on every major issue, it would be folly to expect them to form a group-think position on anything other than cohesive patriotism when we are attacked as was experienced in 1941 and in 2001. The only other exception may be during the Olympic games.

    The GOP or any Party that replaces it needs to focus on what is good for the country, to eliminate what is bad for the country, throw political correctness out the window and political contributions should be limited to individuals only.

    The only answers right now to save this country would be: a revolution, a coup or a political miracle. Trying to gather all the Whites to vote a like is a lost cause, but it works quite well with minorities.

    • Cville

      True, but you can get 65-70 percent of them. Then destroy welfare state. If D voters aren’t getting paid by government they won’t vote D. If D’s can’t deliver they’re dead. Note that Mexicans weren’t storming the border the 100 years before the Great Society even though it was wide open.

      • Luca

        Mexicans have always crossed the border, it’s just that in prior decades they knew they stood a better chance of being deported. They’ve been coming in droves since the 1990’s because the benefits far outweighed the almost non-existent consequences.

        Whites are too divided to get 70% of them to agree on any one candidate unless there were absolutely extraordinary circumstances.

    • ViktorNN

      I think whites are divided because we’ve had the luxury of having different perspectives. Non-whites haven’t had that luxury, which is why you see them clustering and voting together. Race really does trump most other interests in multiracial societies – especially for minorities. When this country becomes majority minority, it’s not unreasonable to expect that whites will vote together even more than they already do (whites already vote for the GOP more than Dems).

      At least they will have to in order to further their own interests. If they don’t, then we will diminish or even perish.

  • laughnow

    Hispanics and blacks will NEVER vote for Republican ideology, that is, rugged individualism, and God fearing center. Rather, they vote with one hand on a burrito, the other on drugs or some fat black female behind.
    Republicans need to form a strategy that can mandate voter id, reduce or eliminate the military industrial complex and an immigration policy that defends the border and deports the law breaking illegals. Thats a strategy those that stayed home in Nov 2012 can get behind, and ultimately level the playing field. Rinos lost in Nov12, for one big reason(besides a crappy candidate), that Romney seriously dis’d Paul at the RNC. Remember the vote was only 312k different in the swing states.

    Wasting time on Hispanics and Black vote is foolishness, since all they ever do is take take take, and never a tax to pay, and fall prey to the endless siren song of the hand out and hating whitey.

  • If I was a a Republican Party strategist I would concentrate on:

    1) Trying to find out why a state like Michgan (Non-Hispanic Whites: 76.6%, Black or African American: 14.2%) voted for Barack Obama.
    2) White college students (Do you want jobs when you graduate or “gibs”).
    3) White women (I know why they did – It’s because their “cool” friend or some female star did … just like the crap clothing and shoes they buy. Most white women in cities are very easily perverted by what they see on TV and read in their garbage magazines).
    4) East Asians (Why do people that hold conservative values vote against them?).
    5) White dominated trade unions.

    • Cville

      Romney carried white women by double digits and won white college educated women by 5.

      • Wasn’t enough. That’s what I am saying it needs addressed.

    • Joseph Bryant

      I am not all that far (only a few years) removed from #3 so I can provide at least a little insight.

      White voters my age associate Republicans with Bushism. Namely, with massive foreign wars and plutocracy combined with sloppy sentimental “compassionate conservatism”. It’s the only Republican President we remember. They aren’t Democrats so much as they will never vote Republican until the Republicans repudiate the disaster that was George W. Bush. Until now they have not instead they pretend like he never even existed. They’ll never get anywhere until they deal with his ghost.

      • WR_the_realist

        Yup, in 2008 they offered the perfect Bush clone — John McCain. In 2012 we got a man who made his fortune by outsourcing middle class jobs and stripping away the pensions of middle class workers — Mitt Romney. Republicans remain The Stupid Party, while Democrats are The Evil Party.

    • WR_the_realist

      The trade unions are very much like the Catholic Church. The leadership of both organizations favor illegal immigration because that means more members. But the ordinary members of the trade unions and the ordinary Catholics are against it.

  • Cville

    Look, right is right. We can debate what right is but ultimately have to go with it – if 51 percent of people don’t go with it, there’s nothing you can do. Just protect you’re own while the nation Californizes or Detroitizes or Illinoisizes.

  • SWPL2

    Rather than reading comments here, I checked out the responses on the New York Times’ site. So many beta-males. So many chubby white ladies desiring to be liked for their progressive politics. So much smug anti-white chest huffing.

    Group think can be a scary thing.

    • Group think is a very scary thing at least to me.
      I can not understand it, never have, even when I was a kid, and probably never will.

  • Evette Coutier

    What is killing Republicans, and especially conservative republicans, is religion. We live in a secular society, like it or not. Republicans loose between two and five percent, depending on the election, to modern day conservative libertarians who don’t want politicians or anyone else to dictate their morality. Additionally, republicans lose a large number of female voters, often conservative leaning, over reproductive rights issues. Asians, who are traditionally more conservative than most whites, vote democratic because of their perceptions that conservative republican Christians are biased against non Christians. Among high income educated classes, they largely believe as evolutionists and not creationists. As most elections are won or lost by only a few points, Republicans are trying to pick up those percentages by an appeal to traditional Christian elements in ethnic communities. It will not succeed. The trend is away from religion across the board. Republicans could succeed by remaining principles, conservative, and predominantly white if it dropped religion from its platform. The dilemma for conservatives, if the want to win elections, is to separate religion from politics, but at the same time hold to their core values.

    • Erasmus

      Troll much, Evette?

      • Evette Coutier

        Actually, I don’t troll at all on amren. I post here because it is one of the few sites where honest is held above political correctness. This is a refuge for intellectual honesty. I posted what I believe is fact. I did not suggest I like the situation, nor did I make any inflammatory comments.If we are to succeed in the future, we need to honestly deal with the world we face. If that honesty is discouraged here, I will stop posting and not burden you with my observations again.

        • Erasmus

          A fair answer. Touché.

    • I think you’re right. The GOP seems to want to be a corporate Jesus-freak version of the Democrats. I don’t want that.

    • WR_the_realist

      I don’t think religion has much to do with it. Indeed, if there is any Republican constituency that regularly gets kicked in the teeth by the very Republicans they help elect it’s the religious right.

      • Evette Coutier

        If you do some Internet research on this topic you will find that what I suggested above is well documented. It is true that the religious right gets kicked in the teeth by the left and moderate republicans. That does not reflect the voting behaviors of Asians, independents, highly educated upper middle class voters, or libertarians. We are so fragmented as a society that these specific voter blocks and their voting trends have all their own issues that do not reflect generalized voting analysis. I would strongly encourage you to study the voter demographics and their poling data to confirm or dispute the accuracy of what I have offered.

  • Which party, the GOP or the Dems, appointed 5 of the 8 justices that just refused to end affirmative action in the Fisher Supreme Ct decision?

    So, I hope the GOP dies. They betrayed all whites as they have done many times in the past and as they will do many times in the future.

    • Bobbala

      If they really wanted to vote for Robert Bork, they would have. But republicans would have had to explain their no vote or “worse” — confirm him. Then democrats bitch and whine about John Roberts. Please don’t throw me in the briar patch.

  • If they do not focus on white voters and work for us – literally unceasingly – the GOP has no future as a US political party.

    That is putting it politely. The GOP has already back-stabbed us so many times I’ve lost count. I’ll vote Democrat straight-ticket in 2016 because I want a civil war and because I’m not getting any younger. Some friends have already realized what is happening, and are frantically trying to get back into shape.

    When my firearms were taken away 13 years ago, I swore I wouldn’t need them.

    • WR_the_realist

      Are you allowed to have a good composite bow? That might do in a pinch.

      • I have a longbow I made out of yew I seasoned myself. I’ve made and fletched my own arrows since I was 17, or for the last 30 years. We also have three crossbows I made, two of which are Belgian-style bullet-bows and shoot 3/8″ slingshot ammo down 10mm steel barrels. The prods for these I made from steel truck leaf springs. I also made a coilgun that uses linear induction. The selector settings are O (off, which spins down the Faraday wheel while recharging and shuts everything down), P (parks the Faraday wheel while recharging the battery pack, but leaves the sights on), S (leaves the Faraday wheel spinning but the weapon will not fire), 1, 4, 10 and E (everything). Cyclic rate is heinous fast because the beast doesn’t have to eject empty cases.

        I have a basement full of shop tools and weld in the garage, so I can make anything I want. Before I was a chemist, I worked in a research lab as a gadget builder; I can build anything. My last major project was my daughter’s RC pterosaur.

        I used to handload centerfire rifle cartridges like it was a religion. I gripe about not being allowed firearms but that’s part of my punishment. My ex-father’s punishment is dying of cancer which no amount of money will ever fix. My wife, daughter and I had a nice walk down the bike path near Cottonwood Creek Monday evening, and it was beautiful, so Sayaka asked me what I would want if I could have three wishes only for myself, so I said “My gun rights back”, and “A good job.” That’s only two, but I can’t imagine anything else I want I couldn’t get with money, so I said I would like to save the third. I don’t really need very much.

        • WR_the_realist

          Note to self: Do not ever trespass on Michael C. Scott’s yard.

  • Rhialto

    Why should a liberal outlet like the New York Times give advice to the Republican party?

    Perhaps, Edsel is just using the literary form of pseudo advice, pretending to give advice will actually commenting. This technique is ancient.

    Perhaps, the liberals are actually afraid that the Republican party will disintegrate. This could be bad for the liberals. If the Democrats become a super party with 80%+ of the voters, the party might not be stable. The diverse groups would not have the evil Republican party as a unifying force, and start fighting each other: Blacks versus Hispanics versus Asians versus Muslims versus Feminists. Who knows?

    Perhaps, it might cause the emergence of a new political parties to represent the interests of those the current parties ignore. This would be bad for liberals, who are happy with the present situation: The effective liberal Democratic party and the ineffectual fatuous Republican party.

  • Bo_Sears

    Republicans are strange animals. Many claim to think they represent our interests, so lets look at three questions that have only to do with the anti-white narrative.

    1) When the late US Senator Robert Byrd on Fox News (3/4/01) referred to a segment of diverse white Americans as “white (the-word-Paula-Deen-used)” and refused to his dying day to apologize to the diverse white American peoples, even though he did apologize to African Americans for his slur on white Americans. No Republican denounced Byrd’s hate speech against us.

    2) When presidential candidate Barack Obama labeled a white American woman on the radio (just two days after his much-applauded speech on race in 2008) as “a typical white person,” that was his shorthand to claiming that we were not a diverse demographic affinity group, ultimately laying bare his hateful attitude toward us. Again no Republican denounced this non-diverse stereotype.

    3) And all through his first term as president, he insisted that the FBI maintain arrest records and reports that folded about 90% of Hispanic American felony & statutory hate crime arrests into the diverse white American category. (About 10% of such arrests went into the black American category.) No Republican has ever denounced the hate that underlay recording statistics in this way.

    These three examples were of events that were so over-the-top that they became materials for the anti-white narrative, something that no Republican has ever denounced. Where did the myth arise that Republicans support the interests of the diverse white Americans?

    • WR_the_realist

      Of far greater significance is that no Republican has introduced a bill to reduce immigration. The Republicans have refused to get serious about enforcing immigration law. And no Republican has dared come out against affirmative action. Every repeal of affirmative action at the state level came through citizen initiatives.

      • Bo_Sears

        WR, while you are drafting legislation and lobbying to get immigration control introduced by the Republicans, we chose to focus on a smaller slice of the anti-white narrative, and we’ve had a lot of success with media, but not with Republicans. Here are a couple of Republicans who use stereotypes to discuss Republicans without objection by other Republicans.

        1) Former Republican governor of Florida, Jeb Bush, deployed the stereotype that the Republican Party has become the party of old white men in a Newsmax interview (11/30/08), The Atlantic Monthly (12/2/08), and he did it again in speaking at a joint news conference with the governor of Puerto Rico (1/14/11). And not a single Republican spoke out against this stereotype.

        2) Former Republican National Chairman Michael S. Steele was reported by Politico (12/9/08) as saying “The Republican Party’s strength comes in many forms and many hues. We have to understand now it’s not all white bread.”

        At Resisting Defamation, we realize that a lot of white activists prefer to grapple with the larger issues and kind of mock any concern for name-calling & other elements of the anti-white narrative, but we have an action plan built around an attackback on the speaker or writer in question, not his or her entire demographic affinity group. Let’s not let our kids suffer this way, when an attackback is available. See Facebook: Resisting.Defamation

        Republicans are namby-pamby on speaking out against names and labels that suppress our diversity, our nationality, our continental origins, our dignity, and our humanity. How could we possibly support them in any cause on any level?

  • WR_the_realist

    What do you mean, “almost”? No one on this planet is more frightened to be called a racist than a Republican politician. They’d much rather lose than face that.

  • AutomaticSlim

    Those acts mean very little compared to the Liberal social /entitlement programs such as welfare, food stamps, head start, public housing, medicaid, school lunch, etc.. These are the the programs that enable the ultra violent criminal minority underclass to breed like an ant heap.
    Rs are complicit in these programs as they have not yet been repealed, but being complicit is still not as bad as championing these things, which the Dems do unabashedly.

    • JohnEngelman

      If it means anything to you I am in favor of replacing Aid to Families with Dependent Children with free abortion on demand.

      A single abortion can save a small fortune in welfare, food stamps, the cost of an education they are too stupid to benefit from, the crimes they commit, and the cost of a criminal justice system capable of restraining their innate savagery.

      • AutomaticSlim

        How about birth control similar to “norplant”, which lasts five years?
        Apply for welfare in your child-bearing years? Must have the “norplant” (or something similar) implanted. That’s got to be even cheaper than the abortions.

  • Erasmus

    When Bush was first running, back in 2000, I wasn’t sure what that smile meant, but I realize now that I should have heeded my suspicions. That constant simper meant: “I’m going to screw you and I’m going to screw you good. You dolts ain’t seen nothing yet.”

    In an interview with Tucker Carlson, then candidate Bush mockingly did an imitation of a Texas prison inmate, Carla Faye Tucker, begging for her life. If the voting public had heard that, a lot of us who voted for Mr. Bush would have never done so. That interview would have made clear to us what a sociopath Mr. Bush is.

    On a brighter note a lot of us who fell for Mr. Bush in 2000, now know to support no more Bushes in their quest for power and to support no more Bush protégés, e.g. Marco Rubio.

  • Karl Rove: “the nonwhite share of the vote will keep growing” and that if “the G.O.P. leaves nonwhite voters to the Democrats, then its margins in safe congressional districts and red states will dwindle—not overnight, but over years and decades.”

    This is all you need to know about the nature of supporting a Party that looks to sustain itself as a Party, and not a Party that looks after the best interests of the people who made this country a viable entity.

    • WR_the_realist

      Karl Rove of course wants to grow that non-white share of the vote even faster with an illegal alien amnesty and massive increases in legal immigration.

  • Steven Bannister

    I agree, the abortion issue needs to be re-examined by white conservatives. How many black and Hispanic feral youths would we have running around today if black and Hispanic women had no access to abortion?

    Instead of being ANTI-abortion for everyone, we should focus on a PRO-NATALIST message within our white communities. Increase the white birth rate, decrease theirs!

  • FalkoBaumgartner

    I think a couple of wealthy, determined and qualified whites should go ahead, buy some Caribbean island and build up a mini-white model state along the lines of Orania. Its success could serve as a beacon for white identity.

  • WR_the_realist

    A black woman (Ezola Foster) of old right leanings who would have made a far better president than the current community organizer in chief.

  • WR_the_realist

    Rush Limbaugh is a shill for the mainstream Republicans who sell us out every chance they get.

  • WR_the_realist

    I’m sympathetic to this. It is better to be stabbed in the front by a Democrat, who is quite open about his contempt for white, heterosexual men, than to be stabbed in the back by a Republican, who pretends to be your friend.

  • Evette Coutier

    First, I am a Christian, and, as a nation, I believe we were founded on Christian values. Anyone who believes otherwise is vastly misinformed. However, your reaction is very emotional and not factual. In the final analysis, politics is about getting elected. There is no second place. You lose and you are out, and we must deal with that reality. Moreover, I totally agree that much of the decline of our culture can be directly linked to a decline in our morals and values as a nation. In my mind that is fact and it is really not debatable. Inasmuch as we can agree that what you say is truthful, it still does not change anything. We are here, now, in this day and age, and regardless of the cause, we must address and deal with the world as it is, and not as we want it to be if we are to be successful. The issues I pointed out above are well documented, and if you do some research on the internet you will see that it is the reality of our situation. It is also true that the trend for secularization is growing across all Christian cultures, not just in America. You can get mad at me all day long, kill the messenger and all that, but that will not change our reality. If we are to survive, we need a winning strategy. I was pointing that out for the republicans. Clearly, their strategies are failing, and their immigration strategy is also a total loser. In fact, when republicans stick to their core values without bringing religion into the conversation, they consistently pole well. However, if you think I am wrong, I would ask that you provide analysis and evidence for discussion instead of making inaccurate personal criticism that does not advance our purpose or our agenda.

  • Erasmus

    But he is now thrusting himself into the fight for amnesty.

    Pity his dad: He’s going to go to his grave regretting he didn’t pull out of Babs the night young George was conceived.

  • WR_the_realist

    We have immigrants who have been here legally for 10 or more years, and have obtained citizenship, one of the requirements for which is competence in English, and yet can not speak three consecutive sentences of English. An example being that woman from Columbia who testified in the Zimmerman trial. So much for our capacity to assimilate people.

  • Yale2001

    We are the only ones that truly care about America’s long standing future, but as the minority numbers rise we will lose all hope. This in return will only destroy the country as a whole. As we turn America into a new socialist Africa and Mexico how do we expect to advance? We can’t. We wont, and the New World Agenda can move forward.

  • Yale2001

    I agree, somewhat. I believe if you must pick sides; however, there is less anti-American policies within the Republican side. There is definitely more within the Democratic cabinet that follow a socialist path and belief. I really believe both are taking us down a road to destruction, but the democrats are taking us at the speed of light.