Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
A Reader Is Slightly Confused About Turnout, But Clear On Karl Rove
From: MrStentorianCommentator [Email him]
Regarding Karl Rove's comment that Mittens Romney would have had to win 62.54% of the white vote, was that the percentage of the white vote that showed up to the polls? If so, isn't that the point of Sailer Strategy proponents and others who have pointed out that the percentage of potential white voters showing up to vote is dropping?
I wonder whether the threshold percentage of the white vote to put Mitt over the top would have been reduced had whites just shown up in similar numbers as they have in previous elections. Curious to know the answer, and probably not smart enough to figure it out myself. However, I am smart enough to know that Rove is a sleazy, lying, misdirecting scumbag who would certainly stoop to playing with the numbers to send us down the wrong path.
See previous letters from the same reader.
James Fulford writes: The fact that the turnout figures might be in the same ballpark as Romney’s needed percentage of voters is only a coincidence. The reader, has, however, grasped the main point–that Karl Rove is a lying weasel.
Both white turnout and the percentage of the white vote would be larger for a Republican Party (or Generic American Party) that wasn’t afraid to represent white interests on issues like crime, immigration, and affirmative action.