Solomon temple thread is...fine, I guess. Better than the others

China happening? Eh, sure

but then you have a blatant shill America hate thread

you'd think that with the amount of shit that gets plastered on this website on a minute to minute basis that no one would have any qualms about a thread dedicated to getting people elected

then a clickbait thread about the UK, then another 'women suck' thread that would be more appropriate for /r9k/

these people live in a fantasy if they think their little turner diaries race war bullshit will ever fucking happen

if we want to get results, we do it with politics

IMO I think the mods or janitors should have regular sticky threads for the following topics: President Trump General, Red Storm General, Culture General (pertaining to cultural practices like religion, different foods, gender wars, shit like that), Biology General (can' t think of a better name, but basically things like race, height, that sort of thing), Europe General (self-explanatory), Middle East General (including Syria)

oh, and definitely an eceleb general

make it a rule that every eceleb thread other than the general gets a ban

eh, that'd be much more productive than what we have atm

I just can't get past the amount of pure garbage there is just every second

I used to go there daily because there was nowhere else I'd have this kind of info, but it's just depressing going in there on a common basis because of all the trash

have you looked at 8chan's /pol/

I wonder if we can make a Red Storm General on that board and have the mods sticky it

not a big 8chan guy, I haven't really considered it

although I'm not sure how 8chan mods run /pol/

I wonder if they're overly strict

I know they are when it comes to lefty/pol/

do me a favor

bump the general with this image attached

and write about how bullshit these slide threads are

yeah, but mods are different on each board when it comes to 8chan

the excuses the shills use on the threads are pathetic

>this isn't for activism it's for lulz xDDDDD

it's like they want society to continue degrading

why do so many people on the alt lite and on /pol/ talk about Austin Petersen

SAY IT WITH ME

open borders is never someone to vote for

MAdAME SPEAKeR

aye and after she gets blumpf and fence impeached she'll be president

5d backgammon

well, I'm gonna go for a while ok

I don't even know who the fuck Austin Petersen is

just googled him

some guy who lost to Mr. A Leppo ?

sure, 4chan used to be about lulz instead of faggy activism back in the day ('Anonymous' was then coopted by dipshits)

but the events of the 2016 election essentially made /pol/ into a de facto arena for online activism

lmao

He's a former libertarians going Republican so he's pretty popular among the Libertarian crowd

http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/141537338/

what do you guys think of the idea of accelerationism

essentially, that you need to deliberately get extreme leftists into power so that the system burns down which will entail a far right ethnic nationalist takeover

I personally think it's fucking retarded

why would anyone bar a complete fucking psychopath want that to happen

that rests on the assumption that your side will be 100% guaranteed to win after a total collapse

I'd rather have my ethnostate done by policy

yet faggots on /pol/ think it's a better option than doing what we're doing

hopefully it doesn't take place

okay, so you ruin every country on earth, then a civil war happens

that's essentially what happened to Germany during the Great Depression

don't these people consider the possibility of losing?

it's just that....they ended up losing the following World War

that's the fucking thing

then white genocide would happen and sooner than they think

read the thread I posted

they didn't even bring up the idea that they could lose

I think the last post summarized it well though

"
>shooting yourself in the head and expecting the tumor to be cured

sounds about right

"

to be fair

it's just incomprehensible how schizophrenic some of these people are

a lot of right-wing movements have resulted as a backlash from leftists in power

http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/search/text/accelerationism%20/

Reagan was a result of Carter, and Republicans won big in 1994 because of Clinton

"


Seems accelerationism is the path forward in Germany. The right in America is able to have so much power because the conditions are getting worse and worse every day.

If I was a German I might actually vote for the most pro open border party, because that will add fuel to the fire and bring about the desired result quicker.

"

wtf

@🎃Boo-ton🎃 yeah, I understand the theory behind it

it's just that....how are you going to execute it properly

you run the risk of making everything irreversibly worse

if Clinton had won in 2016, Republicans would sweep Congress

I mean, that's not always going to end well, if you overdo it, then it's over

look at South Africa ffs

well, we can't even know for sure that the Republicans would have swept congress if Clinton won

maybe it would lead to further expansion of cuckservatism and cracking down on spaces where the actual right can organize

@FLanon exactly

the 10% -- whites in South Africa don't seem to be genociding the 90% blacks any time soon

also, if it happened in the USA, there probably would be all sorts of different factions

it wouldn't be "hurr whites vs shitskins"

a lot of people on /pol/ think we'll balkanize

they just don't get the American character

the globalists could co-opt drone technology

I like this place, I want to make it better

many in the U.S. Military might be sympathetic to the right, but many of them will simply not fight for ethno nationalist causes BECAUSE MANY OF THEM ARE MINORITIES

Jesus, these people actually do think this is the Turner Diaries

holy shit

yeah, are you reading through the 4plebs archive I linked?

@🎃Boo-ton🎃 Yeah definitely.

So in that way Hillary Clinton would've been way better for Republicans because they would be in the House and Senate

these fucking LARPers think winning a civil war will be just like the vidya gaems

there is a very, very, very small fraction of the population who would be willing to tolerate war on American soil

they don't get pragmatism and getting to where you want to be steadily

Do /pol/fags actually believe in shit like white nationalism, the Jewish Question, etc. or is it just a meme

remember that EVERY SINGLE WAR since the Civil War has been OFF American soil

if total collapse happens, how do these faggots know that people won't be clamoring for communism?

I mean, if it comes to having the guns taken, I'll fight, but I'm not going to fucking cross my fingers for it

there are many people who would rather have communism than starvation and bullets

yeah, I'd fight too

but I'd rather use my fucking brains and persuasive skills

if it came down to a fight, it would boil down to random chance

@Snickers yeah, there's a nugget of truth in it, but the thing is a lot of them go way too far with it

some retard could get lucky and shoot me in the head

or I could win a battle with my side, only to have us all killed instantly by a drone strike

someone like Jared Taylor is much more appealing than this accelerationist idiocy

Right, but are most of them legitimately pushing for a white ethnostate, questioning how Jews run everything, etc. or are they just LARPing for whatever reason

it's hard to tell who is LARPing and who isn't

however, I would bet that the kinds of posters who go "hurr instead of voting in the midterms, just take up arms and start a race war instead" are larpers or shills looking to get people in trouble

Trump's approval in the most vulnerable districts:

Competitive Republican House Seats: 15
1. Arizona-2 (42%)/California-25 (36%)/New Jersey-2 (45%)
2. California-39 (41%)
3. California-48 (50%)
4. California-49 (45%)
5. Colorado-6 (37%)
6. Florida-26 (41%)
7. Florida-27 (48%)
8. Minnesota-2 (42%)
9. Nebraska-2 (43%)
10. New York-19 (35%)
11. New York-22 (41%)
12. Texas-7 (41%)
13. Texas-23 (37%)
14. Virginia-10 (46%)
15. Washington-8 (33%)

I'm pushing to make the demographics better too, I'm not blind, but as for ethnostates where there's strict rules for who is allowed to stay and who gets deported isn't going to realistically happen

@🎃Boo-ton🎃 This begs the question...how do we know these polls are sampled properly?

I'd say pushing family values back onto families, and having an immigration system similar to pre-'65 is how I'd put us back on track

in the Alabama election, there was a poll right before that said Jones would win by 10% (far from it) and another that said Moore would win by 10% (nope)

I wouldn't trust polls since they can be very ambiguous.

@FLanon yeah, that makes much more sense than "hurr, let's import the entire third world...and then we're GUARANTEED to win!"

data's better than no data, that's how I see it

yeah, but the question is...how do you use data to make decisions ?

whether or not Trump is popular in those districts, we still need to put as much effort in as possible

now, you could argue that we should ignore safe red and safe blue areas

that's true

but it's hard to tell what's truly 'safe'

tbh the Media should just tell what each politicians' voting record is instead of shoving polls saying who is in the lead, so people can make decisiosn based on policy not advancing whatever politician is ahead

pollsters should ask voters what politicians should do differently

the media doesn't care about democracy and making voters informed

they're in cahoots with a lot of them, wikileaks showed this

I can understand turning to more radical means if things collapse...but voting for people for the purpose of making things collapse is so retarded

not only are you not guaranteed to win, you're also not guaranteed to cause the collapse as quickly as you might want

if it happens, but not to make it happen deliberately

exactly

there's better ways of going at it

if we had better margins in the house and senate, we'd have a) a wall b) a better immigration policy, literally fixes the country in generations

maybe the 4plebs result for 'accelerationism' is skewed because only the dumbasses who support it will use the term, but there seems to be a significant amount of /pol/lacks who think it's a proper strategy

I just can't figure out why anyone would want this kind of shit unless you do nothing but sit and watch gladiator movies your whole life

it's so cartoony

http://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/123182084/

I'm looking through the archives right now

apparently Varg wanted it back when the French election was happening

I remember people saying that Macron winning was 'good' because Le Pen would give the kind of 'kosher nationalism' that Trump was giving which "isn't working"

lmao didn't her dad say the lampshades were something of history or something of that effect?

you've got to be pragmatic, that's how you do it

there's multiple ways you can bring the country back to our favor, not just by setting it on fire

that's like social keynesianism

If we can get the Immigration Act of 1924 reinstated all our problems will be solved

exactly

RAISE can fix so much shit

"
Blackpilled accelerationists are the ghetto niggers of nationalism. They haven't accomplished anything for decades but whenever there's a hint of even a fraction of what they want being normalized they lash out, because if it isn't 100% of what they want they feel betrayed and change takes actual effort while jerking off about muh day of the rope while Muhammad fucks their wife and Juan takes their job at least gives them some petty moral satisfaction that everyone else is as shit as they are.

"

"

Accelerationists are the biggest blue pilled cucks.
There is zero proof that it would work, which it wouldn't if you spent even 2 seconds pondering the fact. There are only 2 possible outcomes of importing a shit ton of niggers and arabs will result. Either the eventual mixing and genociding of all whites or the much less likely outcome our successors in the future eventually driving the shitskins out with violence but the damage would be done and the shitskins would have left their genetic mark on our people just like with southern europeans.
If your a nationalist and your advocating that we fix our problems by opening our borders because muh acceleration of muh collapse, you deserve the rope.

"

RAISE would shift immigration away from Latin America to Europe and Asia, but largely Asia

it's a good start

more people can look at debates for this kind of stuff which I see on Warski all the time

Trump definitely wants more European immigration, he talked about it on the campaign trail and he reaffirmed it during the daca talks

yeah

the thing is, how are we going to get more European immigration

I guess you can rely on the fact that Europe is going to shit

and you can try getting more South Africans

if someone charismatic could make these kinds of arguments in politics, we could make something work.

There's a lot of young faces on the right, and it's definitely not for any gay classical liberalism or liberalist nonsense

I see a lot of these debates on it, and the comments always see the sense in maintaining the european nature of the US

I have no doubt that Europe will fix itself at some point, the thing is about the immigrants over there are mostly opportunistic economic migrants who don't stay if they don't get anything

I remember a story about Denmark where they slashed benefits for migrants and then in a single night, 40000 people left the country

Europe's beyond salvation

With the crackdown of ideas and weapons, any right-wing movement is almost impossible

too much power in the government

I can see that sort of argument made for a lot of areas, but I also see parties like the AfD in Germany making a lot of gains and feeling at least a bit of hope for them

it's a tough thing

the accelerationism meme may manifest over there, I hope they get unfucked before it comes to that, but I'm not quite sure

there's a huge difference between Europeans in the 1920s/1930s and Europeans now...back then, they had just went through a World War and were FAR from being giant pussies

point being, the migrants there would go back to their countries if they had no social net

I'm not sure if militaristic states could easily arise in this day and age

Europe has seen 7 decades of peace

multiple generations have been raised being coddled by the state and never experiencing anything close to the horrors of war

I'm not really thinking too far in that direction, but I'd say that cutting welfare for immigrants could solve the problem easily

change has to come through legitimate political action

but the thing is, it's become very difficult for that to happen, for obvious reasons (thoughtcrime is a real thing over there)

it's like you look at Poland, there's no immigrants there even though it's in the Schengen area, the reason? Economic migrants want money.

I guess Generation Identitaire and groups like it can train themselves to not be pussies

I believe eventually what would happen is that there would be a lot of nations over there which obtain governments similar to the one Austria has, and after that, migrants would have an exodus back to their homelands

if there's no free ride, there's no point in staying, I'd rather be living in a homeland which speaks my language, which there's plenty of in the Middle-East

I mean, put yourself in their shoes. You speak Arabic, you go to Europe because they don't offer dental in Turkey or Jordan. You live an easy life, then the government takes away your incentive. Why wouldn't you go back? Wouldn't you much rather be in a country which speaks your language than which doesn't?

yeah, it makes sense to just let them go away after cutting their aid

hopefully it's that simple

I seriously doubt that 90% are there because they legitimately want to do the Islamic world domination stuff.

It's much more realistic that a person wants to live comfortably. Occam's razor.

yeah, that makes sense

51 seats guaranteed so far in the minimal

looks like a good analysis

the amount of beige states is very whitepilling

I like the fact it includes a candidate next to it

is this the bookmakers analysis?

sauce would be pretty good

IMO Wisconsin is pretty winnable

based on this we should expect 54/55 senators on our side?

that's very good

that's about the margin we have in the house

most likely

56 is an extreme stretch

wouldn't be too certain about that

I'd put our cap at 59

what is the sauce btw

i collaborated the data myself

ah ok

it's probably better than most polls

the betting percentages had to come from somewhere though, right?

https://electionbettingodds.com/

+3.6% in the last week

so that's good

good night guys

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAXo1Y7AK_I

should we get Bradly Manning the nomination just to fuck up the Dems chances in that election?

yeah

probably would be the best chance of getting that seat in a state that is extremely blue

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/156791187#p156794196

lol at this post

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/156832254

new thread goys

keep this bumped

@FLanon @Nuke @skankd @TrippyTurtle

kk

half tempted to write a quick site for this stuff, like that guy did with the tax calculator

>tfw I don't think that Chelsea Manning isn't necessarily a bad choice for the US Senate

I think* whelp

I saw an article stating that some of the more centrist dem are bashing it/her

She will prob lose real hard is she runs

Yeah. Most of the Democratic establishment is shilling against her hard.

Even if she wins or loses, as long as she exposes the corrupt elite agenda of the surveillance state, the war crimes committed by the US, etc. I'd say its a win

But realistically speaking, she's going to probably lose to Cardin anyways

It's hard to say, especially with social justice and girl power on every leftie's tongue. Though, its hard to say what the population of Leftist millenial sjw types is in Maryland.

So I've researched and found some projections for the house that are fairly whitepilling

Nice

thanks for the good work

they're from fairvote, a pretty accurate firm from what I've found

http://www.fairvote.org/fairvote_s_projections_for_u_s_house_elections_in_2018

basically, the high confidence projections they have (which from past analyses they've accurately predicted 99.7% of, so it's extremely likely they'll get all of them right bar one or two at most) has 205 R seats and 163 D seats

this gives a field of about 63 seats in competition

218 seats are needed to have a majority, meaning Rs would need to grab at least 13 seats out of the 63 in play in order to keep the house

obviously we want much more than this for legislative purposes, but this effectively prevents any impeachment attempts

Now, if there's a 2006-esque "blue wave" with a similar makeup to that year, w/ 54% dems and 46% Rs, that still gives Rs a majority of 226 seats, at least according to FairVote

this is about 52% of the House of Representatives which would be Republican, or to give a frame of reference, about the same margin that we had in the senate before Moore's loss

http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/156832254

Not good in my opinion, but not apocalyptic. I think the average House Republican is much more on Trump's side than the average House Democrat (anecdotal, but still my opinion), so Trump would still be able to get some good bills in I assume.

thanks, btw can you bump the thread

yeah, damn

btw don't let these results get you delusional or anything

for all I know, the dems could get a ton more seats than what's considered the "blue wave" in that scenario.

our goals this year are to:
a) maintain the margins in the House, as they're decent at getting legislation passed even with Cuck Ryan.
b) increase the margins in the Senate, as they're the ones effectively blocking legislation from getting passed with a couple Senators
c) maybe get Ryan unseated, as he is a poison pill for Trump's agenda.
The cucks in the senate are already retiring, so we'd also need to make sure to prevent Romney from getting office in Utah.

gotta go, anyways.

have a good night anon, thanks for your work

!!!