Search Results: race

I intentionally don't use the word "race" because I think it's a social construct. But our ancestry isn't. And sorry, white supremacists, your group doesn't have the highest IQs. Asians do. But does this mean anything to you?

Here is a reference to an academic study that analyzes IQ differences among children with different ancestries.

"The Collaborative Perinatal Project is a longitudinal study of over 53,000 children followed from birth to 7 years. Up to now, studies have analyzed data on the 17,000 European American children and the 19,000 African American children. Here data are reported and analyzed for a sub-sample of 100 Asian Americans. The Asian sub-sample averaged a higher IQ (110) at age 7 than did the white (102) or the black sub-samples (90)."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289697900040

Elon Musk’s America PAC reportedly plans to spend between $100 million and $120 million to increase Republican turnout in the 2026 midterm elections. The effort is expected to include door-to-door canvassing, digital advertising, and direct mail in competitive Senate and House races. Its immediate objective is to help Republicans retain control of Congress.

The reporting does not establish that Musk is doing this specifically to stop democratic socialists. However, stronger Republican turnout could also limit the political growth of the DSA, which openly organizes electoral campaigns to win power and endorses candidates whose platforms align with its political program and theory of power.

I support this effort. Republicans need a strong turnout operation to defend their congressional majorities and defeat Democratic and democratic-socialist candidates at the ballot box.

Do you support or oppose America PAC spending more than $100 million to help Republicans in the 2026 midterms?

I vote Support.

Musk's America PAC plans $100 million-plus effort to boost Republican turnout, NYT reports - https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/musks-america-pac-plans-100-million-plus-effort-boost-republican-turnout-nyt-2026-07-30/

Recent democratic-socialist victories are raising a larger question about the future of the Democratic Party.

RNC Research compiled statements from prominent Democrats responding to the socialist/progressive wing’s growing influence. Raphael Warnock, Chris Murphy, Seth Moulton, and Johnny Olszewski have all defended Democrats as a “big tent” party. Bernie Sanders has celebrated progressive and democratic-socialist victories. AOC called socialism’s momentum a “very good sign for November.” Ro Khanna said the progressive movement is “on the ascendancy,” while Jim Clyburn acknowledged that socialism can play well politically.

The compilation also highlights Cory Booker, Jamie Raskin, Ami Bera, Cori Bush, Alex Bores, and Brad Lander discussing accommodation of or cooperation with the socialist wing.

Zohran Mamdani has gone even further, arguing that recent democratic-socialist victories represent a vision extending “beyond the midterms” and “beyond 2028.”

This matters because the DSA generally does not compete as a separate national third party. Its candidates commonly run through Democratic primaries and seek influence from within the Democratic electoral coalition.

That does not mean every Democrat is a socialist. There are still establishment and moderate Democrats resisting that direction. But DSA-backed candidates are winning races, socialist politicians are gaining influence, and more Democrats appear willing to treat them as part of the party’s governing coalition.

I strongly oppose that direction. The DSA agenda goes far beyond a few popular economic proposals and includes major changes to America’s economic and political institutions.

So is this merely one faction gaining influence—or are we watching the Democratic Party gradually embrace a socialist transformation from within?