text:
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Black states, white Republicans
In discussing some examples of where individual and state-level electoral trends differ, I've made note of the fact that blacker states are more likely to vote Republican than less black states are. Given the overwhelming propensity of blacks to vote Democratic, this obviously suggests the black population's effect on the white vote in a state is stronger than it is on the entire state's electoral leaning (obvious though it is, I failed to present it in this way--Orwell's remark "To see what's in front of one's nose requires a constant struggle," appropriately describes me, except that my ignorance is never willful).
The direction of a state's white vote and the percentage of the electorate that is black correlate at a firm .55 (p=0)*. For each percentage point increase in black representation among a state's electorate, McCain improved his support among whites by three points.
Yet looking at all states dilutes the potency of the black population's effect on the white vote. Whitebread red (ie North Dakota) and blue (ie Vermont) states, where racial concerns are mostly abstractions, attenuate the relationship. If only the top 25 states by percentage of the population that is black are included, the correlation jumps to .72.
I speculate that in blacker states like Mississippi, whites are less likely to vote Democratic in part because doing so means supporting wealth transfer policies that primarily benefit blacks at the expense of whites. It's a less abstract moral exercise and more of a real world sacrifice than it is in say, brainy Vermont, where leftist quasi-socialism doesn't have anywhere near the same pathological consequences as it would down South. Also, in lily-white states, most welfare beneficiaries are whites who are presumed to be only momentarily down on their luck.
It's easy to conceive how this pattern could be accentuated further in the coming four years, depending on economic conditions and the agenda President Obama pursues.
* This does not include DC, an entirely urban outlier without the same state-level concerns voters in the rest of the country have. It bucks the trend, with whites voting 7 to 1 in favor of Obama.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Too much of a good thing isn't always so sweet
There isn't much to be done about this, which is unfortunate since the people who are able to generate such a high number of comments are those who putatively write the things most worth talking about. Hosts who approve comments have the opportunity to filter out duplicates if they choose, but it requires a substantial time commitment for a pretty mundane task that in the end won't add much value anyway, unless it is done meticulously, post after post.
Fortunately, it's usually not a problem here! Quality over quantity, right?
Friday, November 28, 2008
Clander selling out? Grammatical errors suggest he is!
If you think about it for a second, this means that the coat is European, Coastal, and Vintage. Three of white people's favorite things.The latter 'sentence' is only a fragment. From the same post:
This makes them feel better than the white people have spent thousands of dollars on an identical piece of clothing.We are missing a "who" in that sentence. Amongst SWPL's whiter readership, there is surely an aspiring copy editor or two out there who'd love the opportunity to do something for the whiter community. In all of his success, Clander appears to have forgotten his roots. He's turned to the wrong kind of white (or non-white) people to do his proofing!
It's more than an isolated incident. It's starting to look like a pattern:
The most notable is Soccer since for some reason it is wrong to get fired up about Football game, but right to get fired up about a Football match.Has "Football game" become a proper noun, never mind the confusing capitalization of "football" in both instances?
Grammatical errors exist in three consecutive posts, and they're three of the most recent posts to boot:
It is so popular, that every white person home contains at least one book from The Onion.We need either the comma or "that", not both.
One more from the Onion post, please. Look, don't get mad at me, I'm just the messenger. If you really want a whiterperson to succeed (and who would want to squander such a historic opportunity?), isn't it better to ensure he is able to respond and react to his own shortcomings than allow him to wallow in his own crapulence (it's a Simpsons reference--I haven't turned my back on my whiterperson heritage!) while making excuses for him?
This is because every white male under 35 is convinced that they could and should be working for The Onion."Male" is singular, "they" is plural.
Okay, I'll stop.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Stuff at SWPL that I like, too
Anyway, if a similar relationship exists between bloggers and books, SWPL is an exception. It hasn't slowed down with the publication of the book of the same name. New posts attract a dizzying number of comments approaching the thousands and Lander continues to tour the country doing book signings.
My favorite post isn't even from Clander, it's a fan submission (further evincing the blindspot sharp white guys everywhere had in not realizing how lucrative a Chris Rock of whiterpeople could be) identifying the tendency to compare political opponents to Hitler:
In order for white people to streamline the process of knowing everything, all human beings can be neatly filed into one of two categories: People I Agree With, and People Who are Just Like Adolf Hitler. ...Rounding out my top five list, are having two last names, being offended, knowing what's best for poor people, and being the only white person around (I'd replace "person" with "American"--I have two close friends currently overseas, and the one in France demonstrates this whiterperson love to a tee, except the people are non-Muslim Frenchies).
It's also critical that you avoid the fatal mistake of getting creative and comparing people you don't like to other evil dictators, such as Joseph Stalin or Fidel Castro. With few exceptions, white people are actually fond of almost any dictator not named Hitler, and your remark that "this is just like something Mao Zedong would do" will be met with blank stares and possible social alienation. This is because, with the exception of Hitler, oppressive dictators share a passion for many of the things white people love--such as universal health care, conspiracy theories, caring about poor people while being filthy rich, and cool hats.
As self-reflection is very much in the spirit of stuff whiterpeople like, allow me to indulge myself further. A little introspection makes me realize my favorites are not those personally describing me. I wonder if other readers who enjoy the site experience the same. I do enjoy those hitting close to home, too, but they're a little less settling than those that are too silly for me to buy into. It's easier to laugh at others than to laugh at oneself, but I suppose the latter shows greater character--true whiterpeople will think so anyway, as their affinity for self-deprecating humor (only in the book) attests.
So, shamelessly, let's say among those I'm guilty of, my new five favorites are bicycles, Japan, gifted children, grammar, and... damn, that's about all I'm able to tag myself with. I guess I could add dogs, even though I don't have one, and not having a TV, even though I have a few, because I don't actually use them to watch television. I have some black friends, too, but none of them are the sort of black people whiterpeople tend to have as friends. Good thing I live in the Midwest, because I'd really be ostracized for being the wrong kind of white person in Manhattan or San Francisco!
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Who better exemplifies patterns of public friendliness: Moe and Ned or Barney and Burns?
I have no dispute there. But I get the impression (mostly from people who are of relatively modest intelligence themselves) that it is relatedly often presumed that people with lower intelligence are naturally more friendly and less guarded than more intelligent people are.
That strikes me as incorrect. It doesn't take much time spent in public in a poor area to feel a default hostility almost emanating from the denizens, especially young men. In contrast, politeness and common courtesies, like holding the door or offering a parking spot to another person waiting for it, appear to be in abundance in upper class areas.
It seems more intelligent people tend to be naturally more friendly and more polite than less intelligent people are. That less intelligent people are more likely to be receptive to dubious promises is a result of being less able to discern the differences between what is being billed and what is actually being offered. So ten minutes into a bogus sales pitch, a high IQ guy may look like he's being a jerk to the seller while a low IQ guy may be signing the clipboard the seller has handed him. See the same interaction within its first ten seconds, and most of the time it'll be the high IQ guy who is at least feigning interest in what the seller has to say while it is the low IQ guy who is grimacing as the seller starts his pitch.
The GSS interviewers are asked to describe respondent attitudes towards being interviewed. They have done so in 22,897 cases going back to 1972. The average IQ* by way of Wordsum scores for each of the descriptions (in order of how accomodating the interviewer believed the respondent was):
|Avg IQ
|Friendly, interested
|Restless, impatient
* Based on the presumption that the average white Wordsum score is the equivalent of an IQ score of 100. Unless it is otherwise noted, "white" probably refers to about half of Hispanics interviewed (disproportionately those with more European ancestry, presumably). Until 2004, the GSS only asked if a respondent was white, black, or other. It has since added a more expansive question on racial self-identification, but that is of course only useful if there is not an interest in anything prior to 2004. So using this method to identify the Wordsum equivalent of an IQ of 100 might inflate the conversions a little. However, for the nearly 23,000 respondents used in constructing the table above, an average IQ of 98.2 is suggested. Since it is looking at all races, that's very reasonable.
GSS Wordsum proxy for IQ, not definitive measure of it
Do you have a sense for how much the GSS needs to be orrected for the fact that it's not a full IQ test, it's just a 10 question vocabulary test? Yes, I know vocabulary correlates with g, the general factor, to a high degree, but I'm concerned that an over-reliance on vocabulary misses out on important non-g subfactors in intelligence, especially 3-dimensional processing power. One's ability to accurately rotate 3-d objects in one's imagination is fairly separate from g, but it's not unimportant in overall IQ. And, it's clearly related in some fashion to masculinity, since men average something like 3/4ths of a standard deviation higher on it.The only thing I can think to do is to separate Wordsum results by gender and create IQ conversions for men and women based on their respective score distributions, since female average scores are about .1 standard deviation higher than male scores are.
This probably isn't worth worrying about for most uses of the GSS vocabulary scores, but for something like propensity to go hunting, which no doubt is related in some fashion to male hormone levels, it does seem important.
The difference between the GSS vocabulary test and a true IQ test is probably also important for politics, too. My impression is that colleges where students average higher on the SAT Math than on the SAT Verbal tend to be more conservative than mirror image schools of the same overall SAT score. That at least was my experience at Rice in the late 1970s.
To specifically address the hunting issue, consider just the estimates for white women who do not hunt but who have a spouse who does (98.9) and white women who do not hunt nor have a spouse who hunts (100.2). Hunting still appears to be an activity of the modestly less intelligent among whites.
Steve's comments provide an appropriate opportunity to remind readers that the GSS provides us with suggestive trends, not definitive ones. The Wordsum test surely correlates with IQ, but it's a proxy measure, not an exact one (a regional comparison of Wordsum averages and a host of other good faith IQ estimates confirms this). To avoid repetitive verbiage, I won't point as much out in every post relying on GSS data going forward, but it is important to be aware of.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Hunting women as smart as non-hunting women until race is considered
Half Sigma marshalls quite the stack of circumstantial evidence that Sarah Palin is of modest intelligence. One of several reasons he gives for presuming she is at best narrowly on the right side of the spectrum:
(5) Smart people have intellectual hobbies. Sarah Palin hunts moose.Hunting is putatively a blue collar activity, but it is also a moderately costly (not just in terms of equipment and licensing, but also time) and predominately white activity.
So is HS correct? The GSS asks respondents if they or their spouses hunt. The average IQ, converted from Wordsum scores, for women who either hunt, are married to someone who hunts, or both, and for women who do not hunt are nearly identical--97.5 in both cases, with hunters enjoying a rounding error edge.
Among whites, however, hunting tends to be an activity of the less cognitively endowed. The average IQ of women who hunt, are married to hunters, or both, is 98.0. For white women who have nothing to do with hunting, it is 100.2.
As long as he's not afraid of political incorrectness (as it's Half Sigma, this isn't the case), his assertion that hunting is an activity characteristic of white women of lower intelligence is a valid one.
Friday, November 21, 2008
Conservative men more intelligent than conservative women; Liberal women more intelligent than liberal men
|IQ Men
|IQ Women
|Male adv
For whites only:
|IQ Men
|IQ Women
|Male adv
I am flummoxed by it. The gaps are not enormous, but they're consistent, particularly with regards to the liberal-conservative spectrum. Considering only the 2004-2006 cohort used in the previous post, conservative white men have a 0.5 point IQ advantage over conservative white women, while liberal white women have a 2.0 advantage over liberal white men. For all races, conservative men have a 1.5 advantage over conservative women, while liberal women have a 1.5 advantage over liberal men. The conservative man's advantage over the conservative woman is 2-3 points greater than the liberal man's (dis)advantage over the liberal woman, whether the last couple of years or the last few decades are being considered, or whether whites alone or the entire population is being looked at.
A little googling didn't turn up anything that addressed this. Maybe I'm reading into differences that are too negligible to matter, but their consistency across time and demographics is what interests me more than their magnitude does.
Are conservative and Republican women more masculine in their intelligence than liberal and Democratic women are? Women who report having sex with at least one other woman since the age of 18 are more than twice as likely to be Democrats as they are to be Republicans, and more than 2.5 times as likely to be liberal as they are to be conservative, so I am not inclined to think that is the case. Perhaps men tend to think in financial terms more regularly than women, consequently leading men to be more likely to think of "conservative" or "Democrat" as these identifiers pertain to fiscal issues, while women are more likely to think about social issues when considering how to self identify (I am presuming 'fiscal conservatives' have higher average IQs than 'social conservatives' do).
Politics and IQ; Conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans least intelligent
Someone who was born into a "Republican family," and doesn't reflect much about ideology and so continues to vote Republican despite being liberal. I don't feel I need to explain conservative Democrats, as it seems to me that political exemplars of this class are generally duller than liberal or moderate Democrats.Regarding the latter remark, I think he is essentially pointing to the South (the US' least intelligent region).
In considering a previous post, Razib points to a couple of historical instances of a prototypical whiterpeople/NAM coalition. He also references a previous post showing the average intelligence of white conservatives and white liberals to be similar. The latter (which might be a little dated) presents an opportunity to force whiterpeople on the left to acknowledge human biodiversity as a prerequisite to basking in their elevated sense of self-worth.
The estimated average IQ by political orientation*, based on Wordsum scores of GSS respondents between '04 and '06, for men and (women)**:
|Party ID
|Average IQ
|100.0 (99.1)
|97.3 (98.1)
|94.4 (92.5)
Republicans are more intelligent. If only whites are considered, things look a little brighter for whiterpeople:
|Party ID
|Average IQ
|100.9 (100.0)
|100.1 (102.3)
|96.3 (95.0)
In the aggregate, there is little apparent relationship between intelligence and party identification among whites, other than self-styled independents being less intelligent than either Democrats or Republicans, a pattern that is also apparent among moderates in comparison to liberals and conservatives.
It's not partisanship but political ideology that whiterpeople are more inclined to embrace as a symbol of greater enlightenment (or intelligence), however. Consequently, it is along the liberal-conservative spectrum where whiterpeople must dispense with blank slatism in order for their (slight) intellectual advantage over conservatives to become apparent.
Average IQ by political ideology for men and (women) of all races who were GSS respondents between '04 and '06:
|Average IQ
|99.4 (97.9)
|99.2 (100.7)
|95.2 (95.0)
And for whites only:
|Average IQ
|101.1 (100.6)
|102.6 (104.6)
|96.2 (97.1)
Self-identified white liberals are, on average, more intelligent than self-identified white conservatives are^, but without considering race, conservatives and liberals are basically at cognitive parity.
Summarizing from above, two things are seen: 1) Republicans have higher IQs than Democrats do, while white Republicans and white Democrats have similar IQs; and 2) Liberals and conservatives have similar IQs, while white liberals have higher IQs than white conservatives do. This results from the fact that although they proxy fairly well for one another, "conservative" does not equal "Republican", nor "liberal" equal "Democrat".
So are self-described liberals from both parties more intelligent than their conservative co-partisans? No. Inline with the trend of those in the squishy middle being less intelligent than those on either end of the spectrum are, conservative Democrats are less intelligent than liberal Democrats are, and liberal Republicans are less intelligent than conservative Republicans are.
Since this requires looking at 49 different categorical placements for a body of respondents from '04 to '06, to ensure samples of at least fifty, average IQ for men and women are not separated. Average IQ for all races by political orientation within each of the the two major parties:
|Average IQ
|Average IQ
Evincing the whiterpeople/NAM divide, the gap is especially wide among Democrats. This tentatively suggests moving either party towards the political center is going to see that party's voter base become less intelligent. This meshes with what appears to have happened to the GOP this election cycle with leftist John McCain as the party's Presidential nominee.
* The GSS lists three degrees for each side by political party orientation and also by political ideology (seven total categories for party and also for ideology). I've condensed them to three for ease of comparison in both sets of tables. The IQ conversion from Wordsum scores is based on the presumption that the white average is 100.
** Women have stronger verbal intelligence than men do. They are also more likely to be Democrats than men are. Consequently, not controlling for gender artificially inflates the apparent average intelligence of Democrats relative to Republicans when GSS data are being used.
^ At least the GSS suggests as much. However, the GSS' proxy for intelligence is a verbal measure. In academia, emphasis on verbal intelligence and leftism go together--disciplines where mathematical and visuo-spatial abilities are more heavily rewarded (engineering, computer science, business) are less leftist in orientation.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
'04 to '08 Presidential election voter turnout by race
Using state level exit polling data from both the '04 and '08 elections allows for a more accurate table to be presented than national exit polls do. Only one in five of those surveyed at the state level participate in the more detailed national poll. The absolute votes (in thousands) and percentage increases in voters from '04 to '08, by race:
|Inc (Dec)
White turnout appears to have increased slightly rather than marginally decreased as national exit polling suggests. Because the '08 national exit poll inexplicably reported 9% of voters to be Hispanic, even though state level polling data suggests it was slightly under 8%, the 16.5% Hispanic increase suggested by national exit polling numbers is attenuated to a more plausible 9.9% increase. Even in a lackluster election for the white electorate, the absolute increase in white votes probably surpassed the absolute increase in Hispanic voters. The Hispanic vote just isn't very important.
Little stake should be put in the Asian and Other categories, because their numbers are so small in so many states. In Washington, for example, the '04 exit poll shows 2% of voters to be Asian, while '08 shows 3%. That translates into an incredulous 25,000 more Asian votes in the state this time around compared to the '04 election.
Using data from state level exit polling for both elections, the proportional representation of each racial group:
In addition to a shifting of the entire electorate against the GOP, the '08 results are largely the story of many uninspired white voters and a very inspired black electorate.
Keep in mind, too, when thinking about this, that exit polling consistently overstates Hispanic turnout.
Monday, November 17, 2008
White IQ and change in white vote by state from '04 to '08 election
GNXP's Razib has created a convenient comparative table of the white vote by state (including DC) in '04 and '08, showing Kerry's and Obama's respective performances. Obama's gains correlate positively with estimated white IQ by state at .34 (p=.01). In Massachusetts, Obama only garnered 57% of the white vote compared to Kerry's 59%. Our most intelligent state happens to be the one that fielded Kerry, so it's an explainable anomaly. Removing it from the analysis increases the correlation to .39. For each added white IQ point, Obama's performance relative to Kerry's similarly increased one point.
Stepping away from the rate of change for a moment, consider the relationship between the total white vote percentage for the Democratic candidate by state and the state's average white IQ. In '04, the white Kerry vote correlated positively with white IQ at .43 (p=.001). In '08, it has increased to .48 (p=.0004). For every one point increase in white IQ, Obama's support among whites increases a little over four points.
That states with more intelligent whites are more likely to vote Democratic than states with less intelligent whites are is what whiterpeople are after when they insinuate Democrats are smarter and more enlightened than Republicans.
But it does not follow that more intelligent states are more likely to vote Democratic (although smarter states shifted more to the left than duller states did). In fact, the opposite is true*. Bush's total share of the '04 vote and the state's estimated average IQ correlate positively at .31 (p=.03). In '08, McCain's share and state IQ correlate at .26 (p=.07).
In summation, smarter white states give more white support to Democrats than duller white states do. That trend became stronger this election. Smarter states are still more likely to vote Republican than duller states are, but the gap narrowed this time around. Both of these observations lend credence to Half Sigma's assertion that the Republican party is losing its relative ability to appeal to intelligence.
Relatedly, see what Steve Sailer's perspicaciously dubs "The McCain Belt". You might consider ordering Albion's Seed if you've not previously read it.
* At first blush, this may seem contradictory. But keep in mind that nationally the GOP still comfortably wins the white vote while losing the black and Hispanic votes. The dullest white state (West Virginia, white IQ of 97.1) is still more intelligent than the smartest black state (Washington, black IQ of 94.5). Further, even though whites in high IQ states like Wyoming and Idaho are less likely to vote Republican than whites in low IQ states like Alabama and Mississippi are, Wyoming and Idaho are both more reliably Republican than either Alabama or Mississippi because of the large black populations in the latter two states.
Friday, November 14, 2008
With Bush's white share, McCain wins CO, IN, NC, OH, VA; with Bush's Hispanic share, he wins FL (and maybe IN)
It's a question I plan to examine more thoroughly later in the week, but for now consider the absolute (in thousands) and percentage increases (decreases) in voters from '04 to '08, by race (using national exit polling numbers for now, and adjusting "Other" for '08 down to 2%, which is where it should be, not 3%, which comes to a total of 101% by race. I will later refine it by aggregating state level totals for '04 as was done for '08):
The white population has grown, not shrunk, since 2004. Neither the black nor the Hispanic population grew at those respective rates over the last four years. Whites were not enthused about this election. Non-whites were.
Two consecutive Presidential election cycles with exit polling data available at the state level allows for some interesting insights to be gleaned. One recurring media narrative open borders supporters like to emphasize is that while McCain held his ground among whites, he lost it not only among blacks, which was unavoidable, but also in the crucially important Hispanic vote, and consequently he went down in flames.
That's not the case. Even though national exit polling shows McCain receiving 55% of the white vote to Bush's 58%, that 3 point shift represents a net change of 5.5 million votes. His combined loss of support among blacks (7 points), Hispanics (9 points), Asians (9 points), and others (9 points) resulted in a net swap of 4.8 million votes. Whites comprise three-fourths of the electorate, so the percentage shift among non-whites must be three times the magnitude of the white shift just to break even. It wasn't, due to the diminishing marginal returns a black Democrat is able to reap given how overwhelmingly supportive of the Democratic party blacks already are.
McCain's drop in white support relative to how Bush performed in '04 is what resulted in an electoral landslide. Because the most competitive states are whiter and blacker (and less Hispanic and Asian) than the nation as a whole is, the 5.5 million net shift is even more important than it might initially appear to be.
Leaving the non-white vote from November 4th alone, if McCain had merely retained the level of white support Bush did in '04, he would've won Colorado, Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia. It wouldn't have been enough to keep Nevada, New Mexico, Florida, or Iowa (barely) from flipping to the Democrats, so Obama would've still won the electoral college, 296-242. But the election wouldn't have been the 365-173 blowout it ended up being.
What if, leaving the non-Hispanic vote unchanged, McCain had enjoyed the same support among Hispanics Bush did in '04? Using the inaccurate Hispanic numbers reported from that election's exit polling that overstated the GOP's performance among Hispanics, and recalling that much of the Hispanic goodwill towards Republicans was bought via the housing bubble that provided years of explosive construction work and astronomical increases in Southwestern housing valuations, he would've won Florida*. That's it. Obama's electoral victory would've remained overwhelming, at 337-201.
* It could've been enough for him to squeak by in Indiana as well. For that to be the case, McCain's support among Hispanics would have to have been 13 points lower than what Bush garnered in '04. However, EMR estimated that Hispanics comprised 3% of Indiana's electorate in '04 and 4% in '08. For both elections, that represents too small a sample for reporting voting patterns, so there's no way to say conclusively whether or not Bush's Hispanic support in the state would've been sufficient for McCain to have held on to it. Granting it to McCain, Obama wins 326-212, a margin still 60 electoral votes worse than retaining Bush's white support would've meant.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
More income, more votes; Republicans wealthier, more generous than Democrats
I ran the same numbers again (whites only, 2000-2006), this time only for families of four. The total number of respondents drops from 4,846 to 725. Spread across eight political categories and 55 income categories, that starts getting pretty sparse. So I've condensed down to three political persuasions:
The trend holds. It's worth pointing out that 'Strong Democrat' families of four have higher average incomes than 'Weak Republicans' do. Otherwise, the rank ordering is identical to the last table presented in the body of the post below.
In discussions surrounding recent posts, I've consulted the GSS for insights on a few things. They may be of general interest, so they're presented below.
Not surprisingly, higher income is correlated with higher voter participation. The average (mean) individual income of respondents by frequency of voting at the local level:
Always vote: $63,700
Sometimes vote: $66,100
Rarely vote: $55,300
Never vote: $36,500
Maybe the "always vote" segment, representing a little under one-third of the population, is made up of political junkies who tend to be well enough off but who are not always the most affluent members of their communities.
The GSS asks respondents how frequently they make charitable donations. I assigned five points to "more than once a week", four points to "once a week", three points to "once a month", two points to "at least 2 or 3 times a year", one point to "once a year", and zero points to "never". Thus a higher score indicates greater generosity. Following are the average charity scores by political persuasion for all respondents and also for (whites only):
|Strong Republican
|2.38 (2.39)
|Weak Republican
|2.04 (2.08)
|2.01 (2.07)
|Strong Democrat
|1.85 (2.08)
|1.82 (1.88)
|Weak Democrat
|1.70 (1.75)
|1.54 (1.57)
That's how liberal they are about giving their money, but what about giving their time? The GSS asked the same question about respondents' frequency of volunteering, with an identical list of prospective responses. I computed average scores by political persuasion in the same way. The scores are lower because people donate their money more regularly than they donate their time:
|Strong Republican
|1.43 (1.46)
|Strong Democrat
|1.19 (1.19)
|1.14 (1.17)
|1.06 (1.11)
|Weak Republican
|1.03 (1.11)
|Weak Democrat
|1.04 (1.11)
|0.81 (0.79)
Republicans' advantage over Democrats is wider when it comes to giving money than when it comes to giving time, but in the latter case Republicans are still more generous. A strong political persuasion increases the likelihood of donating both time and money to charity among both Democrats and Republicans. Notice also that whites, across all political persuasions (with the marginal exception among independents when it comes to volunteering time), are more generous than non-whites are.
Presuming the mandatory civil service Obama and his Secretary of Staff Rahm Emanuel favor allows young Americans some say in how they will 'volunteer' themselves, white Republicans will experience the least amount of disruption in their lives from it, while non-white Democrats will experience the most.
Finally, while I share Half Sigma's concerns that the Republican party is at risk of losing the support of upper class whites, the conceptualization of a Republican comprised of middle class and working class whites and a Democratic party comprised of minorities and upper class whites is premature. White Republicans are still more affluent than white Democrats are.
Looking only at respondents who participated in the GSS sometime between 2000 and 2006, the average family income by political persuasion for whites only:
|Strong Republican
|Weak Republican
|Strong Democrat
|Weak Democrat
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
VG criticism and reviews at Popular Symbolism
While the video game industry is quickly leaving the movie industry in the dust, VG criticism is still in its infancy. It is almost entirely comprised of technical and aesthetic commentary tending to read more like the evaluation of an automobile test-drive than a reflection on an epic story rich with historical and mythological allusions. PS shows a lot of promise in prodding VG criticism forward.
Monday, November 10, 2008
McCain's loss of white support larger than combined loss of minority support
|GOP decline
|Votes lost
|2.8 million
|1.1 million
|0.9 million
|0.2 million
|0.2 million
I've added an extra column showing what each percentage decline translates to in absolute votes based on the aggregate data collected from state level exit polling (the vote gap is essentially double the amounts displayed in the last column, as the GOP's lost votes were converted into Democratic gains).
The headlines telling of how Obama won big among minorities aside, relative to Bush's performance in '04, McCain lost more white voters than he lost of all non-white voters combined. The GOP's fortunes hinge upon the electoral decisions of whites.
McCain's big drop among Hispanics is electorally less significant than a 1% decline in his support among whites would have been. Of course, he dropped three times that amount among whites. Yet the breathless media narrative is that while retaining the white vote, McCain's drop among minorities sealed Obama's victory.
Friday, November 07, 2008
State exit polls reveal national exit poll overstates Hispanic vote, understates white vote
++Addition++Wikipedia's election page has some errors in voter totals (as reported three days after the election; it may have been subsequently edited yet again by the time of this reading). Kentucky's total was overstated by more than 500,000 votes, and a few states were presented as final results even though the totals displayed did not represent 100% of precincts reporting. As Kentucky is a white state, the table presented in the body of this post slightly inflates the white national total. I've kept my original table in the body (I'm only into revisionism when it serves a constructive purpose other than covering my behind), but also present this more accurate one constructed from state voter totals provided by CNN:
The shifts are very minor. The white percentage drops by .2%, black by .2%. The Hispanic percentage rises by .2%, Asian by .1%, and other by .1%.
Steve Sailer has already predicted exit polling data overstated the Hispanic turnout this election (as it did in the 2004 Presidential election):
Hysterical pundits will announce that the Hispanic tidal wave accounted for 8 or 9 or even 10 percent of the vote!It's not even necessary to wait that long to undercut the 9% figure now deemed the official national total by Edison Media Research and the major media outlets that partner with it.
Then, a year from now, the Census Bureau will quietly announce the results of its huge post-election survey of voting, the gold standard of ethnic voting shares. It will show that the Hispanic share of the vote, which was 5.4 percent in 2000 and 6.0 percent in 2004 actually was only 6.9 percent in 2008, or whatever.
On election night, after exit polling data were in for all 50 states and DC, CNN's national exit poll showed Hispanics constituting 8% of the national total. Steve astutely captured and posted this before it was altered.
An easy (albeit tedious) way to verify the national figure is to simply look at exit polling data from each state. Taking the voting percentages by race in each state and multiplying them by the total number of votes cast in the state allows for the number of actual votes cast by race to be determined. The numbers are rounded to the nearest percentage, but there is no reason they should systematically differ across states (7.54% as 8% here should be balanced out by 12.46% as 12% there) to an extent that they misrepresent the national total, and anyway the national exit polls round to the nearest whole percentage point as well. Presumably EMR creates the national exit poll by aggregating each of the individual state exit polls so this does not offer an explanation for the abrupt post-election editing.
What do the exit polls actually say when aggregated together to form a national exit poll? The table shows the total number of voters by race (in millions), what the states actually reveal in percentages of the total by race, and what the major media are now running with:
That's not carelessness on my part--the media total really does come to 101% even though exit polls at the state level come to exactly 100% (and match what CNN originally reported, with the exception of the "Other" category, which varied by one point). Funny how to 'balance' things out, EMR seems to have arbitrarily taken 1.2% of the total respondent base that was white and converted it to Hispanic, er, "Latino", in the national exit poll.
Even that 7.8% will likely prove to be an overestimate, since smaller groups tend to be oversampled as a way of ensuring they're not undercounted, since it would be more problematic in determining voter tendencies to undercount Asians or Hispanics than it would be to undercount whites.
Data, via Swivel, are here.
More educated (but not intelligent) states shift Democratic more rapidly
The latter assertion appeared to me to be the case, but only because many of the more educated red states have been more competitive than the least educated red states (essentially the South) have been for decades. Eyeballing the results, it didn't jump out at me that the more educated or intelligent* states shifted in Obama's favor more than the less educated or intelligent states did.
Analyzing the numbers affirms as much about intelligent states. A state's estimated average IQ and its shift in Presidential voting from '04 to '08 are unrelated (p=.63).
However, there is a moderate correlation of .27 (p=.06) between a state's educational attainment as measured by this index and its shift in voting from '04 to '08. More educated states like Montana and Colorado didn't just shift leftward in tandem with the rest of the county this election cycle, they're doing so at a greater clip than less educated states like Mississippi and West Virginia are. The variances are modest, but in aggregate they're real. Whether this is due to the leftist environment at most colleges, the delaying effect it has on people starting families, or something else, this is concerning.
What about national exit polling? Half Sigma also argues the Republican party is losing support among the wealthiest and most educated voters. Previously, I've tracked average income and educational attainment for voters based on exit polling data for elections in '06, '04, '00, and '96. Using the same methodology**, here's how it shakes out this time around (income, educational index score):
McCain's supporters -- $86,000; 49.0
Obama's supporters -- $77,000; 50.0
In '04, Bush supporters averaged $73,000 and 43.2, while Kerry's averaged $62,000 and 48.4. McCain's educational improvement isn't from an increase in college graduate support, but from a drastic decline in support among high school dropouts (probably attributable to lots of blacks coming out to vote for Obama) as well as a drop in support among high school graduates who've never attended college.
The Democrats clearly narrowed the income gap this time around. Republican voters in '04 had an estimated 18% income edge over Democrats. But this year, the McCain voter's average income is only 11% higher than the Obama voter's average income. This in spite of the fact that blacks represented the biggest proportional increase among racial groups in voters this election cycle compared to last. Ceteris paribus, the black uptick should accentuate the gap, yet it still narrowed. Further, as explained below, I counted the $200,000 or more income category as $250,000 (for the other income ranges, I simply choose the middle dollar amount). Bush cleaned Kerry's clock by nearly two-to-one among these voters, but Obama won them 52%-46%.
* Using an educational attainment index computed using the percentage of a state's population that has a graduate degree, a bachelor's degree, and has not completed high school as a measure of education, and NAEP scores for 8th graders in math and science to estimate IQ, a state's level of education and its average intelligence proxy fairly well for one another, but they are not the same. They correlate at .59 (p=0), indicating that a little more than one-third of educational attainment can be determined by estimated IQ alone, and viceversa.
** I took the middle value of the income range category, determined what percentage of each party's total vote it represented, did this for each income category, and then came up with a mean income (rounded to the nearest thousand) accordingly. For "under $15,000", I used $7,500. For the highest income range, I used 125% of the minimum value (ie, for "$200,000 or more" I used $250,000).
Thursday, November 06, 2008
Educational index by state
Agnostic suggested tweaking the index to give more weight to states with large college-educated populations, rhetorically asking:
What if you defined the index as (SMART - DUMB) * SMART? Where the smarties and dumbies are about as common, the original and new index are about 0. But what about two states where there are many more smarties than dumbies, like Washington vs. Utah -- wouldn't you rather live where the fraction of smarties is larger, all else equal? (Which it probably isn't -- more expensive to live in WA than UT.)Honestly, I just have an aversion to the behaviors of the hard underclass. Minimizing that is most important for immediate quality of life. I spend some free time in mixed working class areas and actually enjoy it. But that's being short-sighted on my part, I don't live there, I'm not raising a family, and anyway, the question was rhetorical so I shouldn't flatter myself in thinking it was directed specifically at me!
Doing this alters the index very marginally. Agnostic's is nearly identical to the original. The two correlate at .97.
Still, he makes a good point. Since the subject came up from Half Sigma's ongoing interest in the voting tendencies of smarter and dumber states, and 17% of this election's voters were postgraduates, I changed the formula so postgrads would be 'worth' 1.5 times as much as those with bachelor's degrees in determining a state's score. It is computed by multiplying the postgraduate percentage of the population by 0.5, adding it to the percentage of the population with a bachelor's degree or higher, and then subtracting the percentage of the population not having completed high school (all for people above the age of 25) and multplying by 100 for ease of viewing.
Following is the new index, colored according to the '08 Presidential election, with the inclusion of DC*. Light blue indicates an Obama margin of victory of ten points or less, and light red indicates the same for McCain:
1. District of Columbia -- 28.7
2. Colorado -- 25.4
3. Massachusetts -- 25.3
4. Connecticut -- 22.3
4. Maryland -- 22.3
6. Vermont -- 22.0
7. New Hampshire -- 21.4
8. Minnesota -- 20.0
9. Washington -- 19.9
10. Alaska -- 17.9
11. Utah -- 17.8
12. New Jersey -- 17.7
13. Virginia -- 17.5
14. Kansas -- 16.3
15. Montana -- 15.4
16. Hawaii -- 15.2
17. Oregon -- 15.0
18. Nebraska -- 14.0
19. Wyoming -- 13.4
20. Illinois -- 12.8
20. New York -- 12.8
22. Delaware -- 12.2
22. Maine -- 12.2
24. Wisconsin -- 11.1
25. Iowa -- 10.5
26. Idaho -- 10.0
27. Michigan -- 9.4
28. North Dakota -- 9.3
29. South Dakota -- 9.2
30. Pennsylvania -- 8.8
31. Arizona -- 8.6
32. Rhode Island -- 8.6
33. California -- 8.5
34. New Mexico -- 7.9
34. Ohio -- 7.9
36. Missouri -- 7.4
37. Georgia -- 6.9
38. Florida -- 6.5
39. Indiana -- 5.4
40. North Carolina -- 4.5
41. Oklahoma -- 4.2
42. Texas -- 2.9
43. Nevada -- 1.9
44. South Carolina -- 0.6
45. Tennessee -- (1.0)
46. Alabama -- (2.0)
47. Louisiana -- (3.2)
48. Arkansas -- (4.8)
49. Kentucky -- (5.1)
50. West Virginia -- (6.7)
51. Mississippi -- (7.3)
Far from being an uneducated wilderness, Alaska is the most educated reliably red state.
Parenthetically, Steve Sailer has helpfully pointed out that younger populations, all else being equal, tend to be more educated than older populations are. This means red states look even worse by comparison to blue states, as younger states are more likely to vote Republican than older states are. The correlation between McCain's share of a state's vote and its median age is an inverse .29 (p=.04).
* As a city included in an index comparing states, DC is an outlier by default. Levels of inequality in DC are higher than they are in any states as a whole (inequality, incidentally, is a great thing for Democrats). Not surprisingly, it is an anomaly in terms of the relationship between estimated IQ and educational attainment of the population. Without DC included, the correlation is .59 (p=0). DC, however, does the best in the country on the educational index even though it has a lower average IQ than any state does, including those in the South.
Monday, November 03, 2008
Further evidence blacks more racialist than whites are; Hispanics too
During the final stretch of the Democratic primaries, exit pollsters queried respondents on whether or not race was an important factor in choosing who they voted for. In all six of the states in which the question was asked, blacks were more likely than whites to say the race of the candidates influenced their vote.
Gallup conducted a national poll after Obama had won the Democratic nomination inquiring into whether or not Obama's race would make respondents more (or less) likely to vote for him, or if it would have no influence on how they voted. Blacks were nearly twice as likely to be influenced by race as whites were (22% to 12%).
As if overwhelming black support for Obama during the Democratic primaries, when he was running against the wife of the "first black President"--an advantage as lopsided as Democrats enjoy over Republicans among blacks in general elections--didn't make it clear, polls consistently show blacks to be more racially-motivated than whites are.
It's not that the focus on white racialism is unimportant. The 12% of whites who self-describe as being influenced by Obama's blackness represent around 11 million voters. The 22% of blacks who say they are influenced come to only 3 million or so voters. Even though whites are the least racialist group in the US, white racialism is of greater absolute electoral importance than the racialism of other groups because there are so many more whites than there are blacks, Hispanics, or Asians. It's the intentional omission of reporting on greater racialism among other groups that is obfuscating (and also disingenuous).
The internet allows for those who are interested to look past the headlines created to fit the media narrative, however. The exit polling data from the Democratic primaries are what Richard Cohen looked to when lamenting perceived white racism in America, while the actual data show blacks are actually more 'racist' than whites are. The Gallup poll showing blacks to be almost twice as likely to be influenced by race as whites are headlines with "Most Say Race Will Not Be a Factor in Their Presidential Vote".
Another recent poll to require a little digging for the full picture to come into focus headlines with "Whites May Exaggerate Black-Hispanic Tensions". Whites are less likely to rate relations between blacks and Hispanics as "good" than either blacks or Hispanics are. There is some street tension between blacks and Hispanics--my observation is that it exists primarily among young black and Hispanic males--but there is also shared solidarity among them as oppressed minorities in a white America. Reminding minorities that they are non-whites (rather than blacks or Hispanics) facilitates this solidarity.
That's news enterprising libertarian white guys like my dad need to consider. The view that Hispanics will create a more tolerable working class than the blacks they will do battle with and then replace in the inner-city is mostly fantastical.
But there's a more interesting psychological insight to be gleaned from the poll: Members of an 'outside' race tend to see more tension in the relations between members of two other races than members of those two other races see among their own race and the other race. That is, whites are less likely to view relations between blacks and Hispanics as good than either blacks or Hispanics are; Hispanics are less likely to view relations between whites and blacks as good than either whites or blacks are; and blacks are less likely to view relations between whites and Hispanics as good than either whites or Hispanics are.
This is a common tendency in the US--the farther a person gets from his own life, the worse he perceives things to be. Surveys consistently show Americans to be much more upbeat on their own personal economic and quality of life situations than they are on the economic and quality of life situation of the country as a whole (this is in contrast to China, where the reverse seems to be true). While Congressional approval ratings are virtually always below 50%, Congressional incumbents win reelection around 90% of the time.
Finally, this gem from a Pew study released last February:
On Super Tuesday, Hispanics were more likely than whites to say that race was an important factor in deciding their vote--28% of Hispanics said this compared with 13% of whites. ... Blacks who said race was important (29% of all black voters) were more likely to vote for Obama than were other blacks--87% did, compared with 80% of blacks who said race was not important.* I consider the term value-neutral, much like the word "familism" to which it is related. "Racialism" is usually a better word choice, but in the common parlance "racism" tends to be used.
Saturday, November 01, 2008
Refutations of common open borders talking points
Between 2000 and this year, the Hispanic electorate will have doubled, to 12% of voters, according to Census data and NDN, a Democratic group that studies the electorate. That growth has been concentrated in once-Republican states, not only in the Mountain West but in the South. By 2006, Hispanics represented 31% of voters in New Mexico, 13% in Nevada, 11% in Florida and 8% in Colorado.Strassel made the same argument more than a year ago, and rehashed it again a day before Weisman's article*. The refutations haven't changed since then. The percentage of the actual votes cast by Hispanics will be about half that, because eligible (we're not talking about illegal immigrants or temporary legal residents, only about those who are able to legally register) Hispanics are less likely than eligible whites or eligible blacks to actually vote. Pew Research reports:
About 54% of Hispanics who were eligible to vote registered in November 2006. Among whites and blacks, the figure was 71% and 61%, respectively.Fredo Arias-King, former advisor to Mexican President Vicente Fox, offers insight into why this is the case:
While Democratic legislators we spoke with welcomed the Latino vote, they seemed more interested in those immigrants and their offspring as a tool to increase the role of the government in society and the economy. Several of them tended to see Latin American immigrants and even Latino constituents as both more dependent on and accepting of active government programs and the political class guaranteeing those programs, a point they emphasized more than the voting per se. Moreover, they saw Latinos as more loyal and "dependable" in supporting a patron-client system and in building reliable patronage etworks to circumvent the exigencies of political life as devised by the Founding Fathers and expected daily by the average American.Citizens calling Congressional offices and organizing recall petitions are such a pain! It'd be much better if they'd just resignedly accept the way the political elite conducts its business.
Republican lawmakers we spoke with knew that naturalized Latin American immigrants and their offspring vote mostly for the Democratic Party, but still most of them (all except five) were unambiguously in favor of amnesty and of continued mass immigration (at least from Mexico). This seemed paradoxical, and explaining their motivations was more challenging. However, while acknowledging that they may not now receive their votes, they believed that these immigrants are more malleable than the existing American: That with enough care, convincing, and "teaching," they could be converted, be grateful, and become dependent on them. Republicans seemed to idealize the patron-client relation with Hispanics as much as their Democratic competitors did.
Further, the swing states are whiter and blacker, at the expense of Hispanics and Asians, than the electorally reliable states are. To those four states that are more Hispanic than the nation as a whole is, this election's swing states of Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina, Missouri, North Dakota, Montana, and Indiana are less Hispanic and more white than the country at large.
Indeed, the electorally-safe states are more than twice as Hispanic as the competitive states are. The competitive states, conversely, are whiter than the safe states are. So the nearly 80% of the national electorate that will be white understates the importance of the white vote, while the 6% or 7% of the national vote that will be cast by Hispanics overstates the importance of the Hispanic vote.
This doesn't negate the fact that the four states mentioned are experiencing demographic changes that will give them a permanent blue hue. California, which voted Republican in all three Presidential elections in the eighties, became forever blue in '92. As whites--the racial group that always votes Republican in Presidential elections (as opposed to blacks and Hispanics, neither of which ever have as long as national exit polling has been conducted)--became a minority in California, so did Republicans. As Cali goes, so goes the country.
Weisman asserts something there is no evidence for:
Demographics also shifted in the right places to give Democrats a lift. ... A concerted Republican campaign to curb illegal immigration turned a wave of new foreign-born voters against the GOP in Florida, Nevada and Colorado, just as the Latino vote in those states was growing.Is there a single (Presidential, House, Senate, or Governor) race for which exit polling exists in which a Republican's Hispanic support was greater than his white support? I've not been able to find one. Yet Weisman tells it as though each time a growing Hispanic population offers Republicans a chance to seize victory, every single time they lose out from it (presumably because of their anti-immigration positions).
The much more obvious explanation that has mountains of empirical backing is that Hispanics are more likely to support Democrats than whites are. It holds no matter where in the US we look. It's hardly surprising that a group much less likely graduate from college (even four generations in), more likely to use welfare, experiences higher illegitimacy and poverty rates, and is more criminally-prone than whites are (in addition to being 'eligible' for affirmative action benefits) is also more likely to vote Democratic than whites are. New Hispanic arrivals fare more poorly than those who've been in the US for an extended period of time do, and consequently are probably even more likely to support Democrats than those who are more established are.
It's likely that federal enforcement of immigration laws will become even more lax under either Obama or McCain. As unskilled Hispanic immigration continues, Hispanic support for the Democratic party will grow. Open borders supporters like Weisman and Strassel will continue to point at restrictionists, but unless the Republican party moves to the left of the Democratic party on economic issues and several social issues, it's inevitable that more Hispanics will translate into Democrats.
Weisman offers the following, parroting Strassel:
President Bush and his political team were able to ride that wave, nearly doubling the GOP's share of the Latino vote from 21% in 1996 to 40% in 2004, according to exit polls. Then came 2006 and the Republican Party embrace of get-tough legislation on illegal immigration, followed by Republican efforts to kill bipartisan bills to stiffen border enforcement and provide illegal immigrants a pathway to citizenship.Using an election when a conservative independent garnered nearly 10% of the vote as a base year is sneaky. But this talking point comes up frequently, and it's crucial to be able to respond to what Weisman fails to mention: The GOP's share of the white vote grew from 46% in '96 to 58% in '04. The Hispanic increase (granting 40%, although 38% is likely a more accurate figure) translates into 1.3 million votes gained for the Republican party. The white increase dwarfs that at over 11 million votes.
Weisman continues:
In 2006, Republican support among Hispanics fell to 30%. Even Sen. McCain, who co-authored the bipartisan immigration legislation, does not appear able to reverse the trend.The GOP dropped about 8 points among Hispanics, costing it 400,000 votes. The party also dropped 7 points among whites, from 58% to 51%, costing it 4,500,000. Ouch. This is another example of how, rather than being a swing vote, the Hispanic vote tends to mirror the white vote, skewed 15-20 points to the left.
And among those who said the Iraq war was an important factor in how they voted, Democrats enjoyed a 53.3%-46.7% advantage. Among those who thought immigration was important, Republicans won 53.4%-46.6%. The losing issue was the one the neoconservative WSJ has supported unfailingly from its beginning.
* Humorously, the article's theme is on creating a "Big Tent" GOP that excludes immigration restrictionists (74% of Republicans) and 'hardline' traditional marriage supporters (55% of Republicans). So, expand the tent by cutting out majorities of it! No concessions are to be made by unreciprocated free traders, open borders supporters, or neoconservative interventionists, however.
That sounds like exactly what the Republican party's national leadership has been trying to do for the last six-plus years. The result is a inority in both Houses of Congress and a leftist Republican Senator who looks to lose multiple states Bush won in '04 without picking up anything new. The definition of insanity...


text:
Boy Joy For Kate And William
The Duke of Cambridge was present for the birth of his son who weighed 8lbs 6oz. "We could not be happier," he said in a statement.
"Her Royal Highness and her child are both doing well and will remain in hospital overnight," Kensington Palace said in a statement.
"The Duke of Cambridge was present for the birth. The Queen, The Duke of Edinburgh, The Prince of Wales, The Duchess of Cornwall, Prince Harry and members of both families have been informed and are delighted with the news."
The Prince of Wales said that he was "enormously proud and happy to be a grandfather for the first time", adding that it was "an incredibly special moment for William and Catherine".
In a touching statement, Charles said: "Both my wife and I are overjoyed at the arrival of my first grandchild. It is an incredibly special moment for William and Catherine and we are so thrilled for them on the birth of their baby boy.
"Grandparenthood is a unique moment in anyone's life, as countless kind people have told me in recent months, so I am enormously proud and happy to be a grandfather for the first time and we are eagerly looking forward to seeing the baby in the near future."
It is understood the Queen was informed of the birth in a phone call from William, though the Royal Family will not visit the hospital as it demands an extra level of security which could cause disruption.
Her Majesty arrived back at Buckingham Palace this afternoon after spending the weekend at Windsor Castle.
A beaming David Cameron declared the birth "an important moment in the life of our nation".
Speaking outside 10 Downing Street, the Prime Minister said: "It is wonderful news from St Mary's, Paddington and I am sure that right across the country, and indeed right across the Commonwealth, people will be celebrating and wishing the royal couple well.
"It is an important moment in the life of our nation but, I suppose, above all it is a wonderful moment for a warm and loving couple who have got a brand new baby boy.
"It has been a remarkable few years for our royal family - a royal wedding that captured people's hearts, that extraordinary and magnificent jubilee and now this royal birth - all from a family that has given this nation so much incredible service."
US President Barack Obama and his wife Michelle have congratulated the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge on the "joyous occasion of the birth of their first child", adding: "We wish them all the happiness and blessings parenthood brings.
"The child enters the world at a time of promise and opportunity for our two nations. Given the special relationship between us, the American people are pleased to join with the people of the United Kingdom as they celebrate the birth of the young prince.
"Given the special relationship between us, the American people are pleased to join with the people of the United Kingdom as they celebrate the birth of the young prince."
Confirmation of the Royal birth arrived by car in the form of an official statement, carried by the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's press secretary.
The statement, on Buckingham Palace headed paper, was brought out for public inspection on the easel by Badar Azim, a footman with the Royal Household, and Ailsa Anderson, the Queen's press secretary.
It was signed by the Queen's gynaecologist Marcus Setchell, who led the medical team that delivered Kate's baby.
There were three cheers of "hip hip hooray," as the crowd outside the palace gates swelled to more than 10 deep.
Many had been waiting patiently for confirmation of the birth ever since news broke of the Duchess going into labour this morning.
Grown men were seen riding on friends' shoulders, while others used step ladders to get an elevated position.
Kasey Coffee, 21, from Washington in the US, said she had spent three hours queuing ahead of the royal announcement.
"The atmosphere in the crowd was awesome. Everybody was excited, then we heard a shriek that it was a boy - everybody was cheering and jumping. It was an incredible thing to be part of history."
Police were sent in with the crowds, as many scrambled to get the best vantage point.
But the wait to see the easel, designed to bring an end to a 12-hour vigil at the palace gates for some, proved too much.
One woman left having tried for half an hour to get closer to the front of the crowd, without success. She said: "I'm pleased we tried to see it, but it was just too difficult. It was impossible to get any closer."
Well-wishers from around the globe rejoiced as news of the birth of the royal baby spread.
Foreign Secretary William Hague said: "My warmest congratulations to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
"Wonderful news and a happy moment for our country and Overseas Territories."
Canada's prime minister Stephen Harper sent his "heartfelt congratulations" to the couple and the royal family on behalf of all Canadians.
Outgoing Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks tweeted "Mazal Tov" to the happy couple. "We wish them blessings, good health, and joy in becoming parents," he added.
First Minister Alex Salmond led Scotland's congratulations to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge on the birth of their baby son.
Mr Salmond said: "I am sure that people across Scotland will be absolutely thrilled to hear the news of the birth of a baby boy to the royal couple and will want to join me in wishing the proud parents many congratulations."
Residents of the village where the Duchess of Cambridge grew up said tonight they were overjoyed with the news that one of their own is a future king.
John Haley, owner of the Old Boot Inn near the Duchess's parents' home in Bucklebury, Berkshire, said: "It's just amazing news. When we heard the announcement it was a boy, the place just exploded."
Mr Haley, who attended the royal wedding in 2011, added: "We are all having a massive party, it's a great atmosphere and it's all kicked off. It's great that Kate and her son are doing well."
The Duchess's former music teacher Daniel Nicholls, who taught her piano from 11 to 14 and who still lives near Bucklebury, said: "It's absolutely amazing news. I think they are going to be wonderful parents.
"I believe they are going to come here to the village with the child and I know that Kate's parents Michael and Carole will be a great support. Is he too young to start learning the piano? Maybe in the future..."
Tessy Ojo, CEO of the Diana Award scheme, an initiative which recognises teenagers who make outstanding contributions to their communities, spoke of Prince William's mother.
"Today Diana, Princess of Wales, would have been a proud grandmother," she said.
"Her legacy continues through the inspirational work of these young people who carry this honour, set up in her memory, with pride."
The new royal baby is third in line to the throne and a future king. A great-grandchild to the Queen - her third - the newborn will also one day be crowned sovereign.
If the baby follows after the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge as king, he will be the 43rd monarch since William the Conqueror obtained the crown of England.
The baby's uncle, Prince Harry, now moves to fourth in line to the throne, while the Duke of York shifts down to fifth and Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie to sixth and seventh place.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Steve Carlton, in full Steven Norman Carlton, byname Lefty, (born Dec. 22, 1944, Miami, Fla., U.S.), American professional baseball player. In 1983 Carlton became the second pitcher to surpass Walter Johnson's career record of 3,508 strikeouts (Nolan Ryan was the first).
Carlton pitched for Miami-Dade, a junior college in Florida, before the left-hander signed a contract with the St. Louis Cardinals in 1965. After a stint in the minor leagues, he moved up to the Cardinals in 1966. He was a three-time all-star in St. Louis, but a salary dispute with team management resulted in Carlton being traded to the Philadelphia Phillies after the 1971 season.
Carlton came into his own while pitching for the Phillies: he captured the pitching Triple Crown in his first season in Philadelphia—leading the National League (NL) in earned run average (1.97), wins (27), and strikeouts (310)—and won the NL Cy Young Award as the league's best pitcher. He went on to lead the league in strikeouts four more times (1974, 1980, 1982, 1983) and placed in the top 10 in NL strikeouts 16 times over the course of his 24-season career. A workhorse pitcher, Carlton also finished atop the league in innings pitched on five occasions. He won the NL Cy Young Award three more times (1977, 1980, 1982) before he left the Phillies in 1986.
Although he announced his retirement in 1986 after recording his 4,000th strikeout (while with the San Francisco Giants), Carlton continued to play, pitching for several teams until 1988. His 329 wins were the ninth highest total in major league history at the time of his retirement. Carlton amassed 4,136 strikeouts during his career, an amount exceeded only by Nolan Ryan, Randy Johnson, and Roger Clemens. Carlton was inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame in 1994.


text:
Has cry-it-out been scientifically proven harmful to babies? Dr. Darcia Narvaez, a Psychology professor at Notre Dame, published a piece in Psychology Today making a case that the cry-it-out method of sleep training damages babies, making them less intelligent, more anxious, and less connected to their parents. She posits that children who are prevented from crying are actually end up more independent than babies who are left to self-soothe.
Plus: One Mom's Story of Sleep Training
Says Narvaez:
"With neuroscience, we can confirm what our ancestors took for granted---that letting babies get distressed is a practice that can damage children and their relational capacities in many ways for the long term. We know now that leaving babies to cry is a good way to make a less intelligent, less healthy but more anxious, uncooperative and alienated person who can pass the same or worse traits on to the next generation."
She goes on to posit that, according to various studies, crying destroys neurons, can wire you with stress for life, and can harden caregivers to a baby's needs. She also believes say that extensive crying shows a "lack of experience, knowledge and/or support of the baby's caregivers," a statement sure to raise the hackles of parents of babies with colic. In an addendum, she credits her own poor memory, bowel issues and social anxiety to her parents' neglect.
Plus: 26 Baby Sleep Tricks to Try
Narvaez makes a seriously guilt-inducing case for those of us that used CIO to help our kids sleep through the night. However, I can't say I see any evidence of damage in own happy kids, who are both champion sleepers to boot.
Did you do CIO? Do Narvaez's arguments make you feel like it was the wrong decision? Do you think extensive crying in babyhood can lead to lifelong problems?


text:
Rise of the Five-Figure Bicycle
Amateurs Covet Superlight Frames, Electronic Gear Shifting
Last year, Ted Perry dipped into his 401(k) to buy a $20,000 bicycle.
Mr. Perry, of Dublin, Calif., knows it sounds crazy to own a bike worth more than his 2007 Honda Civic. But he has no buyer's remorse about the custom-built two-wheeler he purchased from bike maker Baum of Australia, which captivated him with its superior welding, titanium frame and willowy 15-pound weight.


text:
Does it run at one speed all the time?
Does it run at one speed all the time?
Two speeds 700 psi constant and when you take it to lock it jumps to 1000 psi
I am wondering if you have any photos of your installation.
What causes my power steering pump to moan/hummm when I'm at an auto X and there is a lot of quick tight turns?
Last edited by Joel; 11-05-2017 at 10:37 AM.
'67 Lotus Elan S3 DHC (owned since 1970)
'17 Ford Focus RS
Any way to fix the problem with a Noble besides going to electric p.s.
A -10 or -12 size reinforced hose should be the supply to the pump on the suction side. And a -8 should be the low psi return. Make sure are no kinks or issues with the hose sizing or condition.These two hoses are important. One is gravity feed to pump and the other low psi return. Flow needs to be good threw these two.
Also any run longer on the three feet on the return should consider larger than -8
Last edited by cooch8c; 11-05-2017 at 08:29 PM.
i will try to get some picks of the install when i am back in town


text:
Feb. 15, 2006
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - The MIT women's basketball team fell to NEWMAC foe Wellesley College, 54-36, on Tuesday night. Clara Yuan tallied 20 points as the Engineers dropped to 7-15 overall and 2-10 in conference play.
The early stages of the contest saw little scoring as both squads struggled from the floor. Tech recorded its largest advantage of the game when Yuan put MIT ahead, 6-4, at 14:01. A free throw and basket over the next three minutes helped the Blue (8-13, 5-7 NEWMAC) regain the lead. On the Engineers' ensuing possession, Yuan gave them their last advantage of the game (8-7). A three-pointer returned the lead to Wellesley and eventually resulted in a 25-12 margin at the intermission.
In the second half, Tech chipped away at the deficit as it narrowed it to nine (29-20) on a jumper by Kimberly Soo Hoo after 3:45 had elapsed. A trey on Wellesley's next possession returned its advantage to double-digits, which never dropped below 10 points for the rest of the game.
Darchelle Clark led MIT's rebounding efforts with a career-high nine boards. Cherelle Walls collected seven caroms while Soo Hoo finished with seven points.


text:
Aron Dereczynski
Born: May 5, 1922
Slonim, Poland
Aron and his three sisters were raised in a traditional Jewish family in the town of Slonim. Most of Slonim's inhabitants were Jewish, and the town had a long tradition of Hasidic scholarship. Aron's father, Chaim, owned a yard-goods and clothing store.
1933-39: Aron attended a Hebrew-language middle school and was active in the Zionist youth movement, Ha-Shomer ha-Tsa'ir. He had been accepted to study in an agricultural school in Palestine when war broke out in September 1939 and Slonim fell under Soviet rule. Unable to leave for Palestine, Aron attended a Soviet technical school.
1940-45: By 1941, I was in the Slonim ghetto. When it was being destroyed in 1942, my girlfriend, Lisa, and I escaped to the Grodno ghetto. We were about to be deported from Grodno when a Pole named Tadek helped smuggle Lisa and me to the train station. We planned to ride on the top of a train to Vilna. I jumped onto a moving car, climbed to the roof and found Tadek—but not Lisa! Tadek ran the full length of the train and found her, hanging on the side of a car. I held Tadek's legs and lowered him down. He grabbed Lisa's hand and pulled her onto the roof.
Aron and Lisa reached Vilna and fought with the partisans in the Naroch Forest until Soviet troops reached the area in 1944. After the war, the couple married and emigrated to the United States.


text:
Happy Talk Like a Pirate Day!Sep 19, 2012
Ahoy, matey! As afficionados of pirate paraphernalia we're happy to report that today, September 19th, is the 10th anniversary of International Talk Like a Pirate Day. Blimey!
Visit the official Talk Like a Pirate Day website to brush-up on all the pertinent pirate lingo and get to work on expertly rolling your rrrrrr's. Savvy?
Then grab your favorite tricorn hat, put on your Deluxe Pirate Eye Patch, perhaps even an Inflatable Tentacle Arm, and grab a fistful of Pirate Bandages (in case you or your fellow buccaneers cut yourselves on a cutlass or run into the mizzenmast) and have a rip-roaring, swashbuckling day. Yarrrr!
(Pictured above: The Seafair Pirates paying their annual visit to the Archie McPhee store.)


text: Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums :: View topic - Insect and animals Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!" FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in Insect and animals Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Pets View previous topic :: View next topic Author Message MissAnitaJoined: 10 Oct 2003Posts: 1Location: Istanbul, Turkey Posted: Fri Oct 10, 2003 1:48 am Post subject: Insect and animals Hello!! I am interested in finding out the favourite insect or animal of yours. I would like you to tell me something about it and if possible, please also give me a website address so I can have a look on it. Thank you. Miss Anita Back to top HenrietteJoined: 19 Sep 2003Posts: 9 Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 10:21 pm Post subject: HI HI I have a little rabbit and he is very sweet. Where do you come from???? I come from Germany!! What is your favourite pet??? Bye It would be nice if you write back. Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Pets All times are GMT - 8 Hours Page 1 of 1 Jump to: Select a forum Student Forums----------------ComputersCurrent NewsCultureEnglish SchoolsFamilyFilm and CinemaFoodHealth and FitnessHelp CenterHobbiesHolidaysLearning EnglishLiteratureMaking FriendsMusicOpinionsPetsScienceSportsThe Strange and MysteriousTOEFL and Other English ExamsTravel You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum Dave's ESL Cafe is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling. Banner Advertising | Bookstore / Alta Books | FAQs | Articles | Interview with Dave Copyright © 2018 Dave's ESL Cafe | All Rights Reserved | Contact Dave's ESL Cafe | Site Map Teachers College, Columbia University: Train to Teach English Here or Abroad Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group


text:
Selecting your vehicle's make, model, and year allows us to display only parts and items specific to your car's model and year.
Part# GBC9102
Be the First to Review
OPGI Price: $134.99
Part Type: (R) = Authentic reproduction of the original GM product
Years: 1961-1964
Sold As: EACH
Replace your existing worn or broken lower door hinges with our RESTOPARTS®-manufactured premium reproductions. Each is an unmistakable recreation of the original factory hinge complete with professional factory pre-installed springs, bushings and pins, where applicable. Bolt mounting holes will line up with ease. Your satisfaction is guaranteed!


text:
New research reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) suggests that autism may originate in utero, not toddlerhood, as many have long believed. Scientists at the University of California, San Diego, found that autistic children have about 67 percent more nerve cells than do other kids in the prefrontal cortex, a part of the brain that is involved in processing language, social behavior, and decision-making, reports TIME.com.
In this small, preliminary study, researchers looked at postmortem brain tissue from seven boys with autism and six without it, ranging in age from 2 to 16 when they died (from drowning or other accidents; determining how many neurons are in the brain can only be done after death). Researchers were surprised by their findings of an excess of neurons, given that deficits in social skills, like those typically exhibited by children affected by autism, are generally linked to less nerve tissue.
Plus: Parents' Experience with Autism
"When we think of the inability to handle complicated information, we usually think of too little in the way of connections or brain cells," said lead researcher Eric Courchesne, PhD, a professor of neurosciences at the UC-San Diego School of Medicine and director of the Autism Center of Excellence. "But this is just the opposite."
Dr. Courchesne explained that autistic children may have insufficient nerve connections because the excess of neurons may have created difficulty in their ability to connect and communicate with each other.
Plus: Age-By-Age Guide to Autism Spectrum Disorders
These findings are important because neurons or nerve cells start developing in the prefrontal cortex at the end of the first trimester of pregnancy—but do not continue after birth, meaning that events after birth couldn't have created such an oversupply of neurons. (Neurons are generated after birth in just two parts of the brain: in the hippocampus and in the olfactory bulb.)
Plus: Prenatal Vitamins May Reduce Risk of Autism
Although this was a small study, "Knowing that we have a specific type of defect that occurs very early in development really helps us to focus and sharpen the next steps in research to determine what caused the excess," said Dr. Courchesne.


text:
Opinion: South America's New Afghanistan
Bolivia is now a magnet for gangsters and Islamic fundamentalists. WSJ's Mary Anastasia O'Grady discusses how the country has become South America's new Afghanistan. Photo: AP
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.
... I ... the Afghanistan's over the border tiles but its Mary Anastasia O'Grady are America's columnist James ... Ivory so this is pretty disturbing report this week you are comparing ... Bolivia to ... not pre nine eleven Afghanistan which a that's about as bad as the dances is a situation Abedin Bolivian when you see is the parallel ... while they're a lot of troubling developments in in for Stovall Bolivia's pork Unchained landlocked country in the center of South America and so they're a lot of some Larry's just geographically Afghanistan ... I'm also you have a president there who ... I that's a bummer ounce he was elected on basically on the strength of cocoa growers who didn't like the fact that other presidents have been eradicating their crops and so forth ... and he's always been very connected to have the cocaine industry ... ah but he's really ratcheted up so I ... there's a lot more cocaine business coming out of the Libya ... and he's invited I think a number of different actors and of the country ... I in keeping with his anti American alliance with Venice Whelan ... on that and basically says to them come here you can have a safe haven ... you can get money and you can run your activities OKC have ... somewhere to Afghanistan for nine eleven this kind of lawless culture of heavy of ... alliance between those in power in the drug trade gap ... and of ... a lot of of funders of terrorism or actual terrorists Kana coming into the country ... toward the particular threats to their thatthe from around the world of ... for whatever reason did wrong to oblivion in alliance with smiles all the whole high-profile one that we know about is the Rhine ... and a Bolivia has made no secret about its relationship with Iran ... in fact all of the countries that are allied with Venice Whelan South America are also have these on ... these alliances with Iraq ... and I've that is allowing Iran to send ... an Islamic fundamentalist to do outreach culturally ... I and not economically and also ... politically ... and so you get a lot of extremists there were sort of sowing the seeds looking for radical eyes converts ... aam but the on top of that you have some other actors that are harder to ... uncover because I'm human Intel as you know it's very important ... and basically the da and the USA ID in most of that I'm American aid workers have been kicked out of the country so it's very hard to Colac Intel but my sources are telling me ... that I you're seeing an increasing number for example so my lease ... on this tree and non Santa Cruz ... and when you look at what we know about the debt campaign which is that it's going ... up from South America to Africa ... and and getting in disdain in ... in in the transit to Europe ... ah it makes perfect sense that you would have a lot more actors you know from Africa ok and a lot of people love ... to have a different view than we do on immigration talk about securing the border and big often the key ... people wanna work it out but is this an argument that maybe we should think about to ... more security given all the trouble makers that are gathering in this place in South America ... while certainly on this there's a risk that they would somehow try to get into the U S but I don't think the risk is only on the southern border and units also on the northern corridor intact ... one of the things I mention I pieces a report from the Canadian border Agency that says ... yet ... that I'm number of the refugees the high numbers the refugees that applied to getting to Canada over in recent years ... have come had been Iranians ... and many arenas comes to third ... countries ... and most of the search engines and a lot American countries and that's troubling because of this well I am not at Venice Whelan particular about all of the Alba countries are famous for creating fraudulent passports ... in fact I in my reporting have heard stories of ... Iranians who were who ... heard stories of the Libyan officials who say ... that they were directed by higher ups ... to process papers for a rainy inspired ID documents for inside the country and passports ... and so that would be a way for them to get you know once they get the Canon under refugee status ... I'd you know they could I think you get into the U S previously ... now the Canadians for Chile are really good allies of ours and I mean they've they're concerned about the skill ... but the point is that we have two very large foreigners and I think ... of the risk that most of them coming and I knew their border and for that matter coming in Thailand and I mean by sea excuse me ... I'm is ... not unheard of when and ... where would the also argues for ... more intelligence looking at selling Hamilton things for sure ...


text:
SEO Malaysia by RankingMatter.com is аn SEO optimization service соmраnу іn Malaysia that guarantees ranking rеѕult fоr wеbѕіtеs & generate more traffics.
SEO Malaysiaadmin 123 days ago News seo malaysia All https://rankingmatter.com Discuss
FINTECHFX.com is a state of art trading platform designed to provide access to opportunities beyond the conventional boundaries. More info, contact: [email protected]
Mercedes Service Workshop Malaysia - Mercedes Workshop provides alternative one-stop, full-range of European car service, repair & maintenance in Malaysia. Call for best Mercedes-Benz service promotion price 012-449 6696
Best restaurant in KL by Baan26 is one of the Malaysia's best restaurant for Authentic Thai food in Changkat Bukit Bintang, Kuala Lumpur. At Baan26, you will find whatever you are looking for to satisfy those hunger pangs, an award winning restaurant in Malaysia. Try us out today!
Century Battery Malaysia are authorized dealer for Century battery Malaysia. Century Battery Malaysia supplies car battery around kuala lumpur and selangor.
Travel Agent Malaysia - MalaysianDiscovery.com.my is a duly licensed Malaysian Tours & Travels Agency specializing in inbound and outbound tour services in Kuala Lumpur. Accredited by The ministry of tourism Malaysia. [email protected]
Visited Coffee Nowhere for Lunch at West Coast Plaza.
Went there for their Smoked Duck Pizza but everything tasted so good.
Coffee Nowhere
154 West Coast Rd, Singapore 127371
Went there for their Smoked Duck Pizza but everything tasted so good.
Coffee Nowhere
154 West Coast Rd, Singapore 127371
Visited Craft Cafe in Yangon that have s arguably the Best Burger in the area. Decided to do a short video hope you guys enjoy it.


text:
Details & Dimensions
- Requires home-assembly.
- W130 x H76 x D60cm.
- Oak veneer top and powder coated legs
Product Code: 268329
Delivery & Returns
Home Delivery
Delivery UK Mainland & Northern Ireland
FREE returns on selected orders.
Delivery UK Mainland & Northern Ireland
FREE delivery for selected orders over £50
£4.95 for orders under £50
Normally delivered within 3-5 working days.
Delivery Republic of Ireland:
Standard Service = £12
FREE returns on selected orders.
Click here to see more on our Delivery & Returns page.
Care Instructions
- Dust regularly with a clean dry cloth.
- Wipe up any spills immediately with a damp cloth and then dry the surface with a clean dry duster.
- Repeat this procedure for periodic cleaning.
- The use of furniture polish or spray is not necessary or recommended.
- Always use place mats and coasters to protect the surface from moisture and heat.
Shop More:


text:
First Female Member Of New York Stock Exchange Dies
The first woman to buy a seat on the New York Stock Exchange and head one of its member firms has died.
Muriel "Mickie" Siebert died Saturday in New York at age 80, The New York Times reports. The cause was complications of cancer.
Here's more from The Times:
"Ms. Siebert, known to all as Mickie, cultivated the same brash attitude that characterized Wall Street's most successful men. She bought her seat on the exchange in 1967, but to her immense anger, she remained the only woman admitted to membership for almost a decade.
She was one of the pioneers in the discount brokerage field, as she transformed Muriel Siebert & Company (now a subsidiary of Siebert Financial) into a discount brokerage in 1975, on the first day that Big Board members were allowed to negotiate commissions.
She also was the first woman to be superintendent of banking for New York State, appointed by Gov. Hugh Carey in 1977. She served five years during a rocky time when banks were tottering and interest rates were skyrocketing."
In a 2003 interview with NPR, Siebert spoke of the challenges she faced when she first began working on Wall Street: "I had changed jobs two or three times because when I was making $13,000 a year, they [men] were making $20[000]," she said. "You know, that's a quality of life decision at that kind of money."


text:
SANTA CLARA, Calif. (AP) Stevie Johnson had produced three straight 1,000-yard seasons with 23 touchdown catches as Buffalo's most dynamic player in the passing game when that streak ended in frustrating fashion last year.
His 12-game total: 52 catches, 597 yards and three TDs.
There were injuries, and a tough personal moment with the unexpected death of his mother.
Now he has a chance to start a new streak with his new team, back home in the Bay Area. Even if the skeptics wonder whether he can still show signs of returning to his former football self.
''That's with everything. I can't say that's my direct focus. I know there are people who are saying I can't do it again, I know there are people saying that I can,'' Johnson said. ''All I've got to do is put my head down and keep working, work with my brothers and see how it goes.''
The 28-year-old Johnson, who was born in San Francisco and went to high school in Fairfield, came to the 49ers in a trade from the Bills on the second day of the NFL draft in May. In a talented and deep receiving corps, Johnson is confident he can still have a big impact whatever his role.
During one recent practice, he made a leaping 25-yard catch on a pretty pass by Blaine Gabbert along the right sideline while easily landing both feet inbounds as an official signaled the reception. That came a day after Johnson dropped a ball in the end zone.
He will get his first game action chance in Thursday's preseason opener at Baltimore.
''Stevie is Stevie. He gets open. He makes plays. Very excited to see what he does in live action for us,'' quarterback Colin Kaepernick said Tuesday before the team departed for the East Coast. ''Stevie's a pro. He's picked up the offense quickly. He makes very few mistakes in the little time that he's been here. As a quarterback, you like to see that.''
With the Bills, Johnson became the first player in team history to reach 1,000 yards receiving in consecutive seasons. He spent the past four seasons as a starter in Buffalo, yet will have to compete for playing time in this receivers group - the best that fourth-year quarterback Kaepernick has seen so far.
Kaepernick has quickly found a rhythm with Johnson, saying that was ''pretty easy'' given the separation the athletic 6-foot-2 wideout creates.
''Very quick, very deceptive, and I'm happy he's on our side of the ball,'' Kaepernick said.
Best suited to play an inside slot position, Johnson has 301 total receptions for 3,842 yards and 28 touchdowns. Much like new teammate and fellow receiver Anquan Boldin, Johnson has been known to show his emotions and let loose while celebrating.
Yet now, Johnson seems determined to keep his mouth shut and show that he can still be the dominant playmaker he once was.
''Yeah, for sure. When you come off three straight 1,000 (yard seasons) and you don't get it the year after that, it's always, `You've got to get better.' You feel like you've got to be better than last year,'' he said. ''That's the goal collectively as a team. The Niners, they didn't win a Super Bowl, and we feel we have to get there and win.''
Not only was Johnson slowed by injuries, he was excused by the team for the final two games of the season following the death of his mother.
A fresh start is welcome out West, where as a boy he used to throw rocks into San Francisco Bay off Candlestick Point. A bit bummed out he won't play in The Stick, Johnson sees this as an opportunity to help San Francisco establish some momentum in its sparkling new $1.2 billion Levi's Stadium.
There are expectations playing close to home, too.
''That's just like the 1,000-yard thing,'' Johnson said. ''It's good to be home but at the same time it's kind of tough because you have everybody in your ear. You can take it either way. I'm an optimistic type of guy, so I think it's cool. Every day is cool so far.''
Notes: Offensive coordinator Greg Roman said it hasn't been decided whether RB Frank Gore will play Thursday. ... On simplifying the offensive playbook this offseason, Roman said, ''It was time to clean out the garage.''
AP NFL website: www.pro32.ap.org and www.twitter.com/AP-NFL


text:
With all the buzz about extra screen real estate boosting productivity, you can now make a legitimate case to your boss to spring for some big wide-screen displays. You might face an uphill battle, but Dell is making the argument easier with the Dell E207WFP, a 20-inch wide-screen LCD that retails for $260. It surely won't win any awards for its average styling or lackluster performance, but we were pleasantly surprised to see its DVI input is HDCP compliant. Performance-wise, this set scored relatively low on our DisplayMate tests, so gamers, imaging professionals, and videophiles may want to look elsewhere. That being said, the low list price makes this an attractive option as a budget LCD where performance isn't a necessity.
The design of the Dell E207WFP will be familiar to those who already own Dell LCDs, which means it's average looking but not unattractive. The display can be tilted 4 degrees forward and 21 degrees back, but it lacks the ability to pivot or swivel, and its height is nonadjustable. The onscreen display controls are on the front of the panel, but we found navigation a bit tedious. Unlike some other displays we've seen, there are no extras like speakers or media card slots.
Manufacturer's specs
- Resolution: 1,680x1,050
- Dot pitch: .258 mm
- Pixel-response rate: 5ms
- Contrast ratio: 800:1
- Viewing angle: 160 degrees horizontal, 160 degrees vertical
- Connectivity: DVI, VGA
- HDCP compliant
- Included VGA cable
The budget price is a good indicator of the Dell E207WFP's performance--for this display, you get what you pay for. The results from CNET Labs' benchmarks showed some poor color performances, sharpness issues, and small amounts of streaking. In other words, this isn't the ideal display for DVD viewing and game playing. Tested at its native resolution of 1,680x1,050, the Dell E207WFP's score of 68 was significantly lower than another 20-inch Dell we've reviewed, the 2007WFP. And while the 2007WFP is a more expensive at $359, it has significantly more connectivity and extras to go with its enhanced performance. Casual home and business users will probably be safe saving the extra bucks and going with the E207WFP, while more critical viewers will want to want to look elsewhere.


text:
For example you are planning to work on a report after dinner and when the house is quiet only to be 'surprised' by the electricity going off at 8 pm, since it won't be back before 11 pm at least and it's cold and you'rw freezing, there is not much to do really except go to bed.
That's why I'm awake now at 3 am, I slept from 8 pm till midnight when the electricity returned and then I played catch up with emails and such. But that's not the story....
While I fell asleep, I started dreaming that I was having difficulty swallowing and something was choking me in my throat; so in the dream I'm there poking my fingers inside my mouth trying to find the obstruction. Moving around I discover a string which I start to pull at with both my hands just like a floss string that I'm pulling out of my throat it seems. I feel better each time a section of it is coming out and it's really long, black and full of dripping mucus, this keeps going apparently for hours in the dream as I'm aware of monitoring the process with a wall clock, until finally I kind of hit rock bottom with this and the string is pulling at something in my throat and this part is now painful so I look in the mirror to try assess what is it that is stuck to the string only to find out that it is woven or pierced into the uvula in my throat ( believe me I had to check this term online as I never knew it although from numerous Tom and Jerry shows I knew what it was supposed to look like :P ).
In the dream, when I see this I know that I can no longer remove this string on my own and will need some type or surgical assistance, just like removal of a piercing but I have the fear of loosing the string if I put what's left of it back in my mouth. I'm already gagging at the thought.. so I cut the string to a manageable lenght about a metre and leave it hanging out of my mouth and simply continue freaking about how did I ever get into this kind of situation anyway...and I wake up when the lights in my room are back because the electricity in real life is back!
Would anyone care to offer any interpretation ? Can't be an indigestion can it ? it's too vivid


text:
Wednesday, 149 jurors were questioned in the Anthony Sowell murder trial and only 62 are getting called back. That's 87 dismissed!
The focus remains on the potential jurors views on the death penalty and what they've heard about the case so far. Some lawyers close to the case tell 19 Action News that they are confident they will seat a jury, despite the massive publicity.
Cops meantime are still standing guard outside Anthony Sowell's Imperial Avenue home, despite police layoffs.
We could still be weeks away from testimony, but according to the case docket, witnesses are now being subpoenaed, and arrangements made for certain deputies to watch over jurors if they get sequestered.
Sowell could go to death row for killing 11 women.
He currently remains in isolation in the Cuyahoga County jail.
CCopyright 2011 WOIO. All rights reserved.