In 2011, nonwhite babies born in America outnumber white. Does this matter?

[Blackberry]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

Why wouldn't she be considered white?

Because she's Mexican and doesn't look white? I know there are white Mexicans, but most aren't, and she doesn't look like one who is.

Would you argue that Jennifer Esposito and Marisa Tomei aren't white?

I have no idea. I don't know anything about them or what they look like.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by BrainGlutton

What reason?

For the specific things I mentioned?

A lot of problems start in mess halls and yards because it's where you've got the biggest crowds gathered. If there are rumors that two rival gangs are heading for a confrontation, other prisoners who don't want to get involved will avoid those areas. So if we see a drop-off in the number of prisoners eating meals or going to the yard, we'd investigate why.

A similar thing existed with sick calls. You look for patterns. If an unusually large number of prisoners are calling in sick in one particular area, like the laundry for example, if may be because they're trying to avoid some situation in that area.

You watch the amount of packages because prisoners try to stock up on food if they expect there's going to be a problem.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by grude

Finding hidden cyborgs?

Hmm prisoner#95440 hasn't eaten anything in three weeks, move in team!

What I described above was the group numbers. We had a separate system for watching individuals. If a prisoner refused nine meals in a row he was considered to be on a hunger strike and there was a whole procedure set up for that.

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by Der Trihs

Very few, until the Republican party drastically remakes itself. There's plenty of conservative non-whites now who vote Democrat simply because of the deep, entrenched racism of the Republicans.

This could be a fair point, but trying to extend it into the future too far fails on historical evidence.

Consider the Reagan Democrats. Outside the South, they were composed of all the ethnic Europeans with strong Catholic roots who had consistently voted Democrat from before the time of Wilson--and became an absolute lock by the Democrats from the time of FDR. Changes in politics, changes in economics, changes in world views all came together to shift them, almost en masse, into the Republican sphere. Once Reagan's personal charm had passed, the economy suffered following the First Gulf War, and Clinton brought his own brand of popularity to the political arena, many of them wandered back toward the Democrats, but a very large number of them never shifted away from the Republican Party. The same thing will quite possibly occur again in the future. All politics are local and the constituencies that appear to be cast in concrete, today, can often be found moving when specific issues bring pressure on them.

The notion, (asserted and disputed, above), that the "Hispanic vote" is a monolith fails spectacularly when it is subjected to any sort of examination. While there is a fair amount of suppoprt for the Left among immigrants and their children from Mexico and Central America, Hispanics from Cuba tilt very strongly to the Right. Puerto Ricans may tend Left, but their specific issues tend to differ from those from those of Central America and may fracture in local politics. Immigrants from Venezuela who are trying to avoid the socialism of Chavez and immigrants from Colombia or Bolivia who are trying to put the drug wars behind them are likely to tilt Right, as well.

Hispanic voters may trend Left by the current numbers if one simply looked at a simplistic analysis by majority vote, based on the locations of the greatest numbers of immigrants, but those aggregatre numbers do not reflect the ways in which the positions change on a state by state basis and ignore the fact that the numbers are not cast in concrete and can change with local conditions.

[JBGUSA]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

This could be a fair point, but trying to extend it into the future too far fails on historical evidence.

Consider the Reagan Democrats.

I happen to be Jewish and Jews, by and large, are solidly Democratic voters. I registered for the Democratic Party in the lobby of my high school during May 1975, a month after I turned 18. I voted for Jimmy Carter in both 1976 and 1980, and for Hugh Carey for governor in 1978. Then, Reagan happened.

While I did not approve of everything he did or wanted to do, but he accomplished certain things I felt needed doing:

1. Breaking the power of organized labor through the handling of the PATCO strike;
2. Breaking the Communist empire; and
3. Eliminating many tax loopholes in the Tax Reform Act of 1986.

Thus, I voted for Reagan in 1984 and Bush in 1988, and Bush II in 2004. Other elections I voted for the Democrats, though I may have voted for Dole in order to hold Clinton's numbers down in his inevitable re-election.

Thus, no political alignment of an ethnic group should be considered permanent or universal.

[Farmer Jane]

None of this matters if the non-white babies don't grow up to become non-white voting adults.

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by JBGUSA

1. Breaking the power of organized labor through the handling of the PATCO strike;
2. Breaking the Communist empire; and
3. Eliminating many tax loopholes in the Tax Reform Act of 1986.

Anyone wishing to discuss these points, either to challenge them or affirm them, please open a new thread to do so.

[ /Moderating ]

[BrainGlutton]

Originally Posted by Farmer Jane

None of this matters if the non-white babies don't grow up to become non-white voting adults.

Why wouldn't they?

[Ibn Warraq]

Originally Posted by Blackberry

Because she's Mexican and doesn't look white?

That comment is moronic.

First of all, she's not "Mexican" her family has been living in the US for centuries. Secondly please explain how she "doesn't look white".

She's rather obviously of 100% or nearly 100% European descent.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

Anyone wishing to discuss these points, either to challenge them or affirm them, please open a new thread to do so.

I won't argue JBGUSA's claims but I think his (her?) post illustrates a common phenomena. A charismatic figure like FDR or JFK or Reagan can persuade a lot of voters to change their party allegiance. And once they do that they often show the proverbial faith of the converted and become the most devoted members of their new party.

So I don't think major political shifts are caused by demographic trends as much as they're caused by the random appearance of charismatic leaders. You can't predict it in advance because nobody can predict when these individuals will appear of which party they will belong to.

[elfkin477]

Originally Posted by Nava

My first thought was "bet they're counting Latinos as not white, regardless of actual color"

I want to know the methodology too. They definitely mention "mixed race." How mixed? My mother's half Latino/black, so they'd definitely count her as "non-white" for census purposes despite her looking like the poster child for whiteness. How about Vynce and I at 1/4th "non-white"? What about my hypothetical offspring, and nieces and nephews at 1/8th? A whole crapload of people that everyone would agree are white are to varying extents mixed race, so the story just strikes me as sensationalism designed to worry old people.

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

That comment is moronic.

First of all, she's not "Mexican" her family has been living in the US for centuries. Secondly please explain how she "doesn't look white".

She's rather obviously of 100% or nearly 100% European descent.

She's done interviews for Hispanic Heritage Month about her status as Mexican-American and how she's proud of her hispanic heritage. What part of Europe is Mexico?

[Blackberry]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

That comment is moronic.

First of all, she's not "Mexican" her family has been living in the US for centuries. Secondly please explain how she "doesn't look white".

She's rather obviously of 100% or nearly 100% European descent.

I figured you'd harp on the "Mexican" part, but I didn't say Mexican-American because that's not what I'd say IRL since we're talking about heritage and not nationality, and I knew my meaning was obvious.

According to Wikipedia, "Her DNA test results were: 70% European, 27% Asian/Indigenous, and 3% African.[56] Specifically, her indigenous American ancestry is Mayan." So yeah, she's a mixture of European and indigenous, like most Mexicans. I doubt she or anyone else other than you considers her white.

[grude]

Originally Posted by Blackberry

According to Wikipedia, "Her DNA test results were: 70% European, 27% Asian/Indigenous, and 3% African.[56] Specifically, her indigenous American ancestry is Mayan." So yeah, she's a mixture of European and indigenous, like most Mexicans. I doubt she or anyone else other than you considers her white.

WTF? There is so much wrong with that.

[Belowjob2.0]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

That comment is moronic.

First of all, she's not "Mexican" her family has been living in the US for centuries. Secondly please explain how she "doesn't look white".

She's rather obviously of 100% or nearly 100% European descent.

Depends on the social context. Here in LA, most people would read her as Latina, Mexican or Central American. But she could also easily be Armenian, Persian, Arab, or even a "light skinned black person". But this is LA, the land of brown and beige, where black folks and fair skinned white folks are both outliers.

In New York, she might be Sicilian or Puerto Rican. It would depend on where she lived, what kind of people she hung out with, other cultural cues.

Out in flyover country, there are a helluva lot of white folks, especially older white folks, who wouldn't see her as white. She just too dark for that. In small town Wisconsin, for example, white means you can see blood in the face. It means you burn if you spend a day out in the summer sun.

eta,

The other part of social context is who you date and marry. Intermarriage with the historical white American community is the gold standard as far as measuring assimilation is concerned. People who do this routinely are either white or well on the way to becoming white.

Longoria married a black identified multi racial guy, so she's probably not white at all, in a social context.

[Kobal2]

Originally Posted by BlinkingDuck

That is what will happen in the future. The Republicans will jettison their racist and nutjob part...will suffer for a few years and then be a true party of fiscal conservatives as their main platform.

Fiscal ? Social, more like. In my experience, recent immigrants (at least those who come from overwhelmingly Catholic countries) don't give that many fucks about the budget being balanced to the fifth decimal, but they do care about marriage being between a man and a woman like it was in the old country.

Originally Posted by Brain Glutton

Why wouldn't they?

At a guess: X-on-non-white crime, felony arrest (which IIRC precludes one from voting in the US) and US Army rah-rah bang dead. All of which would be equally valid for white babies if there wasn't a relatively straightforward correlation between skin tone and poverty in Western nations.

[Farmer Jane]

Originally Posted by Ibn Warraq

That comment is moronic.

First of all, she's not "Mexican" her family has been living in the US for centuries. Secondly please explain how she "doesn't look white".

She's rather obviously of 100% or nearly 100% European descent.

Well, what does she identify as?

I mean, my friends' family was in the US while it was still Mexico, but she identifies as a Mexican-American. They all do.

And no, she does not look 'white'. She looks Latina to me. (Obviously so, since she almost always plays Latina characters in movies.)

[grude]

Originally Posted by Belowjob2.0

Intermarriage with the historical white American community is the gold standard as far as measuring assimilation is concerned. People who do this routinely are either white or well on the way to becoming white.

Longoria married a black identified multi racial guy, so she's probably not white at all, in a social context.

LOL WHUT?

Has anyone in all of history gone from being identified as non-white to white because they marry a white spouse?! I'm sorry that simply doesn't happen, and it doesn't go the other way either.

[BigT]

In order to be white, your Latino characteristics have to have faded enough that people would not think you had any Latino ancestry just by looking. Everything about Eva Mendez still looks Latino, from the olive skin tone to the eyebrow shape.

Charlie Sheen, on the other hand, is someone whose Latino ancestry is not visible.

I don't know why people think it has anything to do with how long you've lived in America or even how many generations of white ancestors you have. There are only two criteria ever used: how you self-identify, and what you look and sound like. Ancestry is only relevant in how it affects that.

[Belowjob2.0]

Originally Posted by grude

LOL WHUT?

Has anyone in all of history gone from being identified as non-white to white because they marry a white spouse?! I'm sorry that simply doesn't happen, and it doesn't go the other way either.

I feel sorry for you too.

Intermarriage rates are one of the most important metrics for assimilation. Basic sociology. A group of people is socially white when they routinely date, and marry whites.

Like the Chinese in Jim Crow Mississippi. They sued to make sure they were not considered "colored" and not forced to send their kids to segregated schools. They prevailed, sent their kids to the white schools, and routinely intermarried with whites. So they were socially white.

[JRDelirious]

Originally Posted by BigT

Everything about Eva Mendez still looks Latino, from the olive skin tone to the eyebrow shape.

Charlie Sheen, on the other hand, is someone whose Latino ancestry is not visible.

Oy... Not all of us are of such significant Native or African ancestry. A LOT of us look like... well, like the transplanted Spaniards our great-great-grandparents were. Southern Europeans, if anything we look Mediterranean and may get confused with Italians, Greeks or Israelis. Once in a while someone tells me surprisedly that I don't look Puerto Rican... and a couple of times they were clumsy enough to say I "looked white". To which my answer was, I am, and let the gears grind as they try and process that.