Why would anyone use prediction models when we can use real mortality data?
Answer: Because you can't make bodies appear out of thin air, but you can make fake projections appear out of thin air.
When we look at mortality data what do we see? All cause mortality went down. HIV Infection rates went down. AIDS related deaths went down. Coverage went up.
As predicted, USAID was just a Democrat slush fund they used to pay their activists, journalists and NGO workers. Which is the real reason why you're freaking out over this.
Most on the right don't understand the distinctions between woke and Marxism. Tempting to say: "It's all the same thing." Sort of, but not really.
The differences matter a lot as anti-woke Marxists like Walter Benn Michaels (below) has been arguing for years.
I explain:
Ensuring an illegal alien isn’t in the voting booth next to mine, canceling out my vote, is far more important to me than building more affordable starter homes.
The best thing the Trump administration could do in response to communist terrorists being elected by NYC dems is to just denaturalize and deport them using the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Communist Control Act of 1954.
They are completely within their rights to do this. It will create a national scandal that will force mainstream democrats to defend these radical communists which they don't want to do, they want to ignore them.
Most importantly it sets a precedent and severely hampers the long term plans of the DSA Communist left.
JPMorgan didn't have much of a choice in hiring her. Judges have been ordering companies & bureaucracies to hire race/sex appropriate HR bosses since the 1970s, & Section 342 of Dodd-Frank Act (2010) required government reviews of bank diversity statistics.
In Trump's first year USCIS approved 3M fewer applications, State issued 100k fewer student visas & revoked 100k other visas, and DHS terminated 1.5M legal statuses while removing 670k illegals.
Altogether Trump's 2025 restrictions may have impacted up to 6 million immigrants.
Republicans cancel their radicals, and Democrats elect them to Congress.
Imagine a White Republican from Alabama who wins a Congressional primary in an R+30 district on the following platform:
>Openly declaring that Franco and Pinochet were based
>Abolishing all Federal civil rights laws
>Placing machine guns along the southern border
>Abolishing all immigration courts and giving the President direct authority to remove all illegals immediately after they're found
>Colonialism was a good thing, the Europeans should have never left, and we need a second Scramble for Africa because the overwhelming majority of these nations are failed states that cannot govern themselves
>Expelling every Muslim in America from the country
>Dissolving all state universities, expropriating their endowments, and sending every sociology professor in America to Gitmo
>Repealing Hart-Cellar and re-implementing the National Origins Formula, while explicitly banning anyone with a majority Third World ancestry (Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia) from emigrating to the United States at all
What do you think the average Republican would do with such a person the morning after they won a primary in a Safe R district in the Deep South?
Do you think they'd be tweeting that "the people have spoken and we need to be bolder," or do you think they'd be going on CNN to condemn "racism and fascism" while waxing poetically about how "these aren't the conservative values my party stands for"?
WATCHING ‘RADIO GENOA: THE MOVIE’ MOVIE ‘CITIZEN VIGILANTE’ (2026) WITH A LATINA WOMAN
Saw some talk about ‘the new movie where an American goes round shooting immigrants in Europe’ - proposed watching it to my Latina ‘friend’. She wasn’t convinced by the pitch at first, she wanted to watch Toy Story 5 (2026). I said okay and we went to watch Toy Story 5. It was fine but I don’t know why the film exists, it has the exact same emotional beats as the previous movies. Anyway after we came back it was still early so we watched ‘Citizen Vigilante’ (2026) too
“Do you know what’s happening with immigration in Europe? You know there is a lot of it right?”
“Mmm, I read France will become Muslim”
“Where did you read that?”
“Instagram”
“Have you ever been to France?”
“No”
“Well he’s killing immigrants and the people who let immigrants settle in Europe in this movie”
“Alright”
She didn’t seem particularly fazed by the premise, an action film about ‘a man assassinating Muslims’ you assume not regarded as as ‘problematic’ in Latin America. I was more fazed by the premise than her to be honest. Was sort of watching the entire film with a raised eyebrow while she was just scrolling her phone
Lead is a presumably autistic ex-soldier played by Armie Hammer. Don’t know if the character is partially Bronze Age Pervert inspired. He quotes Nietzche, visits prostitues etc. It’s a bit of that and then the rest is Brenton Tarrant-core. Actually this isn’t fair to BAP, the dialogue is not that level of subtle. It’s incredibly ‘chuddy’, would say some of the most ‘chud’ dialogue ever put to screen. Hammer has a lot of what are quite Brenton Tarrant-esque monologues. Very mass shooter manifesto - “What if everything you were ever taught was wrong?” etc
Didn’t realise it was the same actor who plays the older guy Timothée Chalamet spends a steamy gay Italian summer with in ‘Call Me By Your Name’ (2017). He was a convincing pederast in that. I assume Hammer is doing a film like this now because he got MeTooed afterwards
The acting is very flat throughout - even Hammer delivers his lines in an earnest in a shouty American way robotic angry autist tone. Maybe the acting is an intentional stylistic choice who knows? Will say either way it sort of works for what the film is - in Hammer’s case it does actually fit the character. Actually makes him a more convincing autist in the midst of what amounts to the giant ‘chud out’ that is the film’s plot. Distracting for the first fifteen minutes to be sure but then you just go with it
For me one strange decision the movie makes is to set itself in Zagreb, Croatia of all places. From the trailer I thought it was set in Sweden or Germany or something because of the grey Euro filter the film has but no it’s Zagreb. If you’ve ever been to Zagreb you’ll know the city is boring but basically fine. In real life Zagreb (let alone Croatia) doesn’t really have a huge number of migrants and most of those migrants it does have are Indian, Filipino, Nepali etc. And, most of them only arrived in the past 5-10 years, in the main since… 2018. If you go outside of Zagreb too you will barely see any of these migrants. That includes in Split, Dubrovnik, Rijeka etc. Look it doesn’t matter but it doesn’t really make any sense
(Director) Uwe Boll is German but it still feels like Zagreb serves as a confused stand in for ‘Europe’ in the abstract. Is Boll confused in that way himself? Americans who have difficulty distinguishing between the different parts of Europe will compartmentalise it like it is just some generic city in ‘Europe’. Europe is Europe, it’s the same everywhere after all. What is Europe nowadays? Muslims, rape gangs etc. To be fair, Zagreb as it is depicted (ie grey Euro filter and nondescript with Euro characteristics), a lot of European cities do look like this. You can imagine it as Sweden, Germany etc so it might as well be. Who cares? It’s a good example of the film’s indiscriminate chud logic
[1/2]