Trump loses Utah. Surprise!
Which has more explanatory power, EGI Notes or the “movement?” Contrasting Trump in “liberal Massachusetts” to “conservative Utah” will leave the “movement” scratching its head and muttering about calipers and hunter-gatherers. The reality is that these primaries are a referendum on the perception of Trump as a “racist” right-wing populist (putting aside the fraudulent reality of the man) – ethnic gap indeed. Republican primaries are a particularly useful tool to discern (state-by-state) intra-White attitudes, since the vast majority of Republican voters are White Gentiles, and so therefore the results can be analyzed without the large non-White vote that impacts the general election.
And oh yeah, Utah is a “strange state.” Uh huh.
Minnesota, Idaho, Iowa, and Ohio are all “strange” also, I assume? “Movement” jackasses. (Complete with the usual VDARE “cheesecake” picture. Somewhere Beavis and Butthead snigger).
Of course, Arizona is ethnically similar to Utah (albeit without the Mormon ethnocultural component), but its severe immigration problems and controversies seems to have created a more “Southern White” attitude compared to other Western states. Anyway, in human affairs no paradigm is perfect; instead we look at broad trends. There will always be exceptions, always be outliers. In the broad sense, Lind’s thesis has more predictive power than alternatives – it does not have to hold true in every single state.
If Trump was to not garner the delegates needed to avoid an uncontested convention, the fault would lie primarily with the White voters of Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa, Idaho, Alaska, and Utah.