In some cases, there’s a fear about empowering the so-called Bernie wing of the party. But mostly, you hear quotes like this: “We like Keith [Ellison],” one “longtime Obama political ally” tells Thrush, who he spoke to in November. “But is he really the guy we need right now when we are trying to get all of those disaffected white working-class people to rally around our message of economic equality?” If Trump said something like this, you’d call it a dog whistle. It’s almost baffling that, given anonymity, this longtime Obama political ally didn’t just come out and say that what gives them pause about Ellison is who he is—that white working-class people won’t like a black Muslim in charge of the DNC.

In this case “dog whistle” just means something some shitlib imagines White voters want to hear. Heaping scorn on “disaffected white working-class people” is semitically correct. The reality is Ellison won’t be in charge of the DNC because jews don’t like him.

Civic nationalism doesn’t make sense in itself. There is no reason to expel the illegal non-Whites and keep the legal non-Whites. None of them belong in White Countries. A civic nationalist is either someone who is not allowed to be explicitly pro-White, or someone who sides with the Jews and takes part in the subversion of the pro-White movement.

Most people think Trump is pro-White but cannot be explicitly so. That’s enough for the Jews to claim that he is dog whistling. And it’s true that he says things White voters want to hear, but he doesn’t say everything they would like to hear. Even so, that’s an improvement. So there’s no need for coded language.

It’s not just that Trump doesn’t make explicitly pro-White speeches. I don’t think he is preparing pro-White policies either. He will simply try to be pro-American and not anti-White. There isn’t any duplicity. He knows he has to settle for compromise. He cannot be fully pro-White. He has to reckon with Jewish power. With fully pro-White positions, he wouldn’t’ve been elected, and he wouldn’t get any collaboration from the Republican anti-White traitors. But when he gets reelected in 2020, the pro-White side will be in a stronger position.

Of course, it’s hard to know if Trump is really or just vaguely pro-White. We hope he won’t betray White people. But if he is really pro-White, then I can say that I have been in a similar position as he in the past. I was not running for political office, I was just trying to put across my opinion on internet forums.

When I want to rant against race replacement, I go to the Daily Stormer. But 15 years ago, I used to write comments on Breton nationalist websites. Those websites were favorable to things like teaching Breton in Breton schools, creating a Breton TV station, maybe getting independence for Brittany, and so on. But most people there did not openly oppose race replacement. And in fact, some of the forums were moderated by stupid leftists (I now suspect some of them may have been Jews).

It’s very complicated for a commenter who is against race replacement to defend his views on a forum run by stupid leftists. You have to avoid using the words that will get you banned. They may accuse you of using coded language when you are simply trying to get heard in spite of the censorship.

All pro-White politicians find themselves in a similar situation. They are not using coded language, but they have to accept they cannot say everything publicly. And they have to lower their objectives.

Right now, everyone is holding their breath over this Electoral College thing on Dec 19. There is reason for concern.

Why might there lurk the rumored rogue Electors? 1. the Republican’s cushy bureaucratic side, like the Dems, want to maintain the status quo and may perceive Trump a threat. Trump has dissenters among them. 1. There is the (Trumped up) matter of Trump’s Russian and Chinese predispositions, respectively at odds, that many find churlish, and may use as excuses in an contest of loyalty between the voter populace (after all, what do the proletariat really know?) and national welfare (or shall i say, globalist welfare), be this judgment sensible or not.

The definition for “dog whistling” I provided in the post – a politician saying what White voters want to hear – comes closer to how jewsmedia and political pundits actually use the term.

Right, it’s not necessary to speak in code to non-Whites.
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-announces-a-plan-for-urban-renewal1
“DONALD J. TRUMP’S NEW DEAL FOR BLACK AMERICA”
Replacing black with White would be another holocaust.

But even so, if you ask White Democrat voters if they think the Clinton camp is out to get them, it’s obvious they will say no. Most White people still can’t believe the government wants to destroy them.

Union people are the worst. Even the ones that are in their 20s think it’s still 1980 and Dems are gonna save their Union jobs. They’re so focused on muh Union they miss the obvious anti-White message.