I don't think American whites would domiante much of anything anymore. 

Hate to say it but I do think too many Americans are lazy and the test scores show mediocre results for Americans considering the amount of money spent on education in this country the return is really lame. 

Americans are obsessed with too much superficial idiocy like becoming famous/rich, finding out "me" (here's a pro-tip -- you're not a special snowflake), and distracted by consuming 3 lifetimes worth of media. Oh and like 2/3 of the country is overweight. 

No emphasis on work ethic. People can shit on Mexicans all day, but from what I see, the average Mexican immigrant in the US works their ass off. Cleaning puke off hotel bedsheets or picking fruit in the blistering sun for a few bucks an hour can't be easy by my estimation, I don't think the "average" American could work a week like that without wanting to go home and cry to mommy. 

America's never been a real "homogenous" society, even in the past, Italians lived in their part of the city, Irish lived in their part of the city, if you were Catholic you didn't marry a Protestant or even date one, that would be scandolous, and you treated black people like subhumans, etc. etc. We are just going through another wave of immigration which will over time homogenize itself. Europe I think does a considerably worse job at integrating for some reason, I'm not specifically sure why that is. 

Wow, you're pessimistic. American whites do just as well as European whites:

http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/12/overall-pisa-rankings-include-america.html

The US government spends so much money because they are attempting to equalize achievement across races, an endeavor which is doomed to fail. Sure, Mexican immigrants have a great work ethic (usually,) but IQ is everything in a modern economy.

The Italians and Irish were able to integrate because they were white. No multiracial society has ever successfully homogenized itself. At best, America will end up Anglo-Brazil, with a pale-skin upperclass and dark-skin underclass, just like nearly every other Latin American country. Racism won't even go away, it'll just transform into an even more direct color-ism.

Personally I think IQ is a bit overrated. Work ethic I think is the main barometer for success in life along with financial literarcy/discipline, but that doesn't really have anything to do with IQ, anyone can learn what an index fund is and what compounding interest is (and if you don't know these things, put down your college textbook and learn, because it'll do you a helluva more in life than that college degree will). I know plenty of "smart" people who scored great on I.Q. tests who are earning maybe 1/3 or 1/4 what other people I know are, and it simply boils down to they don't have have any drive. 

It's similar with athletes, I've seen athletes who have a lot of natural talent, but they just have no work ethic. And I've seen people who don't have the natural talent, but they work their ass off, gimme the dude who's working his ass off. That's who I want on my team. 

Human society will homogenize eventually, we are already getting there. English will become a global language, there will be a singular popular culture (already getting there), eventually we will leave this planet. 

I see that all as pretty much inevitable. It seems like a "big concept" but so does having sex with a woman to a 12-year-old just starting puberty. But the wheels are already in motion once your hormones start to shift, lol. 

That's basically how I looked at us as a species, we are like an 11/12 year old ... we are still believe in a lot of stupid shit, but we're not a toddler or little kid anymore that can't be left unsupervised without mom and dad for any period of time. We've hit some important mile stones (we can dress ourselves, certainly we don't wear diapers anymore, we don't cry when mom drops us off at school like we did the first day of Kindegarten). We have some understanding of the world around us, but many things are a mystery. We are mature in some ways, but still painfully childish in others. 

The onset of the computer microchip and space travel is basically going to be  "puberty" for the human race, once that starts it can't be undone. 

So I don't neccessarily look at past models as the basis of anything. Yes societies have tended to live in isolated enclaves ... because none of our distant forefathers had access to any type of rapid transport without a high chance of getting killed on the journey (lol). Nor has there really ever been a universal language or such an even playing field where anyone has access to information and economic access even. Anyone can invest in the stock market, it's not confined to one country. Once you remove these barriers, you basically are in a very different ball game. 

things could be a lot worse than they are now. I would like improvements, change, yes- but Donald Trump is not the answer. Someone like Sanders was the answer and the rich/media cheated him in more ways than one.

Someone like Ron Paul is the answer too.

Both Clinton and Trump aren't the answers. Clinton is a puppet controlled by the lobbying corporate sector, like most politicians, and Trump is an egotistical maniac billionaire who will never care MORE about the interests of the American people over his own.

Both are incredibly flawed. But at least with Clinton you most likely have a level of consistency with the status quo rather than the dangerous possibility of highly dramatic things happening.

You don't know what Trump will say, what he will do- he won't care about offending foreign leaders, he won't care about starting international conflicts that cause wars and the death of soldiers and citizens- why? because he knows he and his family won't be damaged from that sort of thing. If anything big business often does better in the longterm (rich / poor gap divide) turning times of economic struggle and/or war.

I mean listen to some of the things Trump says- lowing taxes on the rich and the corporations when the gap between the wealthy and the poor is practically the BIGGEST it is has been in the history of the country?

like I say, both candidates are poor, but at least you don't have to worry about Hilary getting prideful at an international summit and insulting the leader of Iran and starting WW3. A good leader needs some level of tact and the ability to know both WHEN to speak and WHAT to say. Donald knows neither

just because you're ill informed on politics and want change doesn't mean you should automatically say "omg I'm going to pick the 'different' candidate because it means something will change!". I'm sure the Germans had the same excited attitude about Hitler

strong comparison, but the reality is that no one with their head on straight who pays any attention can honestly suggest that its safe to have a hothead self obsessed person like Trump for President. I think we all appreciate his honesty but he is getting WAY too much credit for speaking his own mind and being somewhat anti establishment. News flash: he's a billionaire who can't be damaged much by what he says, that's why he does. its the same reason he would make a terribly poor President, his actions will generally not hugely effect himself in a negative respect regarding the economy, war, government decisions-

when you're worth billions you A) aren't that concerned with the small things that effect everyone and B) cannot at all relate to the average Joe

I will say again though ... getting back to the original point ... if you are against big money in politics, then organize. Make your voice heard, not just in presidential elections, but in electing your senators/congressmen/women.

Educate yourself and make your voice heard, and do not expect results overnight. That is the other part of the equation that isn't so sexy -- you need to be persistent if you want change.

In the general election yes.

But americans need to get off their asses and actually vote and pay attention in senate and house races and in the presidantial primaries.

Bill Maher (on the bolded section):

"...when the talk turns to election I hear some version of 'they're both bad' or 'they deserve each other' or 'there's an election?'.  Republicans have one path to victory in this election and it's called False Equivalency.  They can't deny Trump is horrible--it's on tape--so they want voters to believe Hillary is just as bad, and in pursuit of that goal they have a very powerful ally: lazy people.  People who like to say 'they're all bad' because when you say that you don't have to do any homework.

Say they're all the same and you can sound justifiably jaded by the entire process when really you just don't know anything.  You say you're cynical about politics?  Don't flatter yourself.  Cynical comes when you know too much.  You on the other hand haven't bothered to learn anything--which, Americans by the way, are capable of.

Noam Chomsky once observed that when he listens to a sports call-in show, he said 'it's plain that quite a high degree of thought and analysis is going into that.  People know all sorts of complicated details'.  On the other hand, he said 'when I hear people talk about, say, international affairs or domestic problems, it's at a level of superficiality that is beyond belief'.  In other words: we're not clueless, we just apply our brainpower to bullshit.

It's true.  Before people go out for a taco, they'll spend an hour on Yelp researching for the most authentic one.  All for something that will be out of your body in 15 minutes!  People will use six different websites to get a plane ticket for a weekend trip but they don't care who runs the world for four years.  I don't get how Millennials who can't tell these candidates apart have a hundred different subgenres for music that sounds like this (some electronic dance music plays for roundabout 3 seconds)."  /end quote

A quick overview of the False Equivalency Fallacy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

Case in point, try finding a politician that comes close to this: http://quantum-displacement.tumblr.com/post/146015554444/anti-trump-masterpost (be sure to follow all supporting links)

Or a politician who has flip-flopped more than this: http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/full-list-donald-trump-s-rapidly-changing-policy-positions-n547801

Trump is due in court for fraud at the end of November (due to his scam university) and has a court date in December for raping a 13 year old girl.  And you say they're all the same?  Three times you said it?  Four times?  At least you admit that's because of ignorance and not because you're jaded, but if you take the time to actually research and measure each of the candidates, the only logical conclusion is that a vote for Trump is indefensible.  Wanting change is great and all, but good change never comes from ignorance--you should want to change that first.

I canvassed for Justin Trudeau in Canada and I got a lot of younger guys who normally would vote to vote by simply talking to them about politics (and likely because they were talking to a girl, men lol)

The real problem with politics today is money in politics. And you want to put a money man at the head of it. Obama drinks and smokes. For somebody who claims ignorance you seem well-versed in false equivalence.

It's funny I knew instantly that you would be a Trump voter once I read the title claiming you are ignorant to politics. But your reasoning for why actually surprised me. It's actually irresponsible at the very least and revolting at worst. But it's your opinion and you have a right to it.

Still, if you change your mind and care to get educated on your candidate, check these links out.

http://www.attn.com/stories/10483/chart-compares-presidential-candidates-honesty

http://quantum-displacement.tumblr.com/post/146015554444/anti-trump-masterpost

The second one doesn't get meaty until halfway down when Crimes and Policy sections start.