We know what’s coming and we are prepared.
📊 There's a popular saying that if you're not a liberal at 20, you have no heart, but if you're not a conservative by 40, you have no brain.
It might be more accurate to imagine that people's formative years have large, persistent impacts on their beliefs. A study by Andy Gelman showed how.
In the Gelman model, high presidential approval during a (White) birth cohort's teen years leads them to favor that president's party for the rest of their lives. Whatever the reason, it's as if they're acting to bring back the 'good old days' of their cognizant childhood. To get an idea of how this looks, look at Eisenhower Republicans:
The Eisenhower Republicans were those who missed most of the FDR years and were socialized in ten straight years of Republicans, of which the Eisenhower years had positive spin. As a result, that cohort became very pro-Republican, but then the very pro-Democrat Kennedy and Johnson years moderated them back to being a bit less pro-Republican.
The 1960s Liberals were born a bit later than the Eisenhower Republicans and they got to experience the pro-Kennedy and Johnson years in their formative years, but the next 25 years of strongly pro-Republican sentiment brought them to near-neutrality.
One of the most well-known political generations is the Reagan Conservatives. This generation got to experience strong pro-Republican sentiment and they ushered in the real Reagan Revolution: a cohort with strong pro-Republican leanings and little moderation due to the balance of sentiment between Clinton and Bush II, and Obama's nearly neutral sentiment.
Other cohorts like the New Deal Democrats and Millennials have their own biases that follow from the same dynamics, and if you plot them all together, you get a clear picture of the sentiment of the White electorate:
Now do note, I said Whites. This model works slightly better for non-Southern than for Southern Whites, and compared to those two groups, it works less than half as well for non-White minorities.
In any case, this model based on formative year impacts can explain roughly 90% of the variance in vote choices in the electorate. If you want to get people's votes, get them early in life, and you might be able to hold them through waves of less popular candidates from your own party.
Speaking at the WEF, Savor CEO Kathleen Alexander boasts about how her company is "saving the planet" from the evils of agriculture by replacing real butters and oils with synthetic versions made from carbon dioxide and methane. 😳
"Savor is part of bringing transformation to the food system by re-imagining how we make an entire macronutrient—fats and oils."
"The result is that we can dramatically lower the planetary footprint of our food system."
"Our food system today uses about 50% of the habitable land on the planet. It's 20-30% of our greenhouse gas emissions."
"And we can reduce all of those by 50-100%."
Source
Follow @RealWideAwakeMedia for more content like this!
Merch: https://wideawake.clothing
X | YT | IG | Rumble
🌆 Market News Digest
[July 3, 2026 EST]
🔥 Top Stories
• Middle East risk flares — IDF hits Hezbollah sites in south Lebanon; Houthis threaten Saudi assets; France deploys naval/mine-countermeasure assets near Hormuz.
• U.S. oil market scrutiny — DOJ/FTC say they’re monitoring crude for price-fixing/collusion as Brent settles at $72.12/bbl.
• Trump pardons saga — Trump signs pardons for six and faces fresh scrutiny after NBC reported undisclosed stock purchases before tariff pause.
⛽ Oil & Energy
• Gulf crude exports topped 10M bpd in June but remain ~40% below pre-conflict levels; Fitch flags ongoing Iran/Mideast risk to corporates and oil forecasts.
• CMA CGM warns Hormuz transit charges would be “devastating”; Airbus says defense cooperation remains pressured.
📊 Markets & Macro
• Germany’s 2027 draft budget lifts borrowing to €203.7B and spending to €555.4B; euro equities firm with DAX +0.85%.
• ECB/BoE message: inflation still the focus, but Bailey says UK ...
🇮🇷🏆🇺🇸 Iran Is a Bigger Defeat Than Vietnam | Foreign Policy
At his second inaugural, U.S. President Donald Trump pronounced his hope “that our recent presidential election will be remembered as the greatest and most consequential election in the history of our country.” By losing his Gulf war, Trump has achieved that goal. His choice to launch a campaign against Iran was encouraged by others, but fully his own. It has led to a reversal that marks a strategic calamity far greater than the U.S. defeat in the Vietnam War.
Defeat in the Iranian war looks, on the surface, nothing like other U.S. military defeats. The speed of the war and its remoteness have lent an air of unreality to the whole endeavor. The White House has not been burned, as it was in 1814; there have not been protests against a nonexistent draft. The absence of substantial U.S. casualties in this conflict also masks the scale of the U.S. defeat. To be sure, the war has been deadly: Thousands of Iranians, ...
According to The Wall Street Journal, Donald Trump reviewed military options for a full-scale war against Iran to “finish the job,” but has decided, for now, not to move forward.
The report says Trump is concerned that renewed military conflict could hurt the chances of a diplomatic resolution and of dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, and that he’s shown willingness to let indirect talks in Qatar run past the August 18 deadline. He is said to be fine with continuing limited strikes on Iranian targets if Tehran violates the current temporary deal - as it already has, repeatedly.
How are those negotiations going?
Not well. It seems JD Vance’s “historic” face-to-face achievement was a one-off. Washington has been quietly downgraded from talking to the Great Satan to negotiating with the Little Satan instead - a senior Qatari official confirmed that U.S. envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner met Qatari officials in Doha, but there are currently no high-level U.S.-Iran meetings ...
