It's a Numbers Game: The Numbers Behind Discrimination Against Whites at the U.S. Naval Academy

Summary

Summary of "It's a Numbers Game: The Numbers Behind Discrimination Against Whites at the U.S. Naval Academy"

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show presents a thought-provoking episode titled "It's a Numbers Game: The Numbers Behind Discrimination Against Whites at the U.S. Naval Academy," released on April 21, 2025. Hosted by Ryan Graduski, the episode delves deep into the contentious issue of racial discrimination within elite U.S. institutions, focusing specifically on the U.S. Naval Academy. The centerpiece of the discussion is an interview with Zach Goldberg, an independent researcher whose groundbreaking work sheds light on alleged biases against white applicants in military admissions.

---

1. Introduction to the Topic

The episode opens with Ryan Graduski setting the stage for a critical analysis of recent Supreme Court decisions and their ripple effects on higher education and military institutions. Graduski emphasizes the significance of understanding the quantitative aspects of racial discrimination, framing it as a numbers-driven investigation rather than a purely ideological debate.

Notable Quote:

Host (Ryan Graduski) [03:11]: "If an applicant was white and had a decent grade point average, but had only a 5% chance of admission, their odds would jump to a 50% chance if they were black."

---

2. Background: Supreme Court's Influence on Admissions

Graduski references the landmark Supreme Court case, Students for Fair Admission vs. Harvard, which ruled against the use of race-based admissions, particularly highlighting the discrimination against Asian American applicants. This decision has prompted other Ivy League and top-tier universities to reevaluate and often eliminate racial and ethnic considerations in their admissions processes.

Key Points:

• Public opinion largely opposes race-based admissions, with a 2023 Pew Research poll indicating that 50% of American adults disapprove of universities considering race.
• Following the Harvard ruling, institutions like MIT, Amherst University, John Hopkins, Columbia, NYU, Cornell, and Carnegie Mellon reported declines in Black and Latino enrollments, while white and Asian student proportions increased.

---

3. Transition to Military Admissions: Introducing Zach Goldberg

Zach Goldberg, the guest expert, introduces his research on the U.S. Naval Academy (USNA). Goldberg's study uncovers alarming statistics suggesting that white applicants face significant discrimination compared to their Black, Hispanic, and even Asian counterparts.

Notable Quote:

Zach Goldberg [13:28]: "A white applicant with a 5% chance of getting into the Naval Academy would have almost a 55% chance if treated as black."

---

4. Detailed Findings: Discrimination Against White Applicants

Goldberg presents a comprehensive analysis of admissions data from the USNA, revealing systemic biases that disadvantage white applicants:

• Admission Odds:

  • White Applicants: A baseline 25% chance increases to 87% when considered as Black, 52% as Hispanic, and 59% as Asian.
  • Black Applicants: A 5% baseline jumps to 50% under affirmative action.

• Quantitative Impact:

  • Approximately two-thirds of Black admits and one-third of Asian and Hispanic admits would not have been admitted without racial preferences.
  • Enhanced racial diversity did not correlate with improved academic performance; in fact, Black and Hispanic students struggled academically compared to their peers.

Notable Quote:

Host [16:42]: "How is this different from the Harvard case, and why is the focus solely on whites here?"

Zach Goldberg [17:54]: "Racial preferences, by admitting lesser qualified applicants, set them up for lower promotion rates in the officer pipeline."

---

5. Administrative Defense and Lack of Evidence

When questioned about the rationale behind these admissions policies, the Department of Defense (DoD) and the USNA cite the necessity of racial diversity to enhance military effectiveness and unit cohesion. However, Goldberg asserts that:

• Lack of Data: There is no substantial quantitative evidence supporting the claim that racial diversity improves military lethality or effectiveness.
• Superficial Defense: The DoD's arguments often rely on repurposed affirmative action defenses without providing concrete military-specific research.
• Endorsement Without Evidence: The DoD admits that no studies have conclusively linked racial diversity to enhanced military performance.

Notable Quote:

Zach Goldberg [18:20]: "The Department of Defense admitted that we've actually never studied the relationship between racial diversity and military effectiveness."

---

6. Historical Context and Evolution of DEI Policies in the Military

The discussion traces the origins and institutionalization of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies within the military, highlighting:

• Early Adoption: DEI provisions began in the early 1990s, initially focusing on contracting and later expanding to admissions and beyond.
• Bipartisan Facade: While presented as bipartisan efforts, DEI initiatives often masked underlying ideological drives, primarily benefiting Black and minority groups at the expense of white applicants.
• Judicial Support: The Supreme Court ruling leverages DEI arguments, citing bipartisan consensus on diversity as a national security imperative, despite the lack of supporting evidence.

Notable Quote:

Host [28:34]: "It is worrisome that the military, the government domain we trust the most, is engaging in such opaque DEI decisions."

---

7. Impact on Recruitment and Promotion within the Military

Goldberg elaborates on the broader implications of these admissions policies:

• Recruitment Crisis: A notable decline in military recruitment is attributed predominantly to the disenfranchisement of white men, who traditionally constitute the majority of military personnel.
• Promotion Barriers: Racial preferences at admission gates lead to lower promotion rates for minority officers, as they enter the officer pipeline with insufficient qualifications relative to their peers.

Notable Quote:

Zach Goldberg [25:51]: "Racial preferences, by admitting lesser qualified applicants, set them up for lower promotion rates in the officer pipeline."

---

8. Future Implications and Potential Policy Reversals

Looking ahead, Goldberg warns of potential setbacks:

• Policy Reversals: Despite the current ruling, there is a looming threat that these discriminatory policies could be reinstated under future administrations by invoking national security justifications.
• Legislative Influence: DEI initiatives have become entrenched within federal policies, making it challenging to dismantle without significant legislative and judicial intervention.

Notable Quote:

Zach Goldberg [35:15]: "With this precedent, you can imagine future administrations justifying such preferences or policies in other domains of the federal government."

---

9. Conclusion and Final Thoughts

The episode concludes with Goldberg emphasizing the necessity for continued scrutiny and research into DEI policies and their real-world impacts. He underscores the importance of evidence-based policymaking over ideological commitments, particularly in critical institutions like the military.

Notable Quote:

Zach Goldberg [37:04]: "All these policies are going to easily be snapped back in place. So it's important to shed light on the real numbers behind these discrimination practices."

Host Ryan Graduski expresses his appreciation for Goldberg's investigative work, highlighting its significance in understanding and addressing systemic discrimination within elite institutions.

---

Final Remarks

This episode of The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show serves as a crucial examination of the hidden metrics and biases influencing admissions at prestigious institutions like the U.S. Naval Academy. Through Zach Goldberg's meticulous research, listeners gain insight into the pervasive discrimination against white applicants, challenging prevailing narratives and calling for a more transparent, evidence-based approach to diversity and inclusion policies.

Transcript

[Cindy Crawford]

How to have fun anytime, anywhere.

[Ryan Graduski]

Step 1 Go to chumbacasino.com chumbacasino.com Got it.

[Cindy Crawford]

Step 2 Collect your welcome bonus.

[Ryan Graduski]

Come to papa. Welcome bonus.

[Cindy Crawford]

Step 3 Play hundreds of casino style games for free.

[Ryan Graduski]

That's a lot of games, all for free. Step 4 Unleash your excitement.

[Zach Goldberg]

Chumba Casino has been delivering thrills for over a decade.

[Ryan Graduski]

So claim your free welcome bonus now and live the chumba life.

[Zach Goldberg]

Visit chambocasino.com no purchase necessary vgw group.

[Walton Goggins]

Void where prohibited by law 21 +.

[Amica Insurance]

Terms and conditions apply Every day our world gets a little more connected, but a little further apart. But then there are moments that remind us to be more human.

[Zach Goldberg]

Thank you for calling Amica Insurance.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Hey, I was just in an accident.

[Zach Goldberg]

Don't worry, we'll get you taken care of.

[Amica Insurance]

At Ameca, we understand that looking out for each other isn't new or groundbreaking. It's human. Amica Empathy is our best policy.

[Cindy Crawford]

Did you know that parents rank financial.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Literacy as the number one most difficult life skill to teach? Meet Greenlight, the debit card and money app for families. With Greenlight, you can send money to kids quickly, set up chores automate allowance, and keep an eye on what your kids are spending. With real time notifications, kids learn to earn, save and spend wisely.

[Cindy Crawford]

And parents can rest easy knowing their.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Kids are learning about money with guardrails in place. Try Greenlight Risk free [e-mail] iheart so.

[Narrator]

You want to start a business? You might think you need a team of people and fancy tech skills, but listen to me when I say you don't. You just need GoDaddy arrow. I'm Walton Goggins, an actor, and I like the sound of starting my own business. Walton Goggins Goggle Glasses. But I couldn't do this my own. GoDaddy Arrow uses AI to create everything you need to grow a business. It'll make you a unique logo, it'll create a custom website, it'll write social posts for you, and even set you up with a social media calendar. How cool is that? Well, listen to this. For a limited time, you can get Arrow all access for just a dollar a week for 12 weeks. We're talking all the AI power of GoDaddy arrow plus a domain E commerce store, payments, professional email, a unified inbox. All for less money than I spend on deep tanning lotion while sunbathing off the Amalfi coast. You know what? That sounds like a plan. Get [e-mail] terms apply ugh.

[Ryan Graduski]

Come on.

[Cindy Crawford]

Why is this taking so long?

[Narrator]

This thing is ancient.

[Amica Insurance]

Still using yesterday's tech upgrade to the ThinkPad X1 carbon ultralight, ultra powerful and built for serious productivity with Intel Core Ultra processors, blazing speed and AI powered performance that keeps up with your business, not the other way around.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Whoa.

[Cindy Crawford]

This thing moves.

[Amica Insurance]

Stop hitting snooze on new tech. Win the tech [e-mail] Lenovo Lenovo unlock AI experiences with the ThinkPad X1 carbon powered by Intel Core Ultra processors so you can work, create and boost productivity all on one device.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Welcome back to A Numbers Game with Ryan Graduski. I am your host. Thank you all for being here for another week. If you find yourself bored, lonely, depressed, looking for something to do, I just want to say I have the idea for you. Please like and subscribe this podcast. Give me a five star review if you have the chance of your time. You won't miss an episode. You'll learn something. You'll be smarter. I try to bring it twice a week, every week. So I appreciate you all being here. Please make sure you're here every time. And now I want to talk to you and I want to ask you, if you were to sit there and think what was the most consequential thing the Supreme Court has done in the last five years, Right. Really since the end of the first Trump term. Probably Most of you, nine out of 10, would say abortion, right? Roe v. Wade, because it's the most politically engaging and toxic and energetic. Depends on what side of the aisle you fall on. It's where people pay attention, is where politicians give a lot of focus to. But to me, the decision, the most important decision the Supreme Court made over the last five years, the one that will have the biggest impact over most of our lives, was a Students for Fair Admission versus Harvard case. That case examined the illegality of race based admissions in higher education, ruling that it was unconstitutional that the school at Harvard had discriminated against Asian applicants, Asian American applicants, in favor of black and Latinos. Now, unlike the overturning of Roe, which was a deeply divided issue, ending race based admissions to colleges was extremely popular with the American people. A poll from Pew research in 2023 found that 50% of American adults disapproved of universities considering race. When it comes to admission, just 33% approved. And there was a stark political divide. 74% of Republicans opposed using race and 54% of Democrats approved of it. But overwhelmingly, when you ask independents, and still a large chunk of Democrats, they disapproved of it. Most of the country did. But once the Harvard case happened, other Ivy Leagues and top colleges began following suit and dropping race and ethnicity as a requirement or part of their admissions process. According to the New York Times, which reviewed 66 colleges in the aftermath that changes to admissions, they found that black and Latino enrollment dropped by 1% overall in the top schools and in the Ivy Leagues, 1% of Hispanics, 1% of blacks. MIT's enrollment dropped by 10 points among black applicants from 16 to 6. Amherst University fell by 12.5 to 3.6. John Hopkins went from 11.6 black to 4.1 black and Columbia fall from 20% to 12%. For Latino students in John Hopkins, they fell in half from 25 to 12.5. NYU went from 21% Latino to 13%. The incoming class I'm talking about, Cornell went from 17 to 10 and Carnegie Mellon went from 14 to 8. The share of Asian students went up in a number of top schools including Barnard, MIT and Columbia. And for white students they also ticked up significantly. And the vein of that case, the focus of that case was really just on Asian admissions. That became the victim of this entire scandal of race based admissions. Now, the case behind Harvard, right. They specifically said, as I said before, Asians were the name target of this mass discrimination. And you saw this in Harvard and John Hopkins and a number of universities where right after the Supreme Court ruled there was a huge spike of Asian enrollment. But what about white applicants, right? What if I were to tell you that white students were more discriminated than other groups at the some of the most major universities and some of the biggest Ivy leagues in this country? A study by Georgetown University found that if college admission were based solely on test scores, the proportion of Asian students at top colleges would actually fall from 11% to 10%. Conversely, white students applicants would increase from 66% to 75%. Affirmative action is anti white in many of these cases. A study by Zach Goldberg was released just last week that found that racial discrimination wasn't just a thing for the left wing colleges like Harvard. No, it's actually being committed at the Naval Academy. The prime group facing discrimination is not Asians, it's white men. Goldberg found that a white applicant with the same exact test scores as a black applicant is significantly less likely to get admitted to the U.S. naval Academy. A black applicant with a 5% chance of admissions, their odds would jump to 50% if evaluated as being black. They'd be 15% chance to get in if they were Hispanic and 18% chance to be in if they were Asian. A white applicant with a 25% baseline admission, because that's, you know, on average where their, where their grades were, well, they would be 87% as likely if they were black, 52% if they were Hispanic, and 59% if they were Asian. Asians in the Naval Academy actually had a higher level of chance of getting in than even Hispanics when DEI was applied. Goldberg further states that across five admission cycles, roughly 2/3 of black applicants and one third of Asian and Hispanic applicants would not have been admitted had it been absent of their race. Had their RA had been a completely blind admission, no race looked at whatsoever, just meritocracy, just great scores and ability and all the rest of that, a tremendous amount of non white applicants would have not gotten into the Naval Academy. By admitting students were less qualified to attend, but brought greater racial diversity, it didn't improve testing standards, it lowered them. Black and Hispanic students performed worse once they were in the Naval Academy than the overall average. So it's not like this is a liberal theory that they have is if you get an applicant who maybe they're not qualified because their SAT scores or, you know, their scores aren't high enough, but once they get in the academy, they'll be around other smart people and they're going to surge, they're going to do so, so well. That has never been proven to be true and it is not true in the Naval Academy as black and Hispanic students who had gotten in in part because of their race were struggling with subjects like calculus and science. So it didn't make the overall student population smarter, it just made them more racially diverse for the sake of racial diversity. The degree to which white applicants are discriminated against at the US Naval Academy is difficult for me to describe alone because this is a very long article, a very long substack post. It's well over 100 pages. I did go through it, but I got the man himself, the man who did all the research, who could describe what's actually happening at the US Naval Academy and other federal government backed schools about diversity, equity, inclusion and anti white discrimination. Please just stay with me for his tour de force investigation. Zach Goldberg is next. Stay tuned.

[Amica Insurance]

Step into the world of power, loyalty and luck.

[Ryan Graduski]

I'm gonna make him an offer he.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Can'T refuse with family.

[Narrator]

Cannolis and spins mean everything. Now you want to get mixed up in the family business.

[Amica Insurance]

Introducing the [e-mail] test your luck in.

[Ryan Graduski]

The shadowy world of the Godfather Soldier lot.

[Narrator]

Someday I will call upon you to do a service for me.

[Amica Insurance]

Play the Godfather [e-mail] Welcome to the family.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

No purchase necessary.

[Ryan Graduski]

VGW Group void. We're prohibited by law.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

21 plus terms and conditions apply.

[Cindy Crawford]

Hi, I'm Cindy Crawford and I'm the founder of Meaningful Beauty. Well, I don't know about you, but like, I never liked being told, oh, wow, you look so good for your age. Like, why even bother saying that? Why don't you just say you look great at any age? Every age. That's what Meaningful Beauty is all about. We create products that make you feel confident in your skin at the age you are now. Meaningful Beauty. Beautiful skin at every age. Learn [e-mail].

[Amica Insurance]

At Ameca Insurance, we know it's more than just a car. It's the two door coupe that was there for your first drive, the hatchback that took you cross country and back, and the minivan that tackles the weekly carpool for the cars you couldn't live without. Trust Ameca Auto Insurance. Ameca Empathy is our best policy.

[Zach Goldberg]

For some of us, personal finances aren't just personal. They include a lot more people than ourselves. Loved ones, neighbors, the communities we call home home. And the causes we hold in our hearts. At Thrivent, we help plan your financial picture with the bigger picture in mind. Because even though our business is helping guide your finances, our ambition is to make it mean so much more. Thrivent, where money means more.

[Narrator]

Connect with [e-mail] so you want to start a business? You might think you need a team of people and fancy tech skills, but listen to me when I say you don't. You just need Godaddy Arrow. I'm Walton Goggins, an actor and I like the sound of starting my own business. Walton Goggins Goggle glasses. But I couldn't do this my own. GoDaddy Arrow uses AI to create everything you need to grow a business. It'll make you a unique logo, it'll create a custom website, it'll write social posts for you, and even set you up with a social media calendar. How cool is that? Well, listen to this. For a limited time, you can get Arrow all access for just a dollar a week for 12 weeks. We're talking all the AI power of GoDaddy arrow. Plus a domain E commerce store, payments, professional email, a unified inbox. All for less money than I spend on deep tanning lotion while sunbathing off the Amalfi coast. You know what that sounds like a plan get [e-mail] terms.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Apparently Zach Goldberg is an independent researcher who has an absolutely incredible substack. Zachgoldberg.substack.com I've been a fan of his for years. I can't recommend his substack enough. Thank you for being here, Zach.

[Ryan Graduski]

Thank you for having me on, Ryan.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

So, okay, first things first, go over your data. What are the main findings showing that there's a discrimination against whites at the U.S. naval Academy?

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah, I'll just before I get into that, I just want to say like until this report, until this case, the public really like our understanding of what was going on behind the scenes of the Naval Academy or just other service academy in general was really kind of off limits, opaque. And now with this lawsuit, during the discovery of that case student, the Naval Academy was forced to hand over five years of admissions data and that data was analyzed by duplicate Ms. Peter Arcy D'Assono who also worked on the Harvard case. And What Arcy and D'Asono finds is rather, you know, contrary to the Naval Academy claims of their consideration of race being limited, non determinative, you know, one factor among many other factors, the holistic, you know, consideration. What he finds is that, well, for instance, if a white applicant with a 5% chance of getting into the Naval Academy would have almost a 55% chance if treated as black, 25% chance. If a white applicant had a 25% chance of getting in, he would have, you know, an over 85% chance of getting in it through those blacks. Now I mention I single out blacks because they, the preferences for them are the strongest. But unlike Harvard where Asians were also getting, you know, were also disadvantaged in the admissions process here, Asians also get a boost. So whites are whites and the class of applicants that didn't declare a race whatsoever, which is interesting because they're just as disadvantaged as whites. You know, what are the, I guess the victims here of, you know, discrimination or race, these race based admissions practices. And just a one more final data point is that if not for racial preferences, it is estimated that over 70% of Black admits would not have gotten in for Hispanics and Asians where the preferences are significant, but not as much as blacks do to Brown like 1 in 3.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

So then to round that up, if an applicant was white and had, you know, they had a decent grade point average or whatever, but they would only have a 5% chance and 50 chance if they were black and significantly higher chances if they were both Asian and Hispanic and there would be an immense fall off for applicants. If it was just equally based on grades, which is what a study by, I think it was, Georgetown University found if you, I mentioned at the top of the show, Georgetown University said that there was, if everything was based on race, their discrimination against whites would show that it's actually higher than any other group, including Asians. Now you mentioned the Harvard case, which is obviously where a lot of this stuff, information is forced to come out from in all different universities. How is this. And you mentioned it's different. Asian is different in any other way, aside from just, it's not just, it's not Asians and whites, it's just whites.

[Ryan Graduski]

Well, I guess if you were to like I know in the Harvard case, RCD Asona's analysis, he had also a decile analysis where he's looking at the admission rates by the admissions index decile. So you have 10 deciles and he's looking, okay, what is the rate for different applicants in this decile? And with Harvard, you see obviously at the bottom decile, few, you know, nobody's really getting in. And then you see outside of the bottom decile, you really see just a kind of a linear increase in the black admission rates and you really even up to the final decile where I think the blacks maybe are like 90% versus whites. I think it's been a while since I read the case or seen that data for whites. I think maybe the max they get to in the top decile is like 50%. In this case with the Naval Academy, the greatest disparities are not at the. Well, in both cases the disparities are minimal at the bottom, but in this case they tend to be greatest towards the middle regions, the middle deciles of the distribution.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

That's fascinating.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah. And. Well, because once you get to the top, everybody stop. Still, once you get in the top decile, there's still about a 15 point gap, let's say, or maybe even let me look at the numbers again. Whites are also getting in, I think like around 70% of the time. Blacks may be getting in like 90% of the time. So still. But not as much as you see in the harbor case, but there's still substantial differences even in the top.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

How does the administrations defend this move? I mean, I saw something about military readiness, but is that the military, if it's diverse, is more ready for combat. But is there any evidence behind that?

[Ryan Graduski]

That's the thing is that rather than really rebutting this analysis with data, they went all in or when I Say they, I mean, the DOJ under Biden, who is defending a USNA in this case, they went all in on a diversity defense. And a lot of the arguments really just copied straight out of other affirmative acting as affirmative acting cases. And but what really was really novel about this is whereas previous cases, we're talking about getting the benefit, the educational benefits of a diverse class, now we're talking about the military benefits, the lethality benefits. So the claim is that a racially diverse officer corps enhances military effectiveness, unit lethality, it promotes cohesion. Now what's the evidence for that? Well, the truth of the matter is, is the evidence is so barren on this front that our expert diversity witnesses or expert, they had to resort even to, well, just citing papers that had really nothing to do, nothing to do with racial diversity whatsoever, had something to do with diversity, just in a different context, outside of a military context, didn't relate to race diversity. So they're kind of grasping a trust, trying to just citation pad, so to speak, and hoping people don't actually look at the citations. But when you look at the citations, you see there's really nothing there. There's no quantitative evidence submitted. And in truth, part of that's not their fault because the Department of Defense themselves admitted that we've actually never studied the relationship between racial diversity and military effectiveness. We don't know whether variations in racial composition, more diverse units perform better than less diverse units.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

They never studied that. That is crazy. In a race obsessed society like America, you would have studied, someone would have studied that in the military. They never studied.

[Ryan Graduski]

That's what's incredible is they've had decades to which to produce such data. And you think if you know, well, that's the thing. Either they actually have done the studies and the studies don't support the narrative, or they just don't care about the data whatsoever. They're more comfortable. This isn't kind of. We want federal policy to be evidence based. We want it to be based on rigorous analysis. And in this case, it seems like they are more comfortable just, you know, advancing the ideological, you know, moral priorities over actually seeing. Does this actually make sense empirically? Because on one hand the Department of Defense and the Naval Academy, they say, listen, we're not doing this for racial diversity's sake. Racial diversity is merely a means to an end, and that end is improved military effectiveness. But if that's the case, then they also claim to value all sorts of diversity, not just race. They say they value all sorts of diversity, but when you actually look at the models like economic socioeconomic diversity gets no weight. In effect, it gets almost no weight whatsoever. It's all race. So it's hard not to walk away with the conclusion that they don't really care what the evidence that this is. A lot of this is about optics.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Right, right, right. Well, that's why you see those commercials, you know, of like it used to be to join the military be the best you could be. And now it's like, you know, join the military. We have girls here too. Speaking of, is there. Was there a sex discrimination with white women?

[Ryan Graduski]

Yes, yes. Oh, I mean, we. I didn't see the data like, you know, interact sex by race. But what I can say is that females or women are definitely have. It's not as much as the race preference. It's maybe like, you know, a fraction of the preference given to blacks. But women are definitely get a leg up in the admissions process, which is. And this case wasn't about gender discrimination. So this wasn't the.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

No, I just, I just got curious reading the information. I just was like, I wonder if this is only about white men and not white women as well. But I didn't know and I didn't see it. I don't know if you had read it somewhere.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah, well, I would imagine just based on the coefficients that the disadvantage just for being white, but is kind of offset. I mean, I guess what I'm saying is that the white woman will get due to their sex, a boost over white men, but probably not the boost that black women are getting.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Right, I got you now, you know.

[Ryan Graduski]

Obviously the raw data, you know, it's. It's privileged information. So, you know, can't really run the analysis on that. But that would be just looking at the coefficients and seeing, you know, the models, you know, that would be my prediction at least.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

So all of this, white men make up the majority of military. And how did. How does this affect recruitment?

[Ryan Graduski]

Well, that's the thing is that, you know, in terms of this turning off recruitment, well, there's a recruitment, I guess, crisis across the board or at least.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

But the recruitment crisis across the board, people always remember the recruitment crisis. The recruitment crisis, primarily during the Biden years, was that white men were not joining the military. That was where the decline in military enrollment came from, was not among black or Hispanic men. It was among white men who left joining the military in droves in a significant way.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah, I mean there is some evidence that some of that is DEI related. And what's interesting is that one of the. Their own studies that USNA produced during the report, which is this climate study where it's looking at, you know, it's kind of measuring the temperature in terms of diversity climates. You know, is there enough focus on race, is there not enough focus on race in the, you know, the worst diversity climates? You have a lot of, I mean, it's not just whites, but other whites. I mean, probably substantial number of whites saying that there's too much of an emphasis. And because that data is linked to retention data, subsequent retention, you could see that a lot of whites are more likely to leave. A lot of those whites that leave are ones that said that, you know, there's just too much of an emphasis on race and DEI and diversity training and what have you.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Because if this is about recruitment, then what does it also say about people getting promotions in the military? Would a white applicant be less inclined to get a promotion?

[Ryan Graduski]

Well, here's the thing is that the affirmative action here, at least as far as the Department of Defense is willing to admit, occurs at the front end, meaning at the admission gates. Now once they graduate these academies and they get assigned to a naval community and they, they kind of enter the officer pipeline. Now what's really frustrated the Navy is that the promotion rates among especially blacks tends to be very low at, at a certain, above a certain rank. It just stagnates completely. Now that's not due to discrimination. I mean, this has been studied. And the bottom line is that, and this is kind of what's interesting about racial preferences. They're kind of self defeating or at least they're self restricting in the sense of being the ability to affect the bottom line here, which is the diversity of the least diverse military naval communities. And one of the strongest predictors of promotion is how you did your performance at the Naval Academy. It's not something that people that decide on promotions directly consider, but the traits associated with performance, you know, your academic performance, your military, this is predictive of promotion. And so racial preferences, by admitting lesser qualified applicants, in setting them up, cannot be promoted to have a lesson likelihood of being promoted once they get to the officer pipeline. Now there could, and this is kind of scary, is that if they want, if they really want to increase the diversity, you know, up and down the ranks, they could lower the promotion standards or lower the accession standards to certain elite naval communities which produce an outsized share of the higher ranks. But that obviously comes with risks because now you know, you want, they're not.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Willing to study if they're not willing to study if diversity Makes the military better. What are the chances they've studied if diversity makes. Lowering the standards makes it worse? I don't, I don't know. I mean, I don't know that answer. But that is. This is the military. This is what you're. This is the area of the government that probably has the most amount of trust of anyone else.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah. And that's. It's worrisome that how the extent that the military and I just. This is kind of fresh off the press because I just spent last night, I guess I don't have a life just looking at every single National Defense Appropriation act, which started in 1987. Before then it was the Defense Appropriation Act. But anyways, and you look through that and it's just clear over time that the extent that it's becoming a vehicle for advancing dei, you know, it's supposed to originally start, okay, we're just running missiles, new airplanes, and over time it's kind of been commandeered. I don't want to just single out members of the Black Caucus, but they're definitely very active on inserting, you know, DEI related provisions to the bill. It started with contracting in the early 90s and supporters colleges, and then the 2000s. You start to see a real entrenchment and institutionalization of the DEI, especially over the past 10 years. And that's relevant because when defending these preferences or defending or actually ruling in favor of, of the government. The judge in the case, Richard D. Bennett, he cited a lot of the. These so called commissions that came out of these NDA, these diversity commission reports that came out of these NDA provisions that were stuck in, you know, build a military leadership diversity commission to make recommendations about how do we diversify the officer, you know, so the judge said to that, like, see, this has bipartisan consensus. You know, everybody believes that diversity is a national security imperative. Republican. This was endorsed by Congress. And it's like, no. This commission, this report that you speak to was snuck in by Ben Cardin of Maryland with the support of a couple members of the Black Caucus. You know, most people, these three.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

One time I was in a. When I was in a green room for a television show, I was doing a new show and I was with a military combat vet colonel who said to me, and he said one of the most. Something I, I've never looked into this. I don't know if it's true, I don't know if I believe it. But he said to me something that stuck with me since he has said it. He said Most parts of the military are just a jobs program that we do not need the military size or force that, not force, but the size that we do of standing army because it is just specifically for jobs we don't like. He said most of these people will never see combat, will never do anything to promote national security. It is just to hire people. And I've always thought of that whenever these conversations come up of was he right? I don't know the answer to it, but I think about it constantly, is now this is the federal government making this kind of DEI decision. And this predates Biden is clear.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah. I mean, the, the racial preferences. Yes, they do predate Biden.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Yeah. This wasn't a new thing.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah. Listen, and this is what's incredible is that even during Trump 1, you know, the first Trump term. 1.0. Yeah, yeah. I mean, Trump's own secondary defense, Mark Esper, he was the one, a few weeks after the Floyd incident, he produced a memorandum saying we need to establish a diversity inclusion board within the Pentagon. You know, that it's going to make recommendations about how to increase the diversity inclusion throughout.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

I actually never heard of that before. That is, I, I don't, I, I 100% believe you. I did not know that that happened.

[Ryan Graduski]

That Trump had no idea or just maybe his priority. He was focusing on other things at the time.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

It was a hot.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

We had Covid going on a reelection. Yeah, yeah.

[Ryan Graduski]

But like, you know, in hindsight, there's a lot of things going on, even among Republican presidents. And part of the reason is, is because, you know, they don't call it discrimination against whites or they don't, or, you know, they don't say racial preferences specifically. They kind of, you know, use very laundered language, you know, in some of these bills that make it seem like it's all that is.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

The frustrating thing about DEI conversations is like, I have no opposition for funds that go for poor people, whether they are black or Hispanic or white. But that is not what DEI is. DEI is anti white discrimination primarily. That's really what DEI is. It's not, it's not, oh, we give extra money to poor black kids in this area of the country or that area of the country that I don't care about. Like, no one does. It's when you purposefully discriminate or lower standards in order to prevent one group from succeeding in order for another group to succeed.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yeah. And to your point, I mean, this came up in the case, you know, it's because obviously, in Order to pass the narrowly tailored standard of strict scrutiny, they have to show, the Navy has to show that they've exhausted all race neutral alternatives. And one race neutral alternative is socioeconomic preferences. You know, just giving a leg up for students regardless of the race. And, you know, the dean of admissions, you know, was asked why they didn't utilize SES based preferences instead. And his response was really, well, just remarkable, remarkably, I guess, just really disgusting. He said that, well, we determined that if we did that there'd be a lot of quote unquote, non diverse applicants who would also benefit, which is translation, you know, there'd be too many poor white people, white applicants.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

That happened in North Carolina when they were trying to make the universe this is something less dei. And they said, let's just do it by income. They said, well, there's a lot of poor whites that would benefit benefit from it too. And my last question is, do you believe there's any other areas of the federal government that are doing this exact same thing right now?

[Ryan Graduski]

I believe every other. I mean, the other Service Academy cases are still. Well, they might be headed for mooted cases, but I know they're probably going on there in terms of other areas of the federal government. It wouldn't surprise me. I mean, I only know the data related to this case. But what is particularly shocking and which this ruling in this case upholds, essentially, is that the government, if it just wants to support or advance a DI effort, you know, a discriminatory policy, essentially the judge ruling, it just allows so that they only have to invoke national security, you know.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Right.

[Ryan Graduski]

Because the judge really just completely total competing relation to the government interests. You know, it's just national security with.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Everything is that you say national security enough times, you kind of get your way. Unless you're Rudy Gillian Rank for President, you say 9, 11 of times you don't get your way, but otherwise you do get your way.

[Ryan Graduski]

Yes. So because of this precedent, you can imagine future administrations justifying such preferences or policies in other domains of the federal government, if it's not already going on, you know, and they could just evoke national security and come up with all some sort of rationale of how this relates. You know, by furthering diversity, this furthers our bottom line in terms of this compelling national goal.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Yeah. You are absolutely, can I say, brilliant? I have been. People probably have read Zach's work without knowing it's Zach. That study about the mainstream media's application of WOKE terminology, that was Zach. Like, there were so many times where I'M like, oh, Zach's works being cited again over and over and over again. You really deserve way more credit than you have given so far because your work really is top tier and this, this thing you you've done on the Naval Academy is it is tour de force. It really what is brilliant and it is on yourself. Where can people go to get your stuff?

[Ryan Graduski]

Well, my sub stack is now it used to be Zach's newsletter. Now it's called Unwoke by the Numbers. Hopefully catchy enough to remember Unwoke by the Numbers. Or maybe Zach's newsletter was easier. But anyways one woke by the Numbers and my my twitter handle is z.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

G932 that should be shortened down but 932 Zach Zach and you can find your substack Zach Zach Z A C H. Remember the h? Zach Goldberg substack.com I almost said hepa.com Zack goldberg.substack.com Zach, you're this is incredible work. I if you produce something else, I'd love to have you on this podcast again. You're just, I mean, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant.

[Ryan Graduski]

Want to say one final thing? Just I mean first of all, thanks for having me on because the current moment everybody's focused on tariffs, deportations, what have you. You know, it's hard to get through about the story. I know timing wasn't great, but you know, everybody celebrating the post awokening is premature. All these policies are going to easily be snapped back in place. So it's important and that's what I'm when I get off of you, I'm going to have be talking with somebody who's trying to insert a racial preferences ban in service academies into the 2026 National Defense Appropriation Act. So I'll be able to come on the show and talk more about that.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

I should introduce you a few congressmen and senators that I know and try to get that going because that would be awesome.

[Ryan Graduski]

Really.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Zach Goldberg, thank you for being here. I really, really appreciate it.

[Ryan Graduski]

Thanks for having me.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

You're listening to It's a Numbers Game with Ryan Graduski. We'll be right back after this message.

[Cindy Crawford]

Hi, I'm Cindy Crawford and I'm the founder of Meaningful Beauty. Well, I don't know about you, but like, I never liked being told, oh, wow, you look so good for your age. Like, why even bother saying that? Why don't you just say you look great at any age, every age. That's what Meaningful Beauty is all about. We create products that make you feel confident in your skin at the age you are now. Meaningful beauty, beautiful skin at every age. Learn [e-mail].

[Amica Insurance]

At Ameca Insurance, we know it's more than just a car. It's the two door coupe that was there for your first drive, the hatchback that took you cross country and back, and the minivan that tackles the weekly carpool for the cars you couldn't live without. Trust Amica Auto Insurance Amica Empathy is our best policy.

[Zach Goldberg]

For some of us, personal finances aren't just personal. They include a lot more people than ourselves. Loved ones, neighbors, the communities we call home, and the causes we hold in our hearts. At Thrivent, we help plan your financial picture with the bigger picture in mind. Because even though our business is helping guide your finances, our ambition is to make it mean so much more. Thrivent where money means more Connect with.

[Narrator]

[e-mail] so you want to start a business? You might think you need a team of people and fancy tech skills. But listen to me when I say you don't. You just need GoDaddy arrow. I'm Walton Goggins, an actor and I like the sound of starting my own business. Walton Goggins Goggle Glasses. But I couldn't do this my own. GoDaddy Arrow uses AI to create everything you need to grow a business. It'll make you a unique logo, it'll create a custom website, it'll write social posts for you and even set you up with a social media calendar. How cool is that? Well, listen to this. For a limited time, you can get Arrow all access for just a dollar a week for 12 weeks. We're talking all the AI power of GoDaddy arrow plus a domain E commerce store, payments, professional email, a unified inbox. All for less money than I spend on deep tanning lotion while sunbathing off the Amalfi coast. You know what? That sounds like a plan. Get [e-mail] terms apply.

[Walton Goggins]

Big contest, even bigger prizes. It's the big Circle K giveaway. Visit Circle K four times and you'll get a reward. Come in for fuel, snacks, meal deals, anything. After every four visits, you'll unlock a reward. So what are you waiting for? Come to Circle K and get a head start on your fourth visit. Reward. Visit Circle K today. No purchase necessary. US Residence 18 ends 5-6-2025 for official rules, visit circle k.com big-giveaway.com for the.

[Host of A Numbers Game]

Ask me Anything segment where you can email me about any subject. I know the matter. I know about that. I know anything degree of information about or I could do the research for Please don't email out sports because I don't know much about it but anything else email me ryanumbersgame podcast.com that is Ryan@Numbersgame podcast plural numbers numbersgamepodcast.com I really look forward it really helps this podcast by submitting questions on anything. I got a question from a guy named Sam today who said who do you think is the worst member, worst Republican member of Congress? This is the easiest, easiest question in the world to answer. It is Maria Salazar from Florida's I think 36th district, 37th district, one of the two. I didn't look that up beforehand. I should have. Marie Salazar is a former television host who very, very, very well, it's forgotten now, but it did happen a lot during the 2016 election. She was kind of always attack up and saying that she was slated to have interviews and he canceled because he was afraid of her. And I think they did sit down at one point, but she was on Bill O'Reilly at the time bashing Trump. Anyway, she ran for office in in 2020 and won. She flipped a Democratic seat which many people did not believe that was going to be Republican. But as the coalitions has changed and as her district, which is very heavily Hispanic, has become more Republican, it's now a super Republican seat. It's a seat that Trump won by double digits. And this used to be a Democratic seat. It is in South Florida, is in Miami proper and she is represented now. She won her last election in a landslide. This one wakes up morning, noon and night thinking about amnesty for illegal aliens, how to increase legal immigration, how to give, how to make sure people aren't deported. She's horrible. She's horrible on the issue. She's actually not been super loud lately. But I have a story from when the last Congress was going on and Trump wasn't in office. This is when Biden was in office. Stephen Miller, Trump's advisor, Stephen Miller was giving a presentation. I heard this from a member of Congress, so I wasn't in the room. But this came from a good source. Stephen Miller was giving a presentation and Maria Salazar attended, even though she was not a member of the Republican Study Committee and began yelling and berating him about hating Hispanics and hating Latinos and making all these attack and accusations against him. And apparently he handled it very, very well. He was a perfect gentleman. Calmed her down. She left the room and immediately started calling reporters and bashing the Republican Study Committee. And Stephen Miller, there's a number of times where people I know have been around her and she has shown signs of being very unhinged, very crazy and her policies are terrible. And if there was a Republican who could primary her, it's worth it because her seat is a super safe Republican seat now. Unlike more moderate members who I don't necessarily always agree with, like Brian Fitzpatrick, he still represents a Kamala Harris district, although it has moved to the right. He's fine for the see that he holds. I have no issue with a with a moderate Republican holding a holding a seat. Murkowski is not great. Murkowski is a perfect example. He's Murkowski from Alaska who begs Trump for things for Alaska. He always gives it and then she goes to the media and attacks him. Maria Salazar is out there for illegal immigrants. That's her prime constituency are non citizens. So have a big problem with that. And if there's any Republican who should not be in office in the House of Representatives is Maria Salazar from Florida. Thank you again for listening for this episode of A Numbers Game. Please like and subscribe on the iHeartRadio app Apple Podcast. Wherever you get your podcast, we'll see you on Thursday. Thank you so much.

[Zach Goldberg]

For some of us, personal finances aren't just personal. They include a lot more people than ourselves, loved ones, neighbors, the communities we call home, and the causes we hold in our hearts. At Thrivent, we help plan your financial picture with the plan bigger picture in mind. Because even though our business is helping guide your finances, our ambition is to make it mean so much more. Thrivent where money means more. Connect with [e-mail].

[Ryan Graduski]

Clorox Scentiva smells like.

[Zach Goldberg]

Lavender.

[Ryan Graduski]

Cleans like Clorox.

[Zach Goldberg]

And feels like.

[Ryan Graduski]

Alright. That could go on for a while.

[Cindy Crawford]

Experience the long lasting freshness of Clorox Scentiva.

[Zach Goldberg]

Available in Clorox Scentiva Lavender Scented Bleach Use as directed.

[Narrator]

So you want to start a business? You might think you need a team of people and fancy tech skills. But listen to me when I say you don't. You just need godaddy Arrow I'm Walton Goggins, an actor and I like the sound of starting my own business. Walton Goggins Goggle Glasses. But I couldn't do this my own. GoDaddy Arrow uses AI to create everything you need to grow a business. It'll make you a unique logo, it'll create a custom website, it'll write social posts for you and even set you up with a social media calendar. How cool is that? Well, listen to this for a limited time you can get Arrow all access for just a dollar a week for 12 weeks. We're talking all the AI power of GoDaddy arrow plus a domain E commerce store, payments, professional email, a unified inbox. All for less money than I spend on deep tanning lotion while sunbathing off the Amalfi coast. You know what? That sounds like a plan. Get [e-mail] terms apply.

[Cindy Crawford]

Get this adults with financial literacy skills have 82% more wealth than those who don't. From swimming lessons to piano classes, us parents invest in so many things to enrich our kids lives. But are we investing in their future financial success? With Greenlight, you can teach your kids financial literacy skills like earning, saving and investing. And this investment costs less than that. After school treat Start prioritizing their financial education and future today with a risk free [e-mail] iheart greenlight.com iheartra big contest even bigger Prizes.

[Walton Goggins]

It's the big Circle K giveaway. Visit Circle K four times and you'll get a reward. Come in for fuel, snacks, meal deals, anything. After every four visits, you'll unlock a reward. So what are you waiting for? Come to Circle K and get a head start on your fourth visit. Reward Visit Circle K today. No purchase necessary. US Residence 18 ends May 6, 2025. For official rules, visit circlek.com Big Giveaway.