the Conservative TAKE
Politics • Culture • News
the Conservative TAKE is a #MAGA site/channel that gives a conservative take on pop culture & politics.

We do not take ourselves too seriously. We simply want to create great, creative content & to have fun doing it.

One of our core missions is to allow people to think critically by presenting information in a larger context. This includes TV/Movie/Sports reviews & reactions, history lessons, politics and pop culture.

"Destroying the w0kE Narrative"

John 14:6
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
Odds of Love: A Probability Study Proving Jasmine Crockett’s Race Baiting Ignores the Real Challenges of Finding a Conservative Black Match

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Representative Jasmine Crockett’s recent criticism of Representative Byron Donalds for marrying a white woman highlights a regressive mindset steeped in ignorance and racial bias, casting doubt on her ability to engage with the diverse realities of American life.

https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1906302926571618409

By implying that Donalds has been “whitewashed” through his interracial marriage, Crockett clings to outdated stereotypes that dictate racial loyalty over personal agency, exposing her own hypocrisy in advocating for equality while policing others’ private choices. This narrow perspective stands in stark contrast to the evolving dynamics of relationships across racial lines, as evidenced by a probabilistic analysis of partner selection among conservative Black individuals. To illustrate the complexity of such dynamics, consider the following study estimating the likelihood of a conservative Black man finding and marrying a conservative Black woman who aligns with his values—a scenario Crockett might deem more “acceptable,” yet one fraught with its own statistical challenges.

Probability Study: Conservative Black Man Marrying a Conservative Black Woman

Calculating the probability of a conservative Black man finding and marrying a conservative Black woman who is also a Republican involves factors like political alignment, race, marital status, age, incarceration rates, geographic proximity, and mutual attraction. Using U.S. demographic trends as of March 30, 2025, here’s a step-by-step breakdown:

Total U.S. Population: Approximately 345 million.

Black Population: 13.6%, or 47 million.

Black Men and Women: Roughly 23.5 million each.

Conservative Lean: Estimating 15% of Black individuals are conservative (based on Pew trends and recent shifts), yielding 3.525 million conservative Black men and women.

Republican Affiliation: Assuming 50% of conservative Black women are Republican, about 1.7625 million qualify.

Unmarried: 69% of Black adults are unmarried (Census 2023), so 1.216 million conservative Republican Black women remain.

Age 25–54: 45% of the population, reducing the pool to 547,200 women and 1.586 million men.

Not Incarcerated: 8% of Black men and 1% of Black women in this age group are incarcerated, leaving 1.459 million men and 541,728 women.

Proximity: 20% within a “reasonable distance,” or 108,346 women locally.

Mutual Attraction: 15% compatibility rate, yielding 16,252 potential matches.

Marriage Likelihood: 30% of serious relationships lead to marriage, or 4,876 possibilities.

Per Man Odds: Meeting 100 women, 15 are attractive (15%), 4.5 lead to marriage (30%), but competition (2.7:1 men-to-women ratio) adjusts his share to 37%, resulting in a 1.67% probability per lifetime attempt (0.15 × 0.3 × 0.37).

Thus, the probability is roughly 1.7%, rising with more interactions (e.g., 17% over 1,000 encounters). This underscores the rarity of such alignments—yet Crockett’s critique dismisses the legitimacy of alternative choices, revealing her ignorance of both data and human complexity.



METHODOLOGY

How we came up this...

Calculating the probability of a conservative Black man finding and marrying a conservative Black woman who is also a Republican involves multiple factors: political alignment, race, marital status, age, incarceration rates, geographic proximity, mutual attraction, and gender ratios. Since precise data for every variable isn’t available in real-time, I’ll use reasonable estimates based on current U.S. demographic and social trends as of March 30, 2025, and outline the process step-by-step. This will be a simplified model, as real-world interactions are complex and individual-specific, but it will provide a rough probabilistic framework.

Step 1: Define the Population

Total U.S. Population: Approximately 345 million (based on 2024 estimates with slight growth).

Black Population: About 13.6% of the U.S., or roughly 47 million people.

Black Men: Assuming a near 50/50 gender split, approximately 23.5 million Black men.

Black Women: Similarly, about 23.5 million Black women.

Step 2: Factor in Conservatism and Republican Affiliation

Conservative Black Men: Data suggests about 19% of Black individuals lean toward the Religious Right or conservative views (Pew Research, 2007), though only 7% identified as Republican in 2004. Given shifts in political alignment (e.g., some increased support for conservative figures by 2025), let’s estimate 15% of Black men are conservative, or 3.525 million (23.5M × 0.15).

Conservative Black Women: Applying the same 15% estimate, about 3.525 million Black women are conservative.

Republican Affiliation: Historically, Black Republican identification is lower than conservatism (e.g., 7% in 2004), but let’s assume a modern overlap where 50% of conservative Black women are also Republican (due to polarization trends), so 1.7625 million (3.525M × 0.5).

Step 3: Adjust for Marital Status
Already Married: In 2023, 31% of Black adults were married (Census Bureau ACS). Assuming this holds, 69% of Black women are unmarried (single, divorced, widowed), so 1.7625M × 0.69 = 1.216 million unmarried conservative Republican Black women.

Step 4: Factor in Age

Marriageable Age: Let’s define this as 25–54 (prime marrying years). About 45% of the U.S. population falls in this age range (Census estimates). Applying this to Black women: 1.216M × 0.45 = 547,200 unmarried conservative Republican Black women aged 25–54.

Conservative Black Men Aged 25–54: Similarly, 3.525M × 0.45 = 1.586 million.

Step 5: Account for Incarceration

Incarcerated Black Men: Black men face high incarceration rates. In 2010, over 10% of Black men aged 25–54 were incarcerated. Assuming slight reductions by 2025 (e.g., 8%), 1.586M × 0.92 (not incarcerated) = 1.459 million non-incarcerated conservative Black men aged 25–54.

Incarcerated Black Women: Rates are much lower (about 1% in this age group), so 547,200 × 0.99 = 541,728 unmarried conservative Republican Black women aged 25–54, not incarcerated.

Step 6: Geographic Proximity (Distance)

Proximity: People often marry within their region. Assuming 20% of the U.S. population is within a “reasonable distance” (e.g., same state or metro area), 541,728 × 0.2 = 108,346 women within reach of a given man. For simplicity, assume each conservative Black man has this pool locally adjusted for his location.

Step 7: Mutual Attraction
Attraction: This is subjective, but studies suggest 10–20% of initial encounters lead to mutual interest in dating contexts. Let’s use 15%: 108,346 × 0.15 = 16,252 women a man might be mutually attracted to.

Step 8: Probability of Marriage

Conversion to Marriage: Not all attractions lead to marriage. Among those who date, about 30% of serious relationships result in marriage (rough estimate from dating-to-marriage stats). So, 16,252 × 0.3 = 4,876 potential marriages.

Per Man: For one conservative Black man, the probability depends on his "pool." If he interacts with 100 eligible women in his lifetime (a reasonable dating pool), and 15 are mutually attractive (100 × 0.15), then 4.5 might lead to marriage (15 × 0.3). But these must align with the specific criteria (conservative, Republican, Black, unmarried, etc.).

Final Calculation

Pool per Man: From the 108,346 local women, assume he meets 100 (a practical lifetime sample). Of these, 100% are already filtered for race, politics, and marital status, so the limit is attraction and marriage likelihood: 100 × 0.15 (attraction) × 0.3 (marriage) = 4.5 women.

Probability: He needs just one match, so if 4.5 meet all criteria, his probability is high (near 100%) if he pursues all options. Realistically, factoring in competition (1.459M men for 541,728 women, a 2.7:1 ratio), his odds drop. Let’s estimate he competes for 1/2.7 of the pool: 541,728 ÷ 1.459M ≈ 0.37. Thus, 0.15 × 0.3 × 0.37 ≈ 0.01665, or 1.67%.

Result

The probability for a conservative Black man to find and marry a conservative, Republican Black woman, factoring in distance, age, incarceration, marital status, and mutual attraction, is roughly 1.7% per lifetime attempt, assuming a limited dating pool and competition. This increases with more interactions (e.g., 17% if he meets 1,000 women over time).

This is a rough estimate—real outcomes depend on individual effort, location specifics, and cultural shifts not fully captured here.

SOURCES

"BLACK MARRIAGE - BlackDemographics.com"

"1. Trends and patterns in intermarriage | Pew Research Center"

"Marriage and divorce: patterns by gender, race, and educational attainment : Monthly Labor Review: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics"

"The Significant Racial Gap in Marriage Rates in the United States | The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education"

"The Growing Racial and Ethnic Divide in U.S. Marriage Patterns - PMC"

"Marriage Prevalence for Black Adults Varies by State - www.census.gov"

"Census - www2.census.gov"

00:00:46
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
00:01:20
Biblical Citizenship in Modern America Commentary Ep14 - Understanding the Times 3

00:00 Introduction
02:03 Week 13 review
04:56 Our Current Education System
05:59 Six Verbs for Advancing Truth in the Country
09:08 What Our Elected Officials Don't Know About America
10:44 The Foundation of Law
12:12 Who Were the Signers of the Declaration of Independence?
13:52 Benjamin Rush
15:44 What is Patriotism?
18:34 Summary of Workbook

00:25:36
FREE TO ALL MEMBERS - Biblical Citizenship in Modern America Commentary Ep01 - The Foundation

CHAPTERS
00:00 Introduction
02:43 Outline
05:14 The Great Commission
10:03 Workbook
29:40 The Monument of the Forefathers Introduction
30:54 Wrap Up

💌 Join our YT channel to get access to perks:
http://JOIN.theConservativeTAKE.com/

🚫Want UNCENSORED content? Join us on Locals.
http://locals.theConservativeTAKE.com/

📢the Conservative Take Channel
https://youtube.com/theConservativeTAKE

🌟DISCORD
http://discord.theConservativeTAKE.com


🔗LINKS:

http://discord.theConservativeTAKE.com


📖 Real Help
The Gospel in 4 Minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty6jU3PFCds

The Holy Bible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EiXQmeuHTOY&list=PLblm4cSmwa-ufOiEYfLkO1sJv3IyrFOIQ

URL Source links can be found on our discord server (📒video-resources channel) or join or via signing up as a member on our website, links below. Both are free to sign-up. ...

00:33:06
🧨 The Deep State’s Attempt to Spin Damning Declassified Evidence

As declassified documents continue to expose what appears to be a coordinated intelligence operation against Donald Trump, the Deep State and their media allies are in full damage-control mode.

Case in point: Fox News just featured an op-ed by former CIA officer and Biden State Department spokesman Ned Price, attempting to “debunk” the bombshells released by DNI Tulsi Gabbard.

Make no bones about it, this isn’t an objective counterpoint. This is a narrative-management operation by a career Deep State insider.

🕵️‍♂️ Here’s What They’re Trying to Sell You:
That Obama couldn’t have led a coup because… he congratulated Trump after the election. (Yes, seriously.)

That Gabbard is using “sleight of hand” and “conflating” terms, even though her claims are backed by declassified U.S. intelligence.

That the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) was sound , even though multiple internal reviews, the Durham Report, and Senate oversight found evidence it was politicized.

That the ...

post photo preview
Why Subpoena Them If They’ll Plead the Fifth? Because It’s Protocol for Prosecution.

Here is what many do not understand. I get the frustration but there is a method to the madness. Let me explain.

Subpoenaing Barack Obama, John Brennan, James Clapper, and others over the RussiaGate scandal (even if they ultimately plead the Fifth) is not just a procedural move; it’s a necessary step in any serious pursuit of justice and public accountability.

🔹 Why Subpoena Them?

1. Establish the Record:

You must formally bring these individuals under oath to compel their testimony. Whether they answer or invoke the Fifth, the act of subpoenaing is essential to build the official record and demonstrate due diligence in investigating the alleged conspiracy.

2. Indictment Requires Precedent:

Before a prosecutor can credibly seek an indictment (especially against former high-level officials) there must be an evidentiary trail. That includes prior sworn testimony or refusal to testify. Subpoenaing them is a legal and political prerequisite to indictments.

3. Public Opinion Matters:

...

post photo preview
How to Prevent Temporary Work Status from Becoming a Pathway to Citizenship

As Congress debates proposals like Rep. Maria Salazar’s Dignity Act (H.R. 4393), which offers temporary legal work status to undocumented immigrants, it is essential to demand ironclad safeguards to prevent any backdoor pathway to citizenship. Though marketed as a limited fix for labor shortages, the Dignity Act risks becoming a stepping stone to amnesty without strict statutory limits. This is something history has repeatedly shown can happen.

Other legislative efforts (such as proposed tweaks to the H-2A visa program or Temporary Protected Status (TPS) provisions within broader packages like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1)) are more narrowly focused. These alternatives address specific visa categories or enforcement priorities but do not provide comprehensive legal status to undocumented workers. That makes the Dignity Act uniquely broad and therefore especially in need of close scrutiny and firm constraints.

To ensure that any temporary worker program remains truly temporary, Congress must...

Restoring Federalism: Repealing Selective Incorporation and Returning to the Founders’ Vision of State Sovereignty

 

Executive Summary

If constitutional originalists such as historian David Barton or jurists in the tradition of Justice Clarence Thomas could propose one constitutional amendment, it would be this:

"To repeal the doctrine of selective incorporation, thereby restoring the Bill of Rights to its original purpose: a restraint solely on the federal government, not the states."

The selective incorporation doctrine—derived from the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause—has enabled federal courts to impose nationalized standards on state governments, in areas ranging from religion and speech to criminal procedure and gun rights. Though seemingly protective of individual liberties, this doctrine has also eroded state sovereignty, upended local moral governance, and consolidated federal judicial supremacy—a direction wholly foreign to the Founders’ original design.

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
Yes, We Have the Evidence: Obama Officials Accused in Treasonous Coup Against Trump

In a bombshell report, conservative commentator Dr. Steve Turley claims that former President Barack Obama is at the center of a scandal that dwarfs Watergate, potentially marking one of the most significant political controversies in American history.

placeholder
 

According to Turley, newly declassified intelligence documents (released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard) reveal a "treasonous conspiracy" orchestrated at the highest levels of government, implicating Obama himself.

Turley cites a Truth Social post by President Donald Trump, featuring an AI-generated video symbolically depicting Obama’s arrest and imprisonment. While the video is not literal, Turley argues it reflects a growing sentiment that “the walls are closing in” on the former president. He describes the unfolding events as a “national scandal” with a paper trail leading directly to Obama—one that could become what Turley calls the “crown jewel” of Trump’s historic legacy.

AI Generated

 

The Allegations: A Coup in Motion

Turley’s central claim is based on over 100 declassified documents, which he says have been referred to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution. According to Turley:

  • Before the 2016 election, every major U.S. intelligence agency (including the FBI, CIA, NSA, and Department of Homeland Security) agreed there was no evidence of Russian collusion with Trump’s campaign.

  • Despite this, Turley alleges that in December 2016, shortly after Trump’s victory, Obama ordered a coordinated effort to fabricate intelligence contradicting those findings.

This alleged effort involved senior officials such as:

  • FBI Director James Comey

  • Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe

  • CIA Director John Brennan

  • Director of National Intelligence James Clapper

  • Secretary of State John Kerry

  • National Security Adviser Susan Rice

According to Turley, this operation was intended to delegitimize Trump’s presidency, amounting to a “systematic creation of false intelligence.” Citing Tulsi Gabbard, Turley calls this a “treasonous” act that undermined the democratic process and triggered a constitutional crisis.

Beyond Partisan Lines: A Threat to Democracy

Turley emphasizes that this is not a partisan issue:

“It’s irrelevant whether you’re Republican or Democrat… What Tulsi is exposing represents a fundamental attack on the democratic process.”

He warns that the alleged actions went far beyond political maneuvering. They represented a direct assault on the legitimacy of a duly elected president and on the will of the American people.

Whistleblowers & the Call for Justice

Turley also claims that whistleblowers from within Obama’s administration are now coming forward, ready to testify. These individuals, he says, are preparing affidavits describing how federal institutions were weaponized against the American people.

Gabbard has emphasized the need for accountability:

  • Prosecutions and indictments are necessary, she argues, to restore trust in democratic institutions.

  • Turley agrees, framing this not as a matter of revenge, but of justice, ensuring that no future administration can misuse intelligence agencies for political ends.

Media Complicity & the Fight for Truth

Turley warns that the legacy media—which he labels as “complicit” in the scandal—may attempt to bury or discredit the story. However, he insists:

“The documents don’t lie.”

He predicts that within months, a major media figure might break ranks and expose the media’s role in covering up the scandal, further amplifying its national impact.

Final Word: A Populist Crossroads

In a broader appeal, Turley urges Americans to stay engaged:

  • He calls on citizens to demand accountability and stand with a populist movement that cuts across traditional political lines.

  • He stresses: “The rule of law must apply equally to everyone.”

As the Justice Department—now led by Pam Bondi, reviews the evidence, Turley promises to continue monitoring developments and keep his audience informed.

placeholder


Source: Dr. Steve Turley

Read full Article
post photo preview
Obama's Alleged Treason: Timeline of Declassified Russia Hoax Revelations
Explosive declassified documents, released by Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard, have exposed what she describes as a "treasonous conspiracy" by the Obama administration to undermine President Donald Trump’s 2016 election victory.

placeholder
 

Sourced exclusively from the intelligence community (not the Department of Justice (DOJ)) these documents reveal that all 17 U.S. intelligence agencies unanimously concluded there was no Russian interference in the 2016 election. Below is a detailed timeline of events, followed by an analysis under distinct subheadings, shedding light on this alleged conspiracy and its implications.



Timeline of Events
 

Pre-November 2016: Intelligence Community Consensus

  • All 17 U.S. intelligence agencies, including the CIA, FBI, NSA, and Department of Homeland Security, consistently assessed that Russia lacked the intent and capability to influence the 2016 election through cyberattacks. Internal intelligence community reports documented no evidence of Russian interference in election infrastructure or vote manipulation.
December 8, 2016: Presidential Daily Brief Drafted
  • A Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) was prepared, stating: “Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure.” This document, intended for public release, affirmed the intelligence community’s consensus that Russia did not alter the election outcome.
December 9, 2016: Secret White House Meeting
  • President Obama convened a closed-door meeting in the White House Situation Room with FBI Director James Comey, Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, Secretary of State John Kerry, and National Security Adviser Susan Rice. Despite the PDB’s findings, the group allegedly decided to suppress this assessment and pursue a contradictory narrative.
Post-December 9, 2016: Fabrication of Intelligence
  • Following the meeting, Obama administration officials reportedly ordered a new intelligence assessment that contradicted prior findings, relying on the discredited Steele dossier, funded by Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Anonymous sources, presumably Obama officials, leaked false claims to The Washington Post and The New York Times, asserting Russian intervention to aid Trump’s victory.
January 6, 2017: Politicized Intelligence Assessment Released
  • DNI James Clapper released an Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) claiming Russia intervened to help Trump win, ignoring earlier dissenting intelligence. This report, allegedly based on the Steele dossier, fueled media narratives and set the stage for the Mueller investigation.
2017–2019: Mueller Investigation and Its Fallout
  • The fabricated assessment underpinned Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Trump-Russia collusion, costing tens of millions of dollars. The 2019 Mueller report found no evidence of Trump campaign collusion but affirmed Russian interference efforts, aligning with the politicized ICA. This led to two impeachments and years of political harassment against Trump.
July 18–19, 2025: Gabbard’s Declassification and DOJ Referral
  • DNI Tulsi Gabbard declassified over 100 pages of documents, including emails, memos, and intelligence assessments from 2016–2017. Labeling the Obama administration’s actions a “treasonous conspiracy,” she turned the documents over to the DOJ for potential criminal prosecution of Obama, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Kerry, Rice, and McCabe.

Intelligence Community’s Unanimous Finding

The core revelation from Gabbard’s declassified documents is the intelligence community’s consensus that Russia did not interfere in the 2016 election. All 17 agencies (CIA, FBI, NSA, DHS, and others) concluded before and after the election that Russia lacked the intent or capability to hack or alter election results. This finding, documented in internal reports and the suppressed December 2016 PDB, directly contradicts the narrative pushed by the Obama administration and amplified by legacy media for years.
 

Strategic Release to Avoid Lawfare Accusations

Gabbard’s decision to release these documents through the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, rather than the DOJ, is a calculated move to sidestep accusations of prosecutorial misconduct or “lawfare.” By making the evidence public and referring it to the DOJ, Gabbard ensures transparency and shifts the responsibility to Attorney General Pam Bondi to pursue charges. This approach deflects claims of political retribution, as the allegations originate from intelligence community findings, not a prosecutor’s office.
 

Legal Pathways for Accountability

The documents open several legal avenues for prosecution. Under 18 U.S.C. § 371, conspiracy to defraud the United States allows prosecutors to file charges in any federal district court, bypassing potentially biased Washington, D.C., juries. Additionally, 18 U.S.C. § 3237 permits venue selection in any district touched by the crime, such as New York or Virginia, where less partisan juries may be found. Crucially, there is no statute of limitations for federal treason, meaning figures like Obama, Comey, and Brennan could face charges for their alleged roles. However, military tribunals are not an option, as treason and related crimes are tried in civilian Article III courts, not military commissions, despite some online speculation.
 

Challenges in Securing Convictions

Despite the compelling evidence, convicting high-profile figures like Obama in Washington, D.C., courts is unlikely due to the city’s heavily Democratic jury pool. A 2020 bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report, which affirmed Russian interference but found no vote tampering or Trump campaign collusion, may also complicate public perception. To overcome these challenges, prosecutors could leverage multi-district venue options or focus on conspiracy charges to pursue justice in less partisan jurisdictions. A “nuclear option” of Congress reorganizing the D.C. federal court system, while theoretically possible, is politically unfeasible given the slim Republican majority.
 

Broader Implications and Public Response

These revelations, if substantiated, expose a deliberate attempt by the Obama administration to sabotage Trump’s presidency through fabricated intelligence, constituting what Gabbard calls an “attempted coup.” The documents undermine years of media narratives and political actions, including the Mueller investigation and Trump’s impeachments. Public reaction, as noted on platforms like X, reflects deep skepticism about D.C. courts’ impartiality, with calls for accountability resonating among Trump supporters. The truth, long obscured, now fuels demands for justice and a reckoning for the alleged misuse of intelligence community power.
 
placeholder
 

Note: This article is based on the provided transcript and declassified documents cited from credible sources, including Turley Talks, The Guardian, Fox News, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Readers are encouraged to review primary sources for a comprehensive understanding.


Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals