the Conservative TAKE
Politics • Culture • News
Why the 2025 ICE Riots Are Happening: It’s About Power, Not Protest
Updated 6.9.25 10:10am EST
post photo preview
theARP.org

The unrest that swept through Los Angeles and other blue-state cities in 2025 didn’t come out of nowhere. It wasn’t sparked by a single event or enforcement action. It was the visible edge of a deeper political panic. On social media, grassroots activist Scott Presler distilled the moment with striking clarity. Sharing a map of the projected 2030 congressional apportionment, he warned that due to deportation and interstate migration, Democrats could lose “way more than four House seats in California alone.” His message wasn’t partisan cheerleading. It was a plainspoken recognition of a looming demographic collapse for the Democratic Party. The map he posted tells the story: red states gaining representation, blue states bleeding seats and influence. The protests, Presler implied, weren’t just about immigration; they were about protecting the census math that sustains Democratic control. And that map may explain more about 2025 than any headline.

The Census Clock Is Ticking

Right now, Los Angeles streets are erupting. College campuses turned chaotic. Protesters surrounded ICE field offices. Pundits framed it as a moral battle over immigration. But behind the slogans and signs lies a quieter truth, one that’s not about race, justice, or compassion. It’s about power.

What we’re witnessing isn’t a spontaneous uprising. It’s a coordinated defense of a political system built on population counts. As @The_Prophet_ put it bluntly, “The protests, the riots, the sanctuary city breakdowns. They’re not reactive. They’re preemptive pressure campaigns triggered by the ruling class to preserve the only thing that keeps their machine alive: census-based political power.”

The anger on display isn’t about culture. It’s about arithmetic. And the countdown to the 2030 Census is the clock no one in Washington can afford to ignore.

Why Apportionment Matters

In the United States, representation in the House of Representatives and (by extension, the Electoral College) is based on total population, not citizenship. That means every person residing in a state, including those here illegally, affects how much power that state has in Washington.

For decades, states like California, New York, and Illinois benefited from this arrangement. Mass immigration (both legal and illegal) swelled their populations and expanded their influence. But that advantage is beginning to unravel. Deportations, domestic migration to red states, and declining blue-state birth rates are all contributing to a reshaping of the political map. The 2030 Census will formalize what many already sense: the old Democratic strongholds are losing ground.

The 2030 Forecast: A Shifting Map

According to the American Redistricting Project’s forecast, based on 2023 population estimates, the 2030 Census is set to trigger a dramatic redistribution of political power. California is projected to lose four congressional seats, while New York is expected to lose three. Illinois follows with a loss of two. Six additional states (Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Rhode Island, and West Virginia) are each projected to lose one seat, marking a broad contraction across long-held Democratic strongholds.

On the other side of the ledger, red and right-trending states are gaining ground. Texas is projected to gain four seats, and Florida is close behind with three. Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Utah, Idaho, and Tennessee are each expected to pick up one seat. In total, this amounts to a net shift of 14 congressional seats from blue America to red which would be an electoral and legislative realignment with far-reaching consequences.


A Look Back: What If the 2030 Map Had Been in Place?

The 2022 midterm elections delivered a narrow Republican majority, with the GOP winning 222 seats to the Democrats’ 213 under the existing 2020 apportionment. However, if the projected 2030 congressional map had been in place, the outcome would have looked significantly different.

Republicans would have picked up 11 additional seats from growing states such as Texas (+4), Florida (+3), and others including Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Utah, Idaho, and Tennessee (each gaining +1). At the same time, Democrats would have lost 13 seats due to projected declines in population-heavy blue states like California (−4), New York (−3), and Illinois (−2), along with single-seat losses in Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Rhode Island, and West Virginia.

Altogether, this would translate into a net GOP advantage of 24 seats. The adjusted House balance under the 2030 map would be 246 Republicans to 189 Democrats and an overwhelming majority. Under that kind of congressional landscape, a future Republican president would have the legislative runway to reshape national policy with little resistance.

2024 in Retrospect: Trump’s Victory, Amplified

In 2024, Donald Trump returned to the White House after defeating Kamala Harris with 312 electoral votes. He reclaimed key battlegrounds like Georgia, Arizona, and Wisconsin, reshaping the post-Biden electoral landscape.

But under the 2030 electoral map, his margin of victory would have been even larger. States he carried like Texas, Florida, and others in the Sunbelt, are gaining electoral votes. Blue states he lost are shedding them. Trump’s adjusted total would have risen to 325. Harris would have fallen to just 212. No vote totals changed, but the math did.

And it’s that math that has Democrats sounding the alarm, not just for today, but for what’s coming.

Looking Ahead: JD Vance and the 2030 Race

If the political trends hold and JD Vance inherits Trump’s coalition heading into the 2030 election, he will begin the campaign with a baked-in advantage. Based on current population projections, the Electoral College will tilt even further in the GOP’s favor. Vance could lose Pennsylvania or Nevada and still win handily.

The path to victory for Democrats will narrow unless they reverse migration trends or replace lost population through new waves of immigration. Without that, the political map is likely to remain red-leaning into the next decade.

The Left’s Fear of the Numbers

Political analyst Larry Schweikart has described it starkly: “If President Trump deports just TWO million, the electoral equation changes badly for DemKKKcrats. If he deports TEN million, DemoKKKrats will never win another national election.”

That isn’t hyperbole. Deportation and migration don’t just affect local communities; they determine national representation. Every person removed from a blue state through deportation or outbound migration is one fewer counted in the census, one less seat in Congress, and one less electoral vote in the next presidential race.

Inside the Unrest: Organized, Not Organic

These protests are not simply moral expressions. They are part of a broader political operation. Journalist Eric Daugherty reported that the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), a group linked to Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue, was involved in organizing the unrest. CHIRLA, which has received government funding, helped lead protests in coordination with activist networks and media allies.

The strategies were multifaceted:

  • Flood the media with narratives of ICE oppression to build public backlash.

  • Mobilize “rights-based” protests through NGOs like United We Dream.

  • Sue the federal government to block efforts to exclude non-citizens from census counts.

  • Pass state-level sanctuary policies to prevent population loss.

  • Provoke federal enforcement actions to portray deportation as fascism.

None of this was accidental. It was calculated.

2032 Midterms: The GOP’s Moment?

Assuming JD Vance wins in 2030, the 2032 midterms could solidify long-term Republican control. With Democrats already projected to lose 13 seats through reapportionment, the structural math is not on their side. If Vance experiences a typical first-term midterm bump, Republicans could approach 260 House seats. Senate control could follow, particularly if rightward shifts in states like Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania continue.

In the end...The Census Is the Battlefield

These ICE riots were never just about immigration policy. They were about safeguarding political survival. The Democratic Party’s national strength depends on counting people (millions of them) who don’t vote but still impact power. If those people disappear from the census, the foundation of that strength crumbles.

That’s why protests were organized. Why lawsuits were filed. Why narratives were launched before enforcement even began.

Because what the Left fears most isn’t deportation. It’s what comes after.

Disempowerment.

The census is no longer a bureaucratic process. It’s the frontline of the next political war. And it may determine who holds power in America for the next generation.

community logo
Join the the Conservative TAKE Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
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...

00:00:46
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

Just my opinion, but it seems like a lot of people are grifting off Charlie Kirk’s memory for clicks. I’m not saying everyone, and shoot, I could probably be accused of the same thing. Fair point. My team is waiting for at least the funeral before putting out a full load of content... but the former just doesn’t feel right. Full disclosure: I did a one-hour livestream that night and was a guest on another show a few days later, but that’s about it.

I truly appreciate the sincere takes from people who’ve had the courage to speak. So all I’m really asking for is discernment and tastefulness, at least until after the funeral. But that’s just me, and just my opinion.

What I do know is this: The Left is already spinning (and distracting away from) this. I submit that are trying desperately to ease their guilt, undermine Charlie’s vision, and divide MAGA. They are trying to save their (soon to be out of power for the foreseeable future) Democrat Party.

The real takeaway is...

🧨 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
post photo preview
Census and Gerrymandering: How the GOP Is Fighting Back
UPDATED - 8/15/25 7:55am

America is standing at the edge of a political earthquake. It’s not just about one executive order, one census, or one round of redistricting. What’s unfolding is the culmination of decades of partisan maneuvering, demographic shifts, and constitutional disputes (and the results could permanently change the balance of power in Washington).

At the center of the storm is a startling admission: the U.S. Census Bureau overcounted several Democrat-leaning states in 2020, while undercounting Republican-leaning states. According to the Bureau’s own post-enumeration survey, these errors handed Democrats an estimated five extra congressional seats (and the electoral college votes that go with them) at the direct expense of red states like Florida and Texas.

Even more frustrating to many Americans, the Bureau insists the “oops” must stand until the next census numbers are applied in 2032. That’s nearly a decade of political power built on faulty data.

Trump’s Bold Countermove

President Donald J. Trump has decided that’s unacceptable. On August 7, 2025, he instructed the Commerce Department to conduct a new, highly accurate mid-decade census (one that excludes illegal aliens from the population count used for congressional apportionment and electoral college allocation).

Trump’s rationale rests on both constitutional and practical grounds. The Constitution requires an “actual Enumeration,” not statistical guesswork, and certainly not a count that inflates the representation of states with large populations of non-citizens. Under this new approach, red states like Texas and Florida could gain multiple seats, while blue strongholds like California, New York, and Illinois could see their delegations shrink.

Analysts estimate that excluding illegal aliens from the count could shift up to 14 seats from blue states to red states. California alone might lose four House seats. Florida and Texas could each gain four. The ripple effects on the Electoral College would be seismic, potentially locking Democrats out of a 270-vote path even if they won every “blue wall” state.

The Hypocrisy of Gerrymandering

While Democrats howl that this is an “attack on democracy,” they’ve long played the very same game in reverse. In fact, some of the most egregious gerrymanders in modern history exist in deep-blue states:

  • Massachusetts: Republicans make up 36% of voters but hold zero congressional seats.

  • Connecticut: 42% Republican, zero seats.

  • Maine: 46% Republican, zero seats.

  • New Mexico: 46% Republican, zero seats.

  • New Hampshire: 48% Republican, zero seats.

  • Rhode Island: 42% Republican, zero seats.

  • Vermont: 32% Republican, zero seats.

  • Hawaii: 38% Republican, zero seats.

  • Delaware: 42% Republican, zero seats.

Even in states where Republicans do hold seats, the imbalance is stark:

  • California: 38% Republican voters, but just 9 of 52 seats (20.9%).

  • Illinois: 44% Republican voters, but only 3 of 17 seats (17.6%).

  • Maryland: 34% Republican voters, but just 1 of 8 seats (12.5%).

  • Oregon: 41% Republican voters, but only 1 of 6 seats (16.7%).

This disparity is no accident. Blue states have systematically drawn maps to wipe out Republican representation. Now that red states are returning the favor, Democrats are discovering they have no room left to retaliate… they’ve already maxed out their own partisan advantages.

Texas as the Flashpoint

The battle has been especially fierce in Texas. After Democrat lawmakers fled the state to block legislation, Governor Greg Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton moved aggressively. Arrest warrants were issued for runaway legislators, and GOP lawmakers openly discussed increasing Republican representation with each week Democrats refused to return.

Under the Supreme Court’s 2019 Rucho v. Common Cause decision, partisan gerrymandering is a “political question” beyond federal court jurisdiction (meaning states can draw districts however they see fit). Red states are seizing that opportunity to counter decades of Democrat-drawn maps in blue territory.

The Bigger Picture

What’s happening now isn’t just about maps, or census methodology, or one executive order. It’s about a political realignment that could define American governance for a generation. By excluding non-citizens from the count and aggressively redrawing districts, Republicans could secure a structural advantage in both Congress and the Electoral College that Democrats would be hard-pressed to overcome.

Democrats have long argued these tactics undermine democracy. But as even some liberal commentators admit, they’ve been using the exact same tactics in their own states for years (and in many cases, more aggressively than Republicans ever did).

The irony is inescapable: the party that perfected the art of gerrymandering and census manipulation is now on the receiving end of its own playbook.

If the trends hold, the 2026 midterms could deliver a decisive shift in power… not just for the next Congress, but for decades to come.

Read full Article
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
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