the Conservative TAKE
Politics • Culture • News
Promises Kept: 7 Reasons to Support President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill
post photo preview
The White House

“The most important thing in politics in America is honoring the promises that you make to the American people...that sacred trust between the voter and the man they elect.” — Stephen Miller

That statement, delivered during a June 5, 2025 White House discussion on President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill, captured the essence of what this legislation represents. Joined by senior White House officials Taylor Budowich, Russ Vought, and James Braid, Miller helped unveil a bill that transforms the promises of the campaign trail into binding law. It is a MAGA rally condensed into legislation.

This is not a spending bill. It is not a budget. It is a surgical, reconciliation-only package crafted to bypass the filibuster and deliver immediate, high-impact reforms on taxes, immigration, energy, and welfare. All of this will be done without raising spending or expanding bureaucracy. Despite predictable media distortions, the facts speak for themselves: this is the most pro-American, pro-worker, and fiscally responsible package to come out of Washington in a generation.

Here are seven reasons why every American should support this historic piece of legislation.

 

Senior White House officials Taylor Budowich, Stephen Miller, Russ Vought, and James Braid discuss President Trump’s One, Big, Beautiful Bill.

 

1. This is not a spending bill. It’s essential reconciliation:
As Russ Vought emphasized, this legislation is not funding the bureaucracy that remains subject to appropriations. Instead, it's a reconciliation bill designed to lock in critical reforms and campaign commitments while avoiding the Senate filibuster. It tackles mandatory spending and tax measures (what the American people care about most) without increasing discretionary outlays.

2. It doesn’t raise spending. It rescues taxpayers and trims government:
The bill cuts net mandatory spending by about $1.6–1.7 trillion over 10 years through welfare reforms like Medicaid work requirements and tightened eligibility. These savings are used to fund tax relief, not to expand government .

3. It doesn’t raise taxes. In stead, it upholds Trump's 2017 tax cuts permanently:
This legislation codifies the tax cuts introduced in 2017: no tax on tips, overtime, social security, full interest deductibility for American-made car loans, and a better child tax credit. This represents the largest working- and middle-class tax cut package ever proposed, with estimates of a $13,000 average take-home pay boost per typical family.

4. It's economically pro-growth and anti-inflation:
Miller and Vought both highlight that by eliminating regulations and unleashing American energy, this bill fights inflation and lowers costs across the board in heating, fuel, electricity, and beyond. Meanwhile, work incentives (no tax on tips, overtime deductions) help more Americans earn more.

5. It enforces border security without causing debt:
This bill provides full, upfront funding for the border wall, ICE, and CBP, paid for by increasing visa and immigration fees so the money doesn’t come out of the taxpayer’s pocket 

6. CBO scores (don’t be fooled by baselines):
Critics rely on the CBO’s “current-law baseline,” which assumes existing tax cuts expire automatically, inflating deficit projections. White House experts argue for a “current-policy baseline”, reflecting realistic continuation of policies. According to Vought and Miller, under that baseline, the bill reduces the deficit by approximately $1 trillion, thanks to spending cuts and economic growth, not tax increases.

7. Misunderstandings about Medicaid cuts are overblown:
This bill does not remove “granny’s” Medicaid. Instead, it tightens work, verification, and participation requirements to root out fraud and refocus direct benefits on those truly in need, building on bipartisan reforms from the 1990s .

BONUS. Discretionary spending cuts are coming (but in the right vehicle):
Discretionary programs (like Education, USAID, NPR) must be cut via separate rescission bills or annual appropriations. That is underway such that hundreds of billions in planned cuts are flowing through those channels, not through this reconciliation package.

In the end...

  • Not a bloated spending bill: actually cuts mandatory spending.

  • No new taxes: solidifies and expands tax relief focused on working families.

  • Inflation-buster: by deregulating and promoting domestic energy.

  • Border-first: front-loaded funding paid by non-tax sources.

  • Responsible budgeting: addresses deficits through real cuts, not gimmicks.

This is legislative MAGA in motion delivering on promises, empowering taxpayers, and enforcing fiscal responsibility. If we allow skeptics to mislabel it as “spending” or “reckless,” we risk losing a once-in-a-generation chance to reshape government and economy in favor of everyday Americans.

Let’s call out the confusion, reject the scare tactics, and stand behind a bill that honors the trust of voters, keeps the campaign pledges intact, and secures our nation’s future prosperity.

Center-left and mainstream voices may spin misleading headlines, but the facts are clear: this bill cuts spending, cuts taxes, and cuts big government. That’s why it deserves our backing.

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

For those concerned about Iran, recognize this: Israel has delayed their progress, but it’s not a permanent solution. Iran will eventually acquire a nuclear weapon, and with improving missile technology, they’ll soon be capable of targeting the U.S. homeland. We must act urgently. The Golden Dome is not just a choice. It’s that critical. This is another compelling reason to support the One Big Beautiful Bill. Pass it.

On Christmas Day 1776, General George Washington did a preemptive strike on the Hessian army, saving his army & America from destruction.

Mexico STOLEN? - Here's Why that is Ridiculous

The land that is now Mexico and the American Southwest was first dominated by ancient civilizations like the Zapotec, Teotihuacan, and Maya, then overtaken or succeeded by the Toltecs and Aztecs in Mesoamerica and the Ancestral Puebloans, Hohokam, and Mogollon in the north, followed by Spanish conquest in 1521, then passed to Mexico in 1821, and finally, after the Mexican-American War, was ceded to the United States in 1848 through the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, in which the U.S. paid $15 million (≈ $550–600 million today) in compensation. This was a post-war acquisition, not a theft, as the U.S. fought for the territory and compensated Mexico under internationally recognized terms. While the land had changed hands through centuries of conquest, none of that history implicates the United States.

post photo preview
Israel's Strike on Iran Did Not Start WW3: 10 Reasons Why

On June 13, 2025, Israel launched a bold, preemptive strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, targeting sites like Natanz and eliminating key military figures, including IRGC commander Hossein Salami. The operation, dubbed "Operation Rising Lion," has sparked global alarm, with some fearing a slide into World War III. Yet, a closer look reveals this conflict is unlikely to escalate into a global conflagration. Here are ten (plus a bonus) compelling reasons why this strike, while significant, won’t ignite a broader war, grounded in strategic realities and current dynamics.

Source: Dave Reynolds


First, back-channel sentiments suggest many nations quietly support Israel’s move, even if they won’t say so publicly. Regional powers like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, wary of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, view the strike as a check on Tehran’s regional dominance, though diplomatic restraint keeps them silent. Western allies, while urging de-escalation, privately see the strike as a necessary response to Iran’s provocations, especially after the IAEA’s June 12 resolution condemned Iran’s non-compliance with nuclear obligations.

Second, Iran stands alone. Its traditional allies (Russia, China, and proxies like Hezbollah) are either unwilling or unable to escalate over nuclear facilities. Russia and China, both IAEA voters against Iran, prioritize their own strategic interests over defending Tehran’s nuclear program, especially given global scrutiny. Hezbollah, battered by Israel’s 2024 strikes, lacks the capacity to retaliate meaningfully, leaving Iran isolated.

Third, Iran’s stonewalling and bad-faith negotiations invited this response. For years, Tehran delayed and obstructed IAEA inspections, breaching its non-proliferation obligations since 2019. The failure of U.S.-Iran talks in Oman, coupled with Iran’s uranium enrichment nearing weapons-grade levels, signaled deceit. Israel’s strike was a direct answer to this duplicity, not an unprovoked act.

Fourth, Iran’s military capacity was severely crippled. Israel’s "Operation Rising Lion" demolished critical air defense systems, including Russian-supplied S-300s, and destroyed missile and drone facilities. The strike also eliminated key military leadership, including IRGC commander Hossein Salami, disrupting Iran’s command structure. The IDF’s precision, supported by a covert drone base inside Iran, ensures continued operations will further erode Tehran’s capabilities, sharply limiting its ability to mount an effective retaliation.

Fifth, Iran cannot match Israel in a head-to-head conflict. Israel’s technological superiority, demonstrated by its ability to penetrate Iran’s defenses and destroy fortified sites, far outstrips Iran’s outdated military. Tehran’s April and October 2024 attacks on Israel were largely intercepted, exposing its weaknesses. A direct war would be catastrophic for Iran’s already strained forces.

Sixth, as an Islamic nation, Iran is unlikely to target holy cities or key Israeli urban centers. Striking Jerusalem or other sacred sites risks alienating the Muslim world, particularly Sunni nations already skeptical of Iran’s ambitions. Tehran’s leadership, despite its rhetoric, understands the catastrophic backlash of such a move.


Seventh, a broader war would harm Gaza and the Palestinians, creating a public relations disaster for Iran. Escalation could disrupt humanitarian efforts in Gaza, where Iran claims to champion the Palestinian cause. The optics of worsening Palestinian suffering would erode Iran’s regional credibility and turn global sentiment against it, especially amid ongoing Gaza conflicts.

Eighth, President Donald Trump, as the 47th POTUS, is not playing games. His administration’s “maximum pressure” policy and clear support for Israel signal zero tolerance for Iranian escalation. Trump’s warning to Tehran was for them to agree to a nuclear deal or face “even more brutal” strikes sets a firm boundary, deterring Iran from risky retaliation.

Ninth, Iran’s economy is too fragile to sustain a prolonged conflict. Crippled by sanctions and internal unrest, Tehran cannot afford the financial or political cost of war. A drawn-out conflict risks domestic instability, potentially threatening the regime’s survival, which Iran’s leaders are keen to avoid.


Tenth, global powers are leaning toward diplomacy to prevent escalation, as evidenced by the IDF’s recent map of Iran’s missile range, which threatens nations like Russia, China, Turkey, Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia, Ukraine, and Northeast Africa. In short, Iran is a global threat. Many of these are nuclear-armed and eager to avoid conflict. Despite public criticism, France, Germany, and the UK are advocating restraint and pushing for renewed nuclear negotiations. Even China and Russia, while voicing disapproval, are hesitant to support Iran militarily, prioritizing stability to protect global markets from disruption.

 
Eleventh (BONUS), escalation could lead to Iran’s regime collapse. A full-scale war would expose Iran’s military and economic vulnerabilities, potentially galvanizing internal dissent. The mullahs, already facing domestic challenges, are unlikely to risk a conflict that could topple their rule, especially after Israel’s demonstrated ability to strike at will.

The strikes have undoubtedly heightened tensions, but they don’t herald World War III. Israel’s operation was a calculated move to neutralize an existential threat, not a reckless bid for war. Iran’s isolation, military inferiority, and strategic constraints (coupled with global calls for restraint and Trump’s firm leadership) ensure this conflict remains contained. The world watches, but the path to de-escalation is clearer than the fearmongers suggest.

Read full Article
post photo preview
How Trump Ends the Democrat Party: ICE Riots, Federal Force, and the Final Realignment

In 1861, Abraham Lincoln confronted a Democratic Party that had torn the nation apart. Fueled by radical Southern ideologues, they chose rebellion over union, slavery over liberty, and anarchy over constitutional order. Lincoln answered not with compromise, but with decisive force. The result? The Civil War crushed the Democratic Party’s national power for nearly a century. From 1861 to 1932, they won the presidency only twice. Lincoln didn’t just save the Union. He politically dismantled the party that tried to destroy it.

Now, in 2025, history repeats itself.

President Donald J. Trump finds himself facing a new kind of rebellion—one not fought with muskets, but with foreign flags, firebombs, and mobs protected by Democrat mayors and governors. In Los Angeles, lawful ICE deportations triggered mass riots, freeway takeovers, and violent attacks on federal officers; all cheered or excused by the modern Democratic Party.

But like Lincoln, Trump did not hesitate.

He federalized the National Guard, overriding California’s objections. And as of today, 700 active-duty U.S. Marines are being deployed to Los Angeles, marking the first such federal military response in nearly six decades. This isn’t just a law enforcement move. It’s a line in the sand.

Just as Lincoln shattered the pro-slavery Democrats, Trump now stands ready to break the post-American, open-borders party that wages war on sovereignty, law, and the very fabric of the nation. What we are witnessing is not mere unrest. It is a political realignment. And it may well mark the beginning of the end for the Democratic Party as a viable national force.

This is not just a reaction to civil unrest. This is a pivot in American history. It is a bold shift toward law, sovereignty, and national identity. The Democrats, meanwhile, have chosen chaos. They’ve taken the side of rioters and illegals, and in doing so, they may have committed political suicide.

1. The ICE Raids That Exposed the Left

Over the weekend, ICE carried out lawful, coordinated workplace raids in L.A. County. These were not random roundups. They were federal operations targeting known immigration violators. The response?

Rioters flooded the streets, waving Mexican and Central American flags.
They threw projectiles at ICE agents, set self-driving vehicles on fire, and stormed the 101 Freeway, trapping innocent families in traffic.

Rather than support the rule of law, California's elected officials condemned ICE, not the mobs. It was yet another instance of Democrats openly protecting lawlessness under the guise of “justice.”

2. Trump Acts...And He Doesn’t Wait for Permission

President Trump responded immediately. On Saturday night, he invoked Title 10 of the U.S. Code, bypassing Governor Gavin Newsom and federalizing 2,000 National Guard troops to quell the rebellion. 

Then today, June 9, it was confirmed: 700 active-duty U.S. Marines are being deployed to Los Angeles.

This level of decisive action hasn’t been seen since President Eisenhower deployed troops to enforce desegregation in 1957. Trump’s message is clear: this country will not be held hostage by anarchists, whether they wear black masks or fly foreign flags.

3. Democrats Choose Rioters Over America

Every Democrat governor in the country condemned Trump’s actions—not the violence, not the foreign flags, not the attacks on ICE.

  • They sided with the mobs.
  • They sided with those who want to dismantle American sovereignty.
  • They sided against every American who believes in borders, law enforcement, and national identity.

This is not political overreach. It is an exposure of the true character of the Democrat Party in 2025: post-American, post-sovereign, and post-constitutional.

4. The 80/20 Issue: Americans Side with Trump

This isn’t some far-right fantasy. Poll after poll confirms it. Immigration enforcement is an 80/20 issue:

  • CBS/YouGov (despite a heavy Democrat sampling) shows a majority supporting Trump’s deportation agenda.

  • Aggregate polling places Trump’s immigration approval between 52% and 60%, even among independents.

  • RMG, one of the most accurate pollsters from 2024, has Trump's immigration support approaching 60%.

Even voters who don't love Trump know he’s right on immigration. Americans are tired of seeing our laws ignored, our borders overrun, and our cities burned by activists who hate the country that shelters them.

5. From Summer of Love to Summer of the Steel Glove

In 2020, President Trump allowed local leaders to manage the riots of which many failed miserably. That summer was dubbed the “Summer of Love” by the left and the “Summer of Surrender” by the right.

But 2025 is different.

Trump isn't asking anymore. He’s acting. This is the “Summer of the Steel Glove”. This is a season marked by strength, law, and federal resolve.

The left opened the gates for four years, allowing 12 million illegal migrants into our country. Trump is closing them...decisively.

6. Why This Could Be the End of the Democrat Party

The Democrat Party has aligned itself with:

  • Foreign flags over American highways

  • Rioters over families

  • Anarchy over order

  • Open borders over national security

It is now the party of post-America. This is a movement that believes America is evil, success is theft, and sovereignty is oppression.

As commentator Christian Hines said, “You’re not going to reason with someone who thinks foreign mobs waving foreign flags are just as American as you.”

This isn’t politics as usual. This is a civilizational crisis. The Democrat Party has shown its hand, and it cannot win national elections on this agenda. As Stephen Miller put it:

“How does a party that backs illegal criminals, supports Hamas, and lets men into girls’ sports ever win again?”

They won’t. Not if the America First movement stays strong.

7. A Call to Action: What Comes Next

Trump has shown us the way. The American people are with him. Now, the right must:

  • Match the left’s radicalism with lawful, constitutional force

  • Pursue arrests and prosecutions of sanctuary politicians aiding illegal activity

  • Take back local control from Soros-backed DAs

  • Never again surrender cities to mobs

The left has already gone DEFCON 5 for their post-America vision. Now, we must match and exceed that resolve for America First.

If we stay the course, this won’t just be about winning an election.

Like Lincoln before us, we have the opportunity to break a party that chose rebellion over unity, ideology over country. We’ll dismantle the Democratic Party for a generation and reclaim the sovereign nation they tried to destroy.

Read full Article
post photo preview
Why the 2025 ICE Riots Are Happening: It’s About Power, Not Protest
Updated 6.9.25 10:10am EST

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.

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