Understanding "Replacement Theory"....It's A Fact

[PoliticalChic]

So you don't want to talk about the context of those statistics you dropped? Okay. To what use are my comments to you politically? Will it help you secure the border? End birth right citizenship? Stem the tide of interracial unions? How can this foresight help you prevent your demographic replacement?

NO.....I want to talk about you being a Nazi.



You, expressing everything I have claimed about the Democrats and their supporters, is of great value.....probably more than any other value you have in this world.

Note this:
The Ideology of National Socialism Core Concepts Nation: defined by race/blood, deliberately excludes those not of the “Aryan” race, especially Jews. The German nation must be restored to racial health and power
https://www.wm.edu/offices/auxiliar...locaust-Extracts-from-Mein-Kampf-Ideology.pdf



Compare the above with this quote:
“ I'm happy to be part of the immigrant/mixed race/birth right citizenship brigade helping to demographically replace white Americans. “
Understanding "Replacement Theory"....It's A Fact post #57

When I have an interaction with some other Democrat about whether or not your sort are Nazis.....you can see how valuable you are.

 

[Curried Goats]

NO.....I want to talk about you being a Nazi.



You, expressing everything I have claimed about the Democrats and their supporters, is of great value.....probably more than any other value you have in this world.

Note this:
The Ideology of National Socialism Core Concepts Nation: defined by race/blood, deliberately excludes those not of the “Aryan” race, especially Jews. The German nation must be restored to racial health and power
https://www.wm.edu/offices/auxiliar...locaust-Extracts-from-Mein-Kampf-Ideology.pdf



Compare the above with this quote:
“ I'm happy to be part of the immigrant/mixed race/birth right citizenship brigade helping to demographically replace white Americans. “
Understanding "Replacement Theory"....It's A Fact post #57

When I have an interaction with some other Democrat about whether or not your sort are Nazis.....you can see how valuable you are.

I'm asking you what value you think my honest comments provide you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm asking you what value you think my honest comments provide you.

So you don't even want to deny that you're a Nazi????


Excellent.


Now.....is 'good bye' OK, or do you prefer the more traditional Sieg Heil?????

 

[Curried Goats]

So you don't even want to deny that you're a Nazi????


Excellent.


Now.....is 'good bye' OK, or do you prefer the more traditional Sieg Heil?????

How is you shouting Nazi! at me helpful to you? Do you think it's going to move much, if any of the Jewish American vote?

 

[PoliticalChic]

How is you shouting Nazi! at me helpful to you? Do you think it's going to move much, if any of the Jewish American vote?

Yes.

 

[Curried Goats]

Yes.

That's adorable.

 

[Uriel]

Do you think that if he had been honest about how determined he was to end slavery, that he would have won the election?

That's a good question. but I think he still would have when considering that all of his electoral votes came from free states. He won more electoral votes than the other 3 candidates combined.

You have to remember that, even with the 3/5 Compromise, the free states had more electoral votes in 1860.

 

[Uriel]

If they are propagandizing anything it's acceptance.

There is no evidence of wide spread grooming going on among LGBT lobbyists. The largest cases of child grooming in this country were done by the Catholic Church, the Mormon church, the boyscouts and Slavers who would frequently rape their young female slaves and under the one drop rule, sell their children off to other Slavers so they could do the same. Sally Hemings was the product of Slaver on slave rape as was her mother, her grandmother and her children. Grooming is typically done by people trying to hide their intentions, not those openly promoting inclusion, personal and social acceptance.

Why would the people who are most likely to understand that gender is a social construct, be reluctant to admit that notions of gender are influenced by society?

Only recently. It's still legal in some red states to marry children with their parents consent. It's important though to understand pedophilia and homosexuality and gender nonconformity are all very different things. Most obviously, a person's attraction to the same sex or rejection of gender norms aren't assaults committed against innocent children as pedophilia is. Lumping them into the same argument is disengeneous. There are all sorts of cultural norms from other societies or eras of this one that all decent and intelligent people should reject under the understanding that they violate the free will and safety of others.

Of course they are. There is nothing wrong with being gay or non binary so there should be nothing wrong with talking about these topics openly, even with children. There is something wrong with trying to fuck children.

You yourself said earlier those decisions should be left up to parents and doctors, well most medical professionals and pediatric groups would acknowledge the benefit of hormone blockers as an acceptable method of treating some (not all) cases of gender dysphoria. Very rarely would they recommend reassignment surgery except in extreme cases of intersexuality. (Children born with both male and female sex organs).

People are born gay. They aren't born political or religious but they are born gay so no, the LGBT community has no need to recruit.

The evidence is shown by teachers that are activists of that group themselves when they push these concepts on children. And corporations even do this now. State Farm just funded a group that is giving out books designed for 5 year olds on transgender ideology.

The left has often said that gender is a social construct, but the transgender concept conflates sex with gender. Gender dysphoria is a biological condition, so that would imply that gender is at least partially biological. And if someone transgender actually needs sex reassignment surgery, then clearly, gender is more than just a social construct for them. It would seem that someone that needs hormone treatment and surgery is actually transsexual in addition to transgender.

Nevertheless, if the left is deciding to go with the angle that gender is purely a social construct, then gender dysphoria wouldn't logically exist. Either that, or it would instead be sex dysphoria rather than gender dysphoria.

But there's another contradiction. You'll notice that transgender people often conform to a stereotype of femininity or masculinity, when feminists kept trying to convince us that femininity was not synonymous with female or that masculinity was not synonymous with male. I've yet to see a transgender woman embrace masculinity or a transgender man embrace femininity.

The reluctance I mentioned, however, goes back to something the LGBT lobby fought against early on. They attacked "conversion therapy" claiming that being gay is innate, not social or environmental, yet, this push for exposing impressionable children to various LGBT concepts (and the resulting increase in those who identify as LGBT in recent generations) clearly demonstrates that it has a social and environmental aspect. It's not purely biological, nor is it completely immutable.

We also know that trauma can affect sexuality. People who were sexually abused as children are significantly more likely to become pedophiles than the general population. A higher percentage of gay men were sexually abused as children than straight men.

As far as child marriage goes, that's legal in a lot of states, including blue ones. I'm not in favor of that myself, but that's still a far cry from what I was referring to about Rome and Greece. They were sexually active with children with no intention of marrying them, and it was often with children much younger than the minimum age limits imposed by the marriage policies you're referencing.

The reason I lumped in homosexuality and transgender concepts with pedophilia isn't a matter of seeing them as equals. It's a matter of pointing out that all of these are concepts not intended for elementary age kids to discuss unless it's with a parent involved. The state cannot be trusted with something like this. That's what any "decent and intelligent" person should understand.

There's a lot short of fucking children that is still wrong, and that includes confusing children with inappropriate topics. Once again, the impressionable nature of children makes this kind of activity by the state both perverse and manipulative.

Any parent that is seriously considering putting a prepubescent child on hormone blockers isn't fit to be a parent to begin with. Any doctor willing to enable that is a monster.

Some people are born gay. Others are either traumatized into it or normalized into it.

 

[Curried Goats]

The evidence is shown by teachers that are activists of that group themselves when they push these concepts on children. And corporations even do this now. State Farm just funded a group that is giving out books designed for 5 year olds on transgender ideology.

That's not evidence of anything but your bias. What you call pushing concepts is what I would call educating. A teachers entire job is to push concepts into young minds.

The left has often said that gender is a social construct, but the transgender concept conflates sex with gender.

First, I'm not interested in what you think the left has said, I'm interested in your responses to what I have said and would like to hear what you believe in return. Gender is a social construct. For the purposes of this conversation that isn't the left saying it, it's me saying it. Do you agree? Disagree?

Secondly, the term transgender does transpose gender where sex would be more appropriate but as a complete guess I'm going to posit that the impetus for moving away from the term transexual was so people didn't think of it as an issue relating to sexual intercourse.

Gender dysphoria is a biological condition, so that would imply that gender is at least partially biological.

It's all biological. I'm going to guess they call it gender dysphoria rather than sex dysphoria for the same reason as stated above. There's some interesting studies coming out showing the brains of trans individuals more closely resembles the brains of the sex they identify with.

And if someone transgender actually needs sex reassignment surgery, then clearly, gender is more than just a social construct for them. It would seem that someone that needs hormone treatment and surgery is actually transsexual in addition to transgender.

I know it probably seems confusing but if you think about it, someone who does undergo sex reassignment surgery is still going to biologically be the sex they were born as. Hormone treatments of testosterone or estrogen can encourage the body to develope in different ways but it will not change your chromosomes. Maybe the term transgender is simply an acknowledgement that these changes are a reflection of how they wish to be seen in society while recognizing biological sex is what it is.

Nevertheless, if the left is deciding to go with the angle that gender is purely a social construct, then gender dysphoria wouldn't logically exist. Either that, or it would instead be sex dysphoria rather than gender dysphoria.

The language isn't going to perfect. If it was sex dysphoria we'd have people insisting it was a condition relating to fornication.

But there's another contradiction. You'll notice that transgender people often conform to a stereotype of femininity or masculinity, when feminists kept trying to convince us that femininity was not synonymous with female or that masculinity was not synonymous with male. I've yet to see a transgender woman embrace masculinity or a transgender man embrace femininity.

I'm not sure you have much evidence of this other than the anecdotal. What would you consider stereotypical masculinity? Isn't that subjective? Aggressive gym rat guy? Is he stereotypically masculine to you? I think of my dad who loved to tinker with electronics, took things a part and then occasionally was able to put them back together again without left over screws. He'd only ever been in a fight once in his life when him and my uncle jumped a kid who was bullying them back in grade school and I don't think he's ever set foot in a gym.

The reluctance I mentioned, however, goes back to something the LGBT lobby fought against early on. They attacked "conversion therapy" claiming that being gay is innate, not social or environmental, yet, this push for exposing impressionable children to various LGBT concepts (and the resulting increase in those who identify as LGBT in recent generations) clearly demonstrates that it has a social and environmental aspect. It's not purely biological, nor is it completely immutable.

You are born somewhere on the spectrum between gay and straight. Conversion therapy doesn't work because of that. What is social and environmental is how we respond to these biological differences within ourselves and our community.

We also know that trauma can affect sexuality. People who were sexually abused as children are significantly more likely to become pedophiles than the general population. A higher percentage of gay men were sexually abused as children than straight men.

Trauma can affect lots of behavior. Young boys who are abused as children (not sexually) are more highly predisposed to act out violently and abuse others as adults, typically their spouses. What you haven't shown is that education about homosexuality is traumatic.

As far as child marriage goes, that's legal in a lot of states, including blue ones. I'm not in favor of that myself, but that's still a far cry from what I was referring to about Rome and Greece. They were sexually active with children with no intention of marrying them, and it was often with children much younger than the minimum age limits imposed by the marriage policies you're referencing.

You don't have to go all the way back to Rome, American Slavers were doing the same to their slaves.

The reason I lumped in homosexuality and transgender concepts with pedophilia isn't a matter of seeing them as equals. It's a matter of pointing out that all of these are concepts not intended for elementary age kids to discuss unless it's with a parent involved. The state cannot be trusted with something like this. That's what any "decent and intelligent" person should understand.

Well as a parent myself I couldn't disagree more. Let me explain with a couple of examples of a situations I had to deal with as a father of a young daughter and as a young man in school myself.

When my daughter was in the 3rd or 4th grade (it's been a while, I'm a grandfather now) I got a call to come to school because a boy had been running up to her in the hall and kissing her or trying to kiss her on the cheek and she shouted at him to stop and it became a parent teacher conference. The boys parents were embarrassed but had the just boys being boys attitude (a sentiment I remember sharing as a young boy myself but now found jarring listening to it in regards to my daughter), I was upset and wanted some sort of punishment but I didn't think he was a predator who needed the book thrown at him, he was just kid growing up trying to come to terms with a growing attraction of girls, and my daughter was just mostly embarrassed.

The other story from back in my school days has to do with a boy in class who used to always hang out with the girls. Again this was probably around 3rd or 4th grade. Everyone knew he was different but no one knew why. He did eventually much later in life come out as gay but no us knew what that was back so instead of understanding and acceptance we bullied that poor kid for being different and weird.

I'm ashamed to admit it took way to long to occur to me as an adult but why shouldn't we trust our educators to teach our children about appropriate responses to attraction, to unwanted touching, or to peers who seem different and strange? Most gay children will face bullying in schools, most young girls will have to deal with unwanted touching or attention. Couldn't we do better? Couldn't we trust educators to teach children how to be accepting and respectful along with teaching math and science?

There's a lot short of fucking children that is still wrong, and that includes confusing children with inappropriate topics. Once again, the impressionable nature of children makes this kind of activity by the state both perverse and manipulative.

I think it's the people who want to have these conversations behind closed doors that are the ones fearful that their beliefs are inappropriate.

Any parent that is seriously considering putting a prepubescent child on hormone blockers isn't fit to be a parent to begin with. Any doctor willing to enable that is a monster.

Are you a doctor? Didn't you say before these decisions should be made by parents and doctors? Is the caveat to that, so long as they agree with you? The medical profession doesn't have a gay agenda. I actually have quite a few doctors as relatives including a pediatrician and a pediatric surgeon. Their agenda is medical care. As far as the medical community is concerned puberty blockers are safe and effective treatments for some patients suffering from gender dysphoria.

Some people are born gay. Others are either traumatized into it or normalized into it.

Which says nothing about the inherent nature of homosexuality. People can be traumatized into all manner of detrimental behavior from violence to excess drug and alcohol use.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"324,000 U.S. Blacks Killed by Blacks In Only 35 Years

324,000 U.S. Blacks Killed by Blacks In Only 35 Years – American Free Press

americanfreepress.net


View attachment 648261




View attachment 648262

And those Democrat DAs, judges, prosecutors who won't inforce the law?

 

[IM2]

Thanks PC. These low info types are so conditioned to look at everything through the prism of race, it would make MLK shudder at the path the supposed race movement has taken.
Instead of content of character, they want everything judged on the basis of melatonin levels.
That's straight racism but they are so indoctrinated & miseducated, they cannot see the truth through the gaslighting

Quit lying about MLK.

 

[IM2]

One of the many lies that Democrat serfs....voters......have been trained to accept is that the same 11 million number remains decade after decade, while the Democrats entice millions in every year.



Let's prove the 50 to 80 million number, with quotes and documentation:



"Est., 11 million illegals."



Based on your accepting that bogus 'estimate,' you may continue to be astoundingly dumb.



1. That answer moves you firmly into the category of 'moron.'

Case in point: while millions of illegal aliens filter into the country year after year, the very same figure...."11 million illegal aliens live in the country"....neither changes nor is questioned.



2. "... no number has been given greater certitude and less investigation than that. Not even the number of planets in our solar system has enjoyed such constancy and acceptance.



Imagine the reaction if the media reported daily that this 20 million cohort, supplemented by chain migration and family reunification mandates, would swell to 40 million or 50 million in a decade." How Many Illegal Immigrants Live in the US?





There are between 50 million and 80 million illegal aliens living in this country.







3. James H. Walsh, formerly an Associate General Counsel of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) in the United States Department of Justice, writes



"... the U.S. Census Bureau routinely undercounts and then adjusts upward total census numbers of Hispanics and other foreign nationals residing in the United States––counting only, of course, those willing to be counted. For the year 2000, the Census Bureau reported a total U.S. population count of “about 275 million” men, women, and children.



When the states and local governments challenged that number as an undercount, the total was corrected upward to 281.4 million, with no clear count of illegal aliens. The Hispanic 2000 census count was 32.8 million, but on re-count the Census Bureau adjusted this number upward to 35.3 million, a 13 percent increase."

How many illegal aliens reside in the United States? | CAIRCO - Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform | issues legislation projects research



Increased the totals by 13%!!!

Now....hold on tight....this is gonna involve mathematics, so I may lose you here:



Soooo....if we apply that same 'adjustment' to the fabled 11 million....over a decade of so....we have almost 40 million.









But wait!!!

There's more!



4. Another way to arrive at the numbers of illegals in the country is to base it on the number of apprehensions and escapes.



"The average number of recorded apprehensions of illegal aliens in the United States now hovers at 1.2 million a year [in 2007]. A DHS report, Border Apprehensions: 2005, documented 1.3 million apprehensions in 2005. For the 10-year period (1996–2005), the highest number of apprehensions, 1.8 million, occurred in 2000, and the lowest, 1 million, in 2003. These DHS statistics contradict persistent statements by other government agencies that only 400,000 to 500,000 illegal aliens enter the country each year.





Journeymen Border Patrol agents (on the job five years or more) estimate that a minimum of five illegal aliens enter the United States for each apprehension, and more likely seven. That informed estimate would raise the total number of illegal aliens entering the United States in 2003 to 8 million men, women, and children.



He concludes that:



My estimate of 38 million illegal aliens residing in the United States is calculated, however, using a conservative annual rate of entry (allowing for deaths and returns to their homelands) of three illegal aliens entering the United States for each one apprehended. My estimate includes apprehensions at the Southern Border (by far, the majority), at the Northern Border, along the Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf of Mexico coasts, and at seaports and airports.









5. Taking the DHS average of 1.2 million apprehensions per year and multiplying it by 3 comes to 3.6 million illegal entries per year; then multiplying that number by 10 for the 1996–2005 period, my calculations come to 36 million illegal entries into the United States. Add to this the approximately 2 million visa overstays during the same period, and the total is 38 million illegal aliens currently in the United States."

How many illegal aliens reside in the United States? | CAIRCO - Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform | issues legislation projects research



....and that number is over a decade old!!!!!!



Gettin' nervous?





6. But other Border Patrol agents estimate that a minimum of five illegal aliens enter the United States for each apprehension, and more likely seven......which would give a total of nearly 80 million illegals occupying our country.



The number of illegals would be at least.....at least.....60-80 million at this time.....permanently residing right here is this country.





Hence...even a tiny fraction of them voting would be 3-6 million votes.

======================================================

Judging by the amount of time and effort that the Democrats spend advancing the aims and claims of illegal aliens....one can begin to see what a huge constituency they make up for the Democrat Party.



" Democrats had extensive get-out-the-vote campaigns in areas heavily populated by illegal aliens. As far back as 2008, Obama made sure that those who wanted to vote knew it was safe, announcing that election records would not be cross-checked with immigration databases.

... the Obama White House supported a court injunction that kept Kansas, Alabama and Georgia from requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote. The message was sent, loud and clear: If you're a noncitizen or here illegally, don't be afraid. You're free to vote. No one will stop you."

Did Votes By Noncitizens Cost Trump The 2016 Popular Vote? Sure Looks That Way

We don't know the exact number of illegal votes. No one does. But the data that are available suggest that the number of illegal votes was substantial.

www.investors.com

 

[johngaltshrugged]

Quit lying about MLK.

Stop being a race bating poverty plantation pimp.
MLK said you shouldn't be that

 

[Wreath656]

I would argue the only thing radical about his approach was how he handled Reconstruction. I believe his approach was somewhat necessary to protect the rights of blacks, but in doing so, many whites were angered. After his assassination, Andrew Johnson took a moderate approach, but the end result was that Jim Crow eventually happened.

To put it bluntly, as soon as things escalated at Fort Sumter, war was inevitable. I don't blame that solely on Lincoln. It's quite possible that Davis and Lincoln could have de-escalated things through diplomacy, but obviously, that didn't happen.

im sorry but irather you actaully read history for once

 

[Stann]

1. The supreme benefit of controlling the dissemination of informaton allows the Leftists/Democrats to define words to their benefit.
Such is the case with the proven attempt to alter the electorate to favor Democrats, by flooding the nation with unskilled, uneducated illegal aliens largely from corrupt and criminal societies.



2. But that's not how the Democrats explain 'Replacement Theory:'
And in the use of the Buffalo shooting, we see how cleverly the Democrats can use an event to erase a threatening argument against them.....even when the argument is true and accurate.
The catch phrase used by the demented shooter in Buffalo is "replEacement theory," and here is NPR's definition:
"...the "Great Replacement" is a conspiracy theory that states that non-white individuals are being brought into the United States and other Western countries to "replace" white voters to achieve a political agenda. It is often touted by anti-immigration groups, white supremacists and others, according to the National Immigration Forum."

What is the 'Great Replacement' and how is it tied to the Buffalo shooting suspect?​

The suspect allegedly wrote a 180-page document filled with hateful rants about race and ties to the conspiracy theory, "Great Replacement".

www.npr.org


3. Demorats have trained their voters to see everything through the prism of race.
This issue is more correctly seen as a welfare, or economics, issue.

“In all, nearly 60 percent of immigrants—legal and illegal—are on government assistance, compared with 39 percent of native households. Why would any country voluntarily bring in people who have to be supported by the taxpayer?”
― Ann Coulter, ¡Adios, America!: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole




4. The claim is that the economy needs these illegals.
"...undocumented immigrants are paying billions of dollar in taxes into state and local coffers, and that substantially more would be generated if President Obama prevails in imposing a new executive order protecting many of those workers from deportation."
Study Finds Illegal Immigrants Pay $11.8B in Taxes

But the facts aren't their friend... “The conservative Heritage Foundation estimated unlawful immigrant households paid $39.2 billion in 2010, but received $93.7 billion in government services.” -- Oliver Darcy

[So much for that fable.]
15 Stats That Destroy Liberal Narratives

Immigrants, espeically illegal immigrants, are enticed in by the Democrats for one reason: to vote, and vote Democrat.





5. "Republican objections to the Democrat plan would be exactly the same if Democrats were importing blonde-haired blue-eyed yodeling Scandinavians to shift the US electorate to the Left. In medieval scholastic terminology, what Republicans object to is only per accidens, not per se (accidentally, not essentially) about race. Republicans object to the importation of a political persuasion, not a specific race, into the country in order to achieve political power. It is only the Democrat’s explicit racist plan to use “persons of color” to shift the demographics to secure their hold on power that brings race into the issue!"

The Latest Hoax By Democrats And Their Media... Great Replacement Theory

Democrats claim that they are not using mass immigration to shift the demographics of America while simultaneously doing exactly that.

thebluestateconservative.com

Every word from the Democrats is a lie.

Anyone who has access to guns and who believes in replacement theory is a potential mass murderer. The facts speak for themselves. These crazies are willing to murder to try to prove their point. All they are proving is that they are insane.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Anyone who has access to guns and who believes in replacement theory is a potential mass murderer. The facts speak for themselves. These crazies are willing to murder to try to prove their point. All they are proving is that they are insane.

Clearly you have trouble understanding plain English the first few times it is explained.


1. The supreme benefit of controlling the dissemination of informaton allows the Leftists/Democrats to define words to their benefit.
Such is the case with the proven attempt to alter the electorate to favor Democrats, by flooding the nation with unskilled, uneducated illegal aliens largely from corrupt and criminal societies.



2. But that's not how the Democrats explain 'Replacement Theory:'
And in the use of the Buffalo shooting, we see how cleverly the Democrats can use an event to erase a threatening argument against them.....even when the argument is true and accurate.
The catch phrase used by the demented shooter in Buffalo is "replEacement theory," and here is NPR's definition:
"...the "Great Replacement" is a conspiracy theory that states that non-white individuals are being brought into the United States and other Western countries to "replace" white voters to achieve a political agenda. It is often touted by anti-immigration groups, white supremacists and others, according to the National Immigration Forum."

What is the 'Great Replacement' and how is it tied to the Buffalo shooting suspect?​

The suspect allegedly wrote a 180-page document filled with hateful rants about race and ties to the conspiracy theory, "Great Replacement".

www.npr.org


3. Democrats have trained their voters to see everything through the prism of race.
This issue is more correctly seen as a welfare, or economics, issue.

“In all, nearly 60 percent of immigrants—legal and illegal—are on government assistance, compared with 39 percent of native households. Why would any country voluntarily bring in people who have to be supported by the taxpayer?”
― Ann Coulter, ¡Adios, America!: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country into a Third World Hellhole




4. The claim is that the economy needs these illegals.
"...undocumented immigrants are paying billions of dollar in taxes into state and local coffers, and that substantially more would be generated if President Obama prevails in imposing a new executive order protecting many of those workers from deportation."
Study Finds Illegal Immigrants Pay $11.8B in Taxes

But the facts aren't their friend... “The conservative Heritage Foundation estimated unlawful immigrant households paid $39.2 billion in 2010, but received $93.7 billion in government services.” -- Oliver Darcy

[So much for that fable.]
15 Stats That Destroy Liberal Narratives

Immigrants, espeically illegal immigrants, are enticed in by the Democrats for one reason: to vote, and vote Democrat.





5. "Republican objections to the Democrat plan would be exactly the same if Democrats were importing blonde-haired blue-eyed yodeling Scandinavians to shift the US electorate to the Left. In medieval scholastic terminology, what Republicans object to is only per accidens, not per se (accidentally, not essentially) about race. Republicans object to the importation of a political persuasion, not a specific race, into the country in order to achieve political power. It is only the Democrat’s explicit racist plan to use “persons of color” to shift the demographics to secure their hold on power that brings race into the issue!"

The Latest Hoax By Democrats And Their Media... Great Replacement Theory​

Democrats claim that they are not using mass immigration to shift the demographics of America while simultaneously doing exactly that.
thebluestateconservative.com




Every word from the Democrats is a lie.