The evil of Replacement Theory

?????
I agree with what he said.
Are you saying it's been answered 100 times and not just 20?

Except it’s not. You will say “actually replacement theory means x, y, and z; Tucker supports it!” And then only show a video of him saying x.

It’s disingenuous
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC_Vol
Yet when you proclaim “Tucker Carlson promotes this” you never use that definition. Or when you claim x% of people believe this.

It’s almost like you’re lying
Carlson knows exactly what he is promoting....otherwise he would call it something else.
He could call it the voting theory.
 
Except it’s not. You will say “actually replacement theory means x, y, and z; Tucker supports it!” And then only show a video of him saying x.

It’s disingenuous
It's not. Tucker knows the "code" words and how to manipulate the strings of his followers.
 
Carlson knows exactly what he is promoting....otherwise he would call it something else.
He could call it the voting theory.

Or he has a different definition. Such as the one used in the survey in the OP stating that over 30% of people believe this.
 
Now do the part of where the % of flights increased and where they didn’t.
That’s also a big red flag
Once again, Gov. Ron DeSantis wasn't objecting to the frequency of the flights that were transporting underage illegal immigrants to shelters and designated sponsors, or to the volume of illegal immigrants being transported to Florida. He was objecting to the practice itself. However, this practice did not begin with the Biden Administration. It goes back multiple administrations, and was also done while Trump was president.

Why didn't Gov. DeSantis object to this under Trump?

Because it's not truly a concern of his, but he does see some political advantages for exploiting it now. It's partisan politics. DeSantis is pandering to his base. He often does.
 
Using the words REPLACEMENT THEORY certainly is - 100%. And Tucker knows that better than anybody.

Is it though? When the NYT claims over 30% of people believe in replacement theory, what exactly did they mean?

Do 30% of people believe in a Jewish conspiracy?
 
Or he has a different definition. Such as the one used in the survey in the OP stating that over 30% of people believe this.
Do you think he knows it is defined differently? Has he ever expressly discussed how he is using his definition and in no way supports the more broadly accepted definition? I think not. Curious.
 
Is it though? When the NYT claims over 30% of people believe in replacement theory, what exactly did they mean?

Do 30% of people believe in a Jewish conspiracy?
A lot of them do. Many just think it's white liberal global elites and aren't worried about the Jewish angle.
 
Do you think he knows it is defined differently? Has he ever expressly discussed how he is using his definition and in no way supports the more broadly accepted definition? I think not. Curious.

He specifically states what he means. He openly defines his terms. Then you accuse him of saying what you want him to say.

It’s gross
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT
A lot of them do. Many just think it's white liberal global elites and aren't worried about the Jewish angle.

A lot of 30% is less than 30%. Which means the NYT is doing the same thing you’re accusing Tucker of doing. The only difference is we have actual proof they’re doing this.

In the case of Tucker, you just think he’s doing it
 
He specifically states what he means. He openly defines his terms. Then you accuse him of saying what you want him to say.

It’s gross
What he does is gross. But I put it more and more on the people who willingly consume his grossness.
 
What he does is gross. But I put it more and more on the people who willingly consume his grossness.

Is it what he does or what you think he does?

You’re accusing him of saying one thing and meaning another, without any evidence that he is doing so. Yet the NYT openly does this and you’re silent about it.
 
Is it what he does or what you think he does?

You’re accusing him of saying one thing and meaning another, without any evidence that he is doing so. Yet the NYT openly does this and you’re silent about it.
It's what he does.
I can't access the NYT's article so I can't comment on it. (but I would love to read it)
 
For about the hundredth time now ...

Replacement Theory involves much more than shifting voting demographics. It becomes racist and even xenophobic in nature, when you assume as Tucker Carlson does, that all black and Latino migrants are unskilled workers seeking to take manual labor employment opportunities away from workers who were born in the United States. Carlson never provides any data concerning the education or work experience of these black and Latino migrants. Carlson always just assumes that they fully represent unskilled labor. He then targets white American-born workers, near the bottom of the socio-economic scale, with fear-mongering tactics designed to tap into feelings of resentment and distrust toward these black and Latino immigrants.

In effort to defend Tucker Carlson, many of you only want to make this an issue concerning voting demographics. That makes for an incomplete discussion involving Replacement Theory..

Damn, racist, white supremacy and ultra MAGA’s oh my. Lol
 
So they aren’t bringing in a new voting base for the democrats..??
Well, for one thing, the immigrants being transported aboard those flights are mostly comprised of minors, who aren't eligible to vote yet... and if the objective was just to add votes for Democrats, it does make one wonder why this practice was also carried out by the Trump Administration?
 




Tucker: Jail time is now the fair penalty for disagreeing with Biden

May. 24, 2022 - 14:58 - Fox News host torches Democrats' response to those who disagree with them on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight.'


Tucker Carlson: Democrats have figured out the only way to win the next election


The only way Democrats will win the next election is to convince voters that Republicans are dangerous


Things are changing fast, as you know, and you can tell how fast they're changing by the way that people talk about politics. Language reflects feelings and thoughts. When your views change, so does the way you talk about them. That's especially true of liberals who have very deep feelings and their main feeling (this has always been true) is contempt for you.

If you ever listen to NPR, you know exactly how much contempt liberals have for you and you get to pay for it. NPR takes your tax dollars and then lectures you about how immoral you are. That is liberalism distilled. It's been going on a long time. NPR has been running its particular scam since 1971, but the sneering tone you hear on NPR has been the hallmark of liberals for nearly a century.

Liberals have contempt for Dwight Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon (boy, did they) and for Gerald Ford even. If you're old enough to remember Ronald Reagan, you will recall vividly how liberals felt about him. "Reagan was an idiot," they told you, "a mouth breather" and so was anybody who would vote for him—very much including you. In the words of Al Gore, Republicans were the, "extra chromosome right-wing." So, they were literally genetically defective. That's how liberals actually talk.

Whenever two or more liberals are gathered, you will find sanctimony, but there's a new inflection. You may have noticed it recently. The pivot (and it was a pivot) came six years ago. It was during the 2016 presidential campaign. Liberals seemed to lose any remaining sense of humor the moment Donald Trump arrived. Why? Well, because he called their bluff. Looking back, it's obvious what happened. By 2016, no one could argue that liberal programs or many programs, the various fads and metaphorical wars we were waging on this or that bad thing, there was no evidence that any of it had done anything to improve American life.

Liberals promised you they would make everything great, but they didn't. In fact, every single liberal enthusiasm failed from radical feminism to urban renewal, from outsourcing to the so-called sharing economy. All of them, each and every one, turned out to be a complete disaster. The reason 2016 was significant is that the liberals could no longer deny this. They couldn't say, "Give us another 50 years and we'll turn Baltimore into Geneva."

They couldn't say that because no one would believe it. Not even their own voters would believe that. So, for liberals, 2016 was a profoundly humiliating moment and those can be good. Well-adjusted adults learn from humiliating moments, but that's not what liberals did. They turned their rage outward and they focused that rage on the people they had failed. You always hate the ones you betray. So, liberals decided they hated the American middle class. In 2016, Democrats stopped making arguments in favor of their own policies, whatever those might be, and instead reoriented the entire party around attacking the very people that historically they had represented. Again, America's middle class. Now they hated them. At a fundraiser she thought was off the record. Hillary Clinton summed up the contempt all of them felt.

Tucker Carlson: Democrats have figured out the only way to win the next election
 
Not that it really frightens me that much as i dont think Race really matters; but it is not arguable that the percentage of ethnic white Europeans is on the decline.
I've addressed this issue before, but it isn't just unique to white Europeans. Japan, South Korea and China (soon) are dealing with this. I don't want to go back down this road again because it is not a popular/politically correct explanation.

But it is not blood or race that makes America what it is. It is our shared culture and our values and those are found in great quantities among all races in our country. America is not a result of hardware but of software.
In 2024, what are American values? Gender fluidity? Piety? Peace and justice? The Bill of Rights? Traditional family (Man, woman and child)?

Please tell me what contemporary American culture and values are?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT

VN Store



Back
Top