Red
Well-Known Member
Yeah, I remember hearing that repeatedly from someone…..
Project 2025 Training Videos
- Thread starter Red
- Start date
Red
Well-Known Member
At no time did anyone here claim Trump personally helped put Project 2025 together. You simply rejected it altogether as anything of any significance whatsoever. In your view, it was stupid to even mention its existence. You actually complained that it was a subject of discussion at all. Now, you try to squirm out of your dismissal of Project 2025 by claiming you only were pointing out that Trump himself did not personally work on putting Project 2025 together. I didn’t start a thread on Project 2025, for any reason other than pointing out it outlined plans for the next Republican administration.
Project 2025
With the Biden administration half over and with the immediate dangers inherent to one-party rule in Washington behind us for now, it’s past time to lay the groundwork for a White House more friendly to the right. For decades, as the left has continued its march through America’s institutions...
www.heritage.org
The Heritage Foundation and a “second American Revolution”. Always seemed like a worthwhile discussion, to me, among the many political oriented threads focused on our present moment.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FznbfmZ0JZE&pp=ygUxQSBuZXcgYW1lcmljYW4gcmV2b2x1dGlvbiwgaWYgdGhlIGxlZnQgcGVybWl0cyBpdA%3D%3D
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
I rejected they way you were using it, and the way you use it still as a symbol. You use the invocation of Project 2025 to not address ideas. It is so lazy.
DEI is racism. DEI programs allocate based on the color of one's skin, and those doing the allocating are racist bigots because they have to be to allocate based on race. Racists spun up a narrative of DEI being good racism to counter the bad racism of the past, but it is nothing more than racism with a PR campaign. It is racism and it is gross. Stepping away from racism, good racism, bad racism, all racism is a worthy effort that has broad popular support and yes is in Project 2025.
The lazy way you have used Project 2025 you are now using to support racism, because weeding out racism is in Project 2025, and Project 2025 is bad therefor getting rid of racism is bad. The rub is that I don't think you are a racist person, but I do think you are prone to intellectual laziness. I think you are unwilling to tease through complicated systems to separate wheat from chaff, but instead make up your mind before you start and seek so-called experts who affirm your zero effort conclusion. That is what I reject.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
l
lol
He can never admit he was wrong. lol pathetic
At no time did anyone here claim Trump personally helped put Project 2025 together. You simply rejected it altogether as anything of any significance whatsoever. In your view, it was stupid to even mention its existence. You actually complained that it was a subject of discussion at all. Now, you try to squirm out of your dismissal of Project 2025 by claiming you only were pointing out that Trump himself did not personally work on putting Project 2025 together. I didn’t start a thread on Project 2025, for any reason other than pointing out it outlined plans for the next Republican administration.
Project 2025
With the Biden administration half over and with the immediate dangers inherent to one-party rule in Washington behind us for now, it’s past time to lay the groundwork for a White House more friendly to the right. For decades, as the left has continued its march through America’s institutions...
The Heritage Foundation and a “second American Revolution”. Always seemed like a worthwhile discussion, to me, among the many political oriented threads focused on our present moment.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FznbfmZ0JZE&pp=ygUxQSBuZXcgYW1lcmljYW4gcmV2b2x1dGlvbiwgaWYgdGhlIGxlZnQgcGVybWl0cyBpdA%3D%3D
lol
He can never admit he was wrong. lol pathetic
Red
Well-Known Member
I introduced the subject of Project 2025. It was never my job to write a dissertation. I left plenty of links for people to do their own research. I can’t read for people; they have to do that themselves….
you mention: “instead make up your mind before you start and seek so-called experts who affirm your zero effort conclusion. That is what I reject.”. Well, of course I know whose side I’m on, lol. Of course I have preconceived conclusions regarding the Heritage Foundation. Of course I will look for analysis that confirm my complete distrust of the Heritage Foundation. This is an existential struggle, where my country is concerned. This is a form of civil war at the moment. It’s serious, and I’m in no mood to suggest to myself “The folks in the Heritage Foundation care so much about me and Americans like me. I must be balanced enough to acknowledge the billionaire class cares deeply about Americans like myself”.
Give me a break. People can read, and articles describing how bad Project 2025 really is are fine with me. I can see very clearly what is happening in the United States. Last thing I can be expected to respect is your bs. I have never needed your help in having intellectual clarity in understanding the current moment in our nation’s history. Not in the least. I see clearly, and have for a long time now. Your opinion of me, your objections to my opinions, I have no reason to care. After all, your own vision is clouded, sir, IMO. And that’s entirely your problem. Not my responsibility to help you out.
Here are more. Have you read all 920 pages, before coming to your own conclusions? I have indeed depended on the analysis of others. yeah, I’m intellectually lazy because I did not read from first word to the last word in a 920 pages document put together by the Heritage Foundation. But others have, and I can post links describing their analysis. And I can find great merit in their analysis. Project 2025 greatly enhances the power of the Executive branch. The last thing we need. And it was not really that difficult to recognize this…
Project 2025, Explained | American Civil Liberties Union
Learn more about the Heritage Project initiative that threatens to erode our democracy — and how to fight it at ACLU.org.
www.aclu.org
The People’s Guide to Project 2025
We read Project 2025’s Mandate for Leadership so that you don’t have to.
democracyforward.org
.
This report is part of a series from the Center for American Progress exposing how the sweeping Project 2025 policy agenda would harm all Americans. This new authoritarian playbook, published by the Heritage Foundation, would destroy the 250-year-old system of checks and balances upon which U.S. democracy has relied and give far-right politicians, judges, and corporations more control over Americans’ lives.
Introduction and summary
With American democracy already at a crisis point, extreme right-wing operatives have crafted an authoritarian playbook that would push it over the edge, destroying the nation’s 250-year-old bedrock system of checks and balances to create an imperial presidency. The Project 2025 Mandate for Leadership is a 920-page road map for a future president to wield excessive power to implement a dangerous policy agenda, ripping out democracy by its roots and replacing it with a system that most Americans would find unthinkable.1For many decades, there have been efforts to advance radical proposals to weaken America’s middle class, stripping them of fundamental freedoms and subverting the rule of law, most notably by capturing the U.S. Supreme Court. But the Project 2025 blueprint makes those prior efforts look quaint. Project 2025 unabashedly promotes the wholesale violation of norms and laws, consolidating enormous power in a president and trampling on Congress’ constitutional role—to take away Americans’ long-cherished freedoms and opportunities. Not only would this authoritarian playbook make it easier for a far-right executive branch to weaken the independence of public agencies, install political cronies throughout the government, punish people it disagrees with, and control what news the media can report, but it would also allow the government to eliminate abortion access, health care choices, overtime pay, educational opportunities, and countless other programs that benefit communities and families.
Quite simply, if Project 2025 is implemented, the United States would be unrecognizable. Instead, it would resemble autocracies around the world, such as Hungary and Turkey, which in recent years have severely weakened their democracies and vested inordinate power in authoritarian leaders who serve the interests of themselves, not the public. Once this backsliding occurs, it is incredibly difficult to fix. Make no mistake: This could easily happen in the United States without a firm system of checks and balances. Ominously, the Heritage Foundation, which created Project 2025, and its president declared in July 2024 that they are in the process of the “second American Revolution” and suggested that political violence may be necessary to effectuate their authoritarian blueprint if Americans resist.2
This report first discusses the background and draconian goals of Project 2025. It then explains how the plan’s extreme ideas could come to fruition, exploring seven critical guardrails that Project 2025 would demolish, including weaponizing the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) against political opponents and everyday Americans; politicizing independent agencies and executive branch departments; and replacing tens of thousands of nonpartisan civil servants with loyalists to do the president’s bidding. In each instance, this report provides concrete examples of the direct harms that would result from eliminating these crucial guardrails.
Last edited:
Al-O-Meter
Well-Known Member
I'm glad you have a bit of self-awareness and that we could find agreement.
The rest is mostly nonsense and will be exposed as such in the next 18 months when there is an election, then again 24 months after that when there is a presidential election. We aren't becoming an authoritarian country and nothing is happening to democracy.
As for the supposedly lost freedoms, nothing is being lost and that was actually the answer to what had been left out of your earlier fear over looming revolution. 1970 was the period in which Giswold v. Connecticut (1965), Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972), and Roe v. Wade (1973) were decided. Those decisions destroyed the American family and millions of women who used to raise children instead flooded into the labor market which dropped the value of labor causing real wages to decline for a long period. Without knowing it, you held high the economic case against a woman's right to kill her children and bought into the claims that it would lead to revolution.
While I do think allowing women to kill their children is bad, I don't think it will lead to revolution. It did lower real wages for a long time but eventually a new equilibrium was reached and wages started to rise again. The claim of real wages being stagnant is a case of cherry-picking end points and ignoring the crater between the end points showing us now on an upward trajectory. I do find it funny that you fell for it.
Red
Well-Known Member
PJF
Well-Known Member
What is Project 2025 really?
Project 2025, led by the Heritage Foundation, is a conservative initiative aimed at preparing a policy agenda for a future Republican administration. Its proponents highlight several aspects they view as positive, focusing on reducing government size, promoting economic growth, and aligning policies with traditional values. Below are the key positive aspects as articulated by supporters, based on available information and perspectives from posts on X:
1. **Reducing Government Overreach and Bureaucracy**:
- Project 2025 proposes shrinking the federal government by eliminating or downsizing agencies like the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Supporters argue this reduces wasteful spending and restores decision-making power to states and local communities, fostering more tailored governance.
- The plan aims to privatize functions like the National Weather Service and Amtrak, which proponents claim could improve efficiency and reduce taxpayer burdens by leveraging market-driven solutions.
2. **Economic Growth and Deregulation**:
- The initiative advocates for significant deregulation, particularly in agriculture, energy, and business sectors. Supporters argue this will lower compliance costs, potentially reducing consumer prices (e.g., cited examples include lowering egg prices by easing agricultural restrictions).
- Tax reforms, such as a simplified two-rate individual tax system (15% and 30%) and reducing the corporate tax rate from 21% to 18%, are seen as pro-growth measures. Proponents believe these changes will stimulate investment, job creation, and economic prosperity, especially for small businesses and entrepreneurs.
- Cutting capital gains taxes and eliminating taxes on tips are framed as ways to increase disposable income for workers and incentivize economic activity.
3. **Restoring Traditional Values**:
- Project 2025 emphasizes policies that align with conservative social values, such as promoting traditional family structures (married, heterosexual households) and protecting religious freedoms. Supporters see this as a counterbalance to progressive ideologies they view as divisive, like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
- The plan’s focus on protecting “life from conception” and limiting abortion-related policies (e.g., via the Comstock Act) is viewed as a moral victory for pro-life advocates, aligning with the values of many conservative voters.
4. **Strengthening National Security and Immigration Control**:
- The initiative proposes stricter immigration policies, including mass deportations and enhanced border security. Supporters argue this protects national sovereignty, reduces strain on public resources, and prioritizes job opportunities for American citizens.
- Plans to strengthen the military by focusing on readiness and traditional recruitment standards (e.g., reversing policies on gender-affirming care) are seen as bolstering national defense.
5. **Enhancing Executive Accountability**:
- The reintroduction of Schedule F, which allows the president to reclassify and replace certain federal employees, is defended as a way to ensure the executive branch aligns with the elected administration’s agenda. Supporters argue this reduces obstruction from unelected bureaucrats, making government more responsive to voters.
- Streamlining federal agencies is seen as a way to eliminate inefficiencies and ensure taxpayer dollars are used effectively.
6. **Promoting Energy Independence**:
- Project 2025 advocates for expanding domestic energy production, particularly fossil fuels, by reducing environmental regulations and defunding climate change initiatives. Supporters claim this will lower energy costs, enhance energy security, and support industries like oil and gas, which employ millions of Americans.
7. **Education Reform and Parental Rights**:
- By proposing to eliminate the Department of Education and redirect funding to states, supporters argue Project 2025 empowers parents and local communities to control curricula and school policies. This is seen as a way to prioritize parental rights and reduce federal influence over education.
- Ending programs like DEI in schools is viewed as refocusing education on merit and core academics, avoiding what some call “ideological indoctrination.”
### Context and Perspective
Supporters of Project 2025, as reflected in some X posts and conservative commentary, view it as a bold blueprint to counteract decades of perceived government overreach, progressive policy dominance, and bureaucratic inefficiency. They argue it aligns with the priorities of many Americans who value limited government, economic freedom, and traditional values. For example, the Heritage Foundation emphasizes that the plan reflects input from over 100 conservative organizations, suggesting broad grassroots support within the conservative movement.
However, these positives are not without controversy. Critics argue that the plan’s deregulation could harm public health and the environment, its social policies may exclude marginalized groups, and its personnel reforms risk politicizing the civil service. The feasibility of many proposals, like eliminating entire departments, is also uncertain due to congressional and legal hurdles.
### Conclusion
From a supportive perspective, Project 2025 is seen as a transformative agenda to streamline government, boost the economy, strengthen national security, and restore traditional values. Its focus on deregulation, tax cuts, and state-level control resonates with those who prioritize individual liberty and limited federal intervention. For a detailed look at the proposals, the “Mandate for Leadership” document is available at www.project2025.org.
Project 2025, led by the Heritage Foundation, is a conservative initiative aimed at preparing a policy agenda for a future Republican administration. Its proponents highlight several aspects they view as positive, focusing on reducing government size, promoting economic growth, and aligning policies with traditional values. Below are the key positive aspects as articulated by supporters, based on available information and perspectives from posts on X:
1. **Reducing Government Overreach and Bureaucracy**:
- Project 2025 proposes shrinking the federal government by eliminating or downsizing agencies like the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Supporters argue this reduces wasteful spending and restores decision-making power to states and local communities, fostering more tailored governance.
- The plan aims to privatize functions like the National Weather Service and Amtrak, which proponents claim could improve efficiency and reduce taxpayer burdens by leveraging market-driven solutions.
2. **Economic Growth and Deregulation**:
- The initiative advocates for significant deregulation, particularly in agriculture, energy, and business sectors. Supporters argue this will lower compliance costs, potentially reducing consumer prices (e.g., cited examples include lowering egg prices by easing agricultural restrictions).
- Tax reforms, such as a simplified two-rate individual tax system (15% and 30%) and reducing the corporate tax rate from 21% to 18%, are seen as pro-growth measures. Proponents believe these changes will stimulate investment, job creation, and economic prosperity, especially for small businesses and entrepreneurs.
- Cutting capital gains taxes and eliminating taxes on tips are framed as ways to increase disposable income for workers and incentivize economic activity.
3. **Restoring Traditional Values**:
- Project 2025 emphasizes policies that align with conservative social values, such as promoting traditional family structures (married, heterosexual households) and protecting religious freedoms. Supporters see this as a counterbalance to progressive ideologies they view as divisive, like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.
- The plan’s focus on protecting “life from conception” and limiting abortion-related policies (e.g., via the Comstock Act) is viewed as a moral victory for pro-life advocates, aligning with the values of many conservative voters.
4. **Strengthening National Security and Immigration Control**:
- The initiative proposes stricter immigration policies, including mass deportations and enhanced border security. Supporters argue this protects national sovereignty, reduces strain on public resources, and prioritizes job opportunities for American citizens.
- Plans to strengthen the military by focusing on readiness and traditional recruitment standards (e.g., reversing policies on gender-affirming care) are seen as bolstering national defense.
5. **Enhancing Executive Accountability**:
- The reintroduction of Schedule F, which allows the president to reclassify and replace certain federal employees, is defended as a way to ensure the executive branch aligns with the elected administration’s agenda. Supporters argue this reduces obstruction from unelected bureaucrats, making government more responsive to voters.
- Streamlining federal agencies is seen as a way to eliminate inefficiencies and ensure taxpayer dollars are used effectively.
6. **Promoting Energy Independence**:
- Project 2025 advocates for expanding domestic energy production, particularly fossil fuels, by reducing environmental regulations and defunding climate change initiatives. Supporters claim this will lower energy costs, enhance energy security, and support industries like oil and gas, which employ millions of Americans.
7. **Education Reform and Parental Rights**:
- By proposing to eliminate the Department of Education and redirect funding to states, supporters argue Project 2025 empowers parents and local communities to control curricula and school policies. This is seen as a way to prioritize parental rights and reduce federal influence over education.
- Ending programs like DEI in schools is viewed as refocusing education on merit and core academics, avoiding what some call “ideological indoctrination.”
### Context and Perspective
Supporters of Project 2025, as reflected in some X posts and conservative commentary, view it as a bold blueprint to counteract decades of perceived government overreach, progressive policy dominance, and bureaucratic inefficiency. They argue it aligns with the priorities of many Americans who value limited government, economic freedom, and traditional values. For example, the Heritage Foundation emphasizes that the plan reflects input from over 100 conservative organizations, suggesting broad grassroots support within the conservative movement.
However, these positives are not without controversy. Critics argue that the plan’s deregulation could harm public health and the environment, its social policies may exclude marginalized groups, and its personnel reforms risk politicizing the civil service. The feasibility of many proposals, like eliminating entire departments, is also uncertain due to congressional and legal hurdles.
### Conclusion
From a supportive perspective, Project 2025 is seen as a transformative agenda to streamline government, boost the economy, strengthen national security, and restore traditional values. Its focus on deregulation, tax cuts, and state-level control resonates with those who prioritize individual liberty and limited federal intervention. For a detailed look at the proposals, the “Mandate for Leadership” document is available at www.project2025.org.