Jump to content

Project 2025: The plan for radical republicans to take America back to the 1700s


Recommended Posts

Posted
On 7/13/2024 at 5:24 PM, Sawbonz said:

I can see where Dixon wants to push back when he sees something that appears to be hyperbolic or even outright propagandistic. When I see a tweet and dig a little and it’s misleading or even bullshit I get pissed off at whoever is behind it.

TBH, I wasn't even trying to push back.  I was simply looking for an accurate understanding of that's in there because I don't see a path for Biden winning, and thus assume P2025 is a forgone conclusion.

On 7/14/2024 at 6:25 PM, mchookem said:

thanks for putting in the effort to do this, seriously.

i'm sure @DixonHurappreciates it. 

I do, thanks, @Neonmoon

On 7/14/2024 at 6:03 PM, F250 said:

The cited text sounds worse than the bullet points. The bullet points don't really grasp the seriousness. Reading the actual text brings up some major WTF? thoughts as a broad spectrum of the population would be impacted.

There should be some School House Rock type videos covering all the different areas of Project 2025.

100% this.  Instead, you've got Pete Buttigieg out there asking people to "take five minutes to read through Trump’s Project 2025 online"... who the fuck can read 922 pages in 5 minutes?

Some of us need easily digestible infotainment.

As for @Judge Roybeanbag's suggestion that only members of one of the 2 establishment parties should be able to vote, all I can say is wow.  @WhatTheBuck summed it up really well, so I won't harp on it, but the reason I'm an independent is because about 30-40% of my views could be defined as conservative and 60-70% could be classified as liberal, so neither of the parties conform to belief system.  So, instead, I vote for candidates, not political parties. It's really not any more complicated than that.

Just so happens that the vast majority of those candidates have been Democrats since 2004 because the GOP took the train to crazytown.  

As mentioned, many times before, I am voting for the Dem nominee in November, whoever that is.  I'm just hoping it's not Biden so more of my "kind" will be engaged in swing states will join me in voting against Trump.  

I think what a lot of posters are misunderstanding is that independents are not a monolith.  We don't have a party affiliation, or even a shared identity.  And so, it's not like we have a convention where we discuss who to vote for... we are literally just a people who are not members of either the DNC or GOP... that's it.  Thus, my concern is that many have looked at the two options and have basically given up.  

Yes, I can hear some of you rolling your eyes at the idea that some folks don't see Trump and the GQP as the existential threat that we do, and that's fair.  But I doubt most people, even Dems, are all that informed.  Voters could just as easily say, "we heard all this when Trump was running in 2016" and we survived.

So, it's not that I fear that independent, and some Dems, will vote for Trump... my concern is that many will be unmotivated and just stay home. 

I suppose we'll all find out soon enough.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

There's obviously a lot of Christofascist bullshit in that document but this one managed to stand out:

"the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages"

Do we think there might be some explanation for that other than inherently "higher levels of instability"?

I mean, these people are insulting the intelligence of the American public by having their manifesto publicly accessible, and they are on their way to being proven right for doing so.

Posted
On 7/14/2024 at 6:49 PM, YGIFS said:

The no-fault divorce one is still so baffling to me.  A significant portion of the divorces that occur between a politician or police officer spouse are declared "no fault" so the man can save face because he's in fact been abusive or cheating on her or substance abuse, or some combo.  They make a deal to just make it look like "we've grown apart" so the kids and extended family don't read about the real truth in the news.  Now, the actual proof is going to come out.  Family Law Courts will have to be on 24-hour watch and the wait times will be measured in decades, or longer.  I 've also questions about women not working and staying home with the kids, but I'll suppose we flesh that out later on.  

Bottom line---there's a bunch of shit on their list they didn't think through that will hurt them.  Not as much as it will hurt non-psychotic extremists, but there is some shit that has a fuck-ton of unintended consequences for them too, that they merely inserted for political points.  From drug prices to white trash couples having their kids on school lunch programs in rural America, they're gonna fuck over a massive chunk of their base.  Then we get to foreign policy, or lack thereof. 

I think most of them hadn’t thought through the unintended consequences of overturning Roe even though they had had 50 years to contemplate it. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
47 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

There's obviously a lot of Christofascist bullshit in that document but this one managed to stand out:

"the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages"

Do we think there might be some explanation for that other than inherently "higher levels of instability"?

I mean, these people are insulting the intelligence of the American public by having their manifesto publicly accessible, and they are on their way to being proven right for doing so.

I saw that. It’s in the section about a “Healthy Marriage and Relationship Education (HMRE) Program.” There’s a lot of creepy talk about protecting and prioritizing “faith-based” programs. They don’t provide any source for their stated statistics and my inclination is to doubt whatever numbers they’re listing and suspect that they’re most likely rooted in bias. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
28 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I saw that. It’s in the section about a “Healthy Marriage and Relationship Education (HMRE) Program.” There’s a lot of creepy talk about protecting and prioritizing “faith-based” programs. They don’t provide any source for their stated statistics and my inclination is to doubt whatever numbers they’re listing and suspect that they’re most likely rooted in bias. 

So, if someone feels like divorce they are supposed to go to their pastor to be talked out of it by threat of eternal damnation. 

Posted
55 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I know you think you’ll be safe, but you should know that fascist leaders tend to get all of their supporters killed. 

Jeez, don't tell him.

Posted
13 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I saw that. It’s in the section about a “Healthy Marriage and Relationship Education (HMRE) Program.” There’s a lot of creepy talk about protecting and prioritizing “faith-based” programs. They don’t provide any source for their stated statistics and my inclination is to doubt whatever numbers they’re listing and suspect that they’re most likely rooted in bias. 

I'm sure their "stats" take into account that same-sex marriage only became legal in large parts of the US less than 10 years ago.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, C-Man said:

I'm sure their "stats" take into account that same-sex marriage only became legal in large parts of the US less than 10 years ago.

It's such an obvious ploy.  Why limit the data to all marriages since same-sex became legal?  That wouldn't sell the myth!

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

An enterprising lefty should dig up the stats on how many same sex partners are in jail for abusing/killing their spouses vs. "Trad" marriages.  

Let's get real.  But trad fuckers don't want that put there.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 hours ago, C-Man said:

I'm sure their "stats" take into account that same-sex marriage only became legal in large parts of the US less than 10 years ago.

For anyone interested, the page number for this silliness is 481.  But of course, the "study" is not cited.

Posted
On 7/18/2024 at 8:40 AM, gmr548 said:

There's obviously a lot of Christofascist bullshit in that document but this one managed to stand out:

"the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages"

Do we think there might be some explanation for that other than inherently "higher levels of instability"?

I mean, these people are insulting the intelligence of the American public by having their manifesto publicly accessible, and they are on their way to being proven right for doing so.

it is true that the longest same-sex marriage in Texas is only 9 years.  That proves some shit...

Posted
On 7/17/2024 at 9:12 PM, tx 3 putt said:

 

On Jan 20th, Trump will sign executive orders for many if not all Project 2025 initiatives.

what might slow them down is the recent SCOTUS ruling (overturning chevron)  moving power from the Admin to the Legislative/Judicial branches. Sane people might be able to slow down project 2025 by suing that their inevitable agency decisions are not theirs to make.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

what might slow them down is the recent SCOTUS ruling (overturning chevron)  moving power from the Admin to the Legislative/Judicial branches. Sane people might be able to slow down project 2025 by suing that their inevitable agency decisions are not theirs to make.

Good one.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
On 7/17/2024 at 6:40 PM, gmr548 said:

There's obviously a lot of Christofascist bullshit in that document but this one managed to stand out:

"the average length of same-sex marriages is half that of heterosexual marriages"

Do we think there might be some explanation for that other than inherently "higher levels of instability"?

I mean, these people are insulting the intelligence of the American public by having their manifesto publicly accessible, and they are on their way to being proven right for doing so.

First I question its veracity. I could stop there. But as soon as you strip away the latent morality and judgment you can evaluate a number of factors.
 

First and foremost, gay marriage is in its infancy as an institution. There’s little research, therapists helping same sex couples usually glean from straight marriage research to aid. There is obviously tons of overlap and even within straight couples there are differences. I don’t know how gay men fight and resolve conflict but I can say two women conflict has its differences to straight couples. That’s a shallow attempt to highlight the issue but it’s subtle and meaningful at the same time. 
 

second, there is a ton of outcast pressure on LGBTQ folks already so mental health is always an issue. This is Christians acting the oppressors then saying see, they are fucked up when a marriage fails with no self awareness to realize they and how they treat their queer kids is a major factor in queer relationship instability (and their straight kids are not immune either). I don’t know a lot of folks who escape the family of origin and societal pressure unscathed that means there are lots of hurt queer folk and hurt people hurt people. It’s getting better.

Third, on the societal pressure front most LGBTQ folk resist normative demands to some extent so that means while little girls are taught to dream of their wedding day, many queer folk have outright scoffed at that. And that dynamic goes on and on across hetero normative societal values - monogamy being one of them, sex positivity, gender binary being another, going to church can be added to the list and on and on. Obviously some straight people scoff at some of this as well, but it’s more extreme in queer culture. So yeah the value of the institution itself may not be shared the same way.  I know very few gay people who see marriage as a religious sacrament and covenant. They see it as a legal agreement with tremendous importance but we aren’t moving on in the next life as queen and queen of our own universe. There’s nothing inherently magical or eternal about a marriage promise. 
 

so of course there could be different outcomes. Guess what, I’ll bet you $100 (big spender here) that lesbian couples will outlast everyone else and straight couples will fall in the middle and gay men the least all for mostly biological and psychological reasons that have nothing to do with morality. When you add kids I would think longevity increases across all categories of relationships as would be expected - and I find nothing judgmental about these potential differences. Nothing.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
41 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

I would have reported a suspicious package on board.

It is after all, our duty to report terrorist activity.  

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted
11 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

IMG_1159.jpeg

When de-planing, wish the guy, "Hey, good luck with your P-transition."

-the hell you'd say to me ?

"Your transition procedure.  Seems long and complicated, but if that's who you truly are inside..." 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

When de-planing, wish the guy, "Hey, good luck with your P-transition."

-the hell you'd say to me ?

"Your transition procedure.  Seems long and complicated, but if that's who you truly are inside..." 

I'd definitely say that to that Gaetz fucker if I sat next to him on a plane. you know matt, can I call you mattie? your eyebrows are on point true but really just a little too on point if you know what I mean.

Edited by troph
  • Haha 4
Posted
1 hour ago, Jive Turkey said:

Project 2025 is hitting at the local level. Quite possibly the most racist ad of the cycle.  
 

 

This is the real deal.

None of that high fructose corn syrup racism you see now-a-days.

This shit’s the cane syrup Mexican Coke style racism.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Posted

 

Le Batard talked about it on his show today, which is great because it likely hits a large audience that has not heard much about P2025 yet. Stick around until the very end for some lulz.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
Posted
On 7/12/2024 at 1:07 PM, Leeroy Jenkins said:

 

Project25.jpg

I saw a podcast that brought up Schedule F protections, and agreed with the speaker that might be the most frightening of all.  It basically makes every federal worker a political appointment so the President can fire everyone and install all lackeys at all levels.  As it currently stands, "only" about 4,000 fall in the category of political appointees.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I saw a podcast that brought up Schedule F protections, and agreed with the speaker that might be the most frightening of all.  It basically makes every federal worker a political appointment so the President can fire everyone and install all lackeys at all levels.  As it currently stands, "only" about 4,000 fall in the category of political appointees.

It never seems to be mentioned that Trump already did the Schedule F thing in October 2020: 

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-creating-schedule-f-excepted-service/

obviously, Biden un-did it.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
31 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

It never seems to be mentioned that Trump already did the Schedule F thing in October 2020: 

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-creating-schedule-f-excepted-service/

obviously, Biden un-did it.

Yep, that is how we ended up with the one completely unqualified guy as like secretary of defense or something for the last few weeks before Jan 6. Fucking insane. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yep, that is how we ended up with the one completely unqualified guy as like secretary of defense or something for the last few weeks before Jan 6. Fucking insane. 

Well, SecDef is a classic political appointee and always has been.  This is the equivalent of replacing all the Captains, Majors, Lieutenants, and Lieutenant Commanders, and Sergeants and Petty Officers with political hacks.  Commissars, if you will.

This is, I'm sure, the part of P2025 that appeals most to Trump, not for political expedience, but because he loves him some bootlickers.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Yep, that is how we ended up with the one completely unqualified guy as like secretary of defense or something for the last few weeks before Jan 6. Fucking insane. 

Christopher Miller. The SecDef Trump installed after losing the election. He’s also one of the people working on Project 2025. 

Edited by WhatTheBuck
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
20 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Christopher Miller. The SecDef Trump installed after losing the election. He’s also one of the people working on Project 2025. 

...and thus completes the great circle of crap.

Posted

We’re not gonna tell you everything that’s coming.  Just this 990 page manifest which contains literally every detail of what’s coming.  
 

He sounds like Goebbels at the end “sure things look a little rough right now with all of our weapons systems totally depleted.  But alas, we have this secret super-weapon that nobody knows is coming in two weeks!”

Posted
32 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Hmmm

 

So is this the Lindell version or do we think they really are going to go full Kristallnacht?  Would be a big FAFO moment for them I'm thinking.

Posted
40 minutes ago, A-Tex Devil said:

I am convinced this guy is a modern day Oswald Mosely.  And I am also pretty sure he'd take that as a complement.  

Compliment, but I tend to agree.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

I think something that the Dems and Harris need to make clear when they talk about Project 2025 is that this isn’t something they made up or that they are selectively criticizing.
 

This is the plan that the GOP ACTUALLY PUT OUT ON THEIR OWN. 

Harris needs to consistently point this out. This isn’t cherry picking. This isn’t twisting the facts. Quote directly from it. Put out links to specific parts of the text from their own site. All of it is out there. Don’t let them claim conspiracy by the Dems.  

  • Hook 'Em 5


×
×
  • Create New...