one does not simply write a 900 pages plan for sport
Right?
Like, even if Trump doesn’t win you can bet your ass a lot of conservatives are on board and pushing the agenda
If Trump doesn’t win, it’ll just become Project 2029.
Oh yeah that too, but what I specifically meant was that there’s a lot of conservative lawmakers who’ll be pushing policy points from the “manual” before that – they’ll probably largely agree with a lot of the goals set out in it
I wonder how long we have left with Trump, though. I mean, the dude’s pushing 80 and already pretty senile.
Trump didn’t write Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation did. This is the agenda of the Republican party, not any one figurehead.
Fair point.
Isn’t that what 2025 is? A plan for if Trump doesn’t win.
Nah it’s a plan specifically for the president since it also includes things that only he could do, but there’s a lot of it that is just legislation
No, it’s a plan for how to quickly replace career administrators to pack the government with loyalists, cripple education and sprinkle in indoctrination, reverse key rights for women, and just generally subvert democracy to keep conservatives in power even though the population is interestingly progressive
It’s written for a president to put into place in their first year, hence “2025” when the next president will be sworn in
Thanks, I hadn’t been following it closely. Political news has been too depressing lately.
I’ve spent three years writing a fantasy campaign setting. The result is about 30-40 pages long so far.
900 pages is insane
900 pages is a suitable length for a large scale overarching policy agenda. It’s clear that they put a lot of thought into every detail of this.
The content of that 900 pages, now that’s insane. It’s literally a blueprint for a fascist Christian theocracy.
The Chevron case the SCOTUS just ruled on was in direct support of Project2025. They aren’t waiting for a new potential president.
They’ve wanted that forever. Once Goursich was chosen the legal world knew what was coming. A legal podcast I used to listen to called it once he was picked.
You know it’s corrupt when you can call things like that :(
What was the podcast?
It was called opening arguments, but one of the hosts did the whole “get popular and become a sexual predator” thing so they’re gone now. :(
If you’re looking for another Supreme Court watch podcast, I recommend Strict Scrutiny.
I miss that show
It’s almost like his mother was involved in the original Chevron case.
Funny thing was that it was a conservative victory at the time, because Reagan appointees were intentionally fucking shit up.
deleted by creator
P2025 sounds like a check engine code.
Edit: looked it up and it is one. It gets better though - related to emissions (OBDII)! 🤣
P2025 - Evaporative Emissions Fuel Vapor Temperature Sensor, Performance Out of Range.
“Project 2025- smells like hot farts”
Excellent! I knew we could get funnier. 😁
It’s nice to see Democrats properly demonizing a Republican agenda into a standalone buzzword, the way Republicans do with a new variations of “equality” every year (woke, DEI, etc.)
It’s beautiful.
Soon we’ll all be subsidizing Matt Gaetz raping and trafficking underage girls, while he continues to take a taxpayer salary and the DOJ does nothing about it.
I hope some group starts tracking every bill against p2025, so that any time they try to squeeze anything in it into a bill everyone knows and we can make it impossible to pass. We also need to know if any Dems ever allow any of it to pass… Basically it should become the anti-Bible for the left… If it’s in there, it’s never going to be allowed to happen
Manchin voted for it in the defense spending bill in committee.
He’s gotta go
Oh boy they’re going to push project 2025 with or without Trump aren’t they
They rallied against roe v wade for 50 years, yeah they’re gonna keep going no matter what
Of course they are. They’ve been laying the groundwork for this for literal decades. Trump was just a convenient tool for them.
My only hope is that it causes a schism among the Republican party, causing it to split in two so a conservative never wins an election ever again.
“Accused”?
Look, say it or don’t. These aren’t criminal charges, you don’t need to allege anything. They’re public figures, they’re not going to sue. Why the chickenshititude?
Say what, exactly?
“House GOP Moves to Budget Project 2025 Efforts”
?
The author is not accusing them of doing it, they are reporting that someone else is. The author is supporting those accusations by showing the evidence.
Common Dreams is a pretty shitty source, but this is actually reasonable journalism. They should report just the facts.
Yes I know. They’re using “accused” correctly - and limiting the impact of the article. The headline I offered changes no facts, presuming they show them in the article, and doesn’t limit the impact by offloading the premise as an “accusation”.
House GOP is funding Project2025 efforts. Is it doing so because Project2025 told them to? That’s irrelevant. If that’s the focus of the article, it shouldn’t be.
Saying “accused” is weak - it limits the impact because they’re not directly tying the budgeting and Project2025 together and they’re not saying who’s “accusing” them. It’s clickbaity.
My main complaint against commondreams is their adblocker-blocker. This type of headline writing is not unique to them.
