Project 2025??

[Danioover9000]

@Rafael Thundercat

2 minutes ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

https://www.openculture.com/2016/11/umberto-eco-makes-a-list-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.htmlsome one did a summary

Umberto Eco 14 points on Fascism. amazing 

   Sure it's amazing. Did you persuade the Trump supporters or those with a more nationalistic bend with this?

[Hardkill]

18 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Exactly. They are so delusional that they cannot see that the majority of Americans will reject their ideas.

They shoot themselves in the foot with their own ideology. Trump is smarter than them. He knows their stuff is unpopular.

I have no blindspot on this issue. All is clear.

Low-information voters and poorly educated people don't care much about actual policies and don't vote for a candidate based on what that candidate's policies are, right?

On 7/3/2024 at 7:27 PM, Leo Gura said:

Half of them won't care because they have been brainwashed to foam at the mouth for owning the libs. The other half will realize they made a mistake but by then it will be way too late.

Though, Project 2025 is a list a numerous unpopular policies.

So, how much do voters really care about policies when they are voting for a certain candidate?

Edited July 7, 2024 by Hardkill

[Rafael Thundercat]

8 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Rafael Thundercat

   Sure it's amazing. Did you persuade the Trump supporters or those with a more nationalistic bend with this?

The problem is that a man convinced against his will is not convinced still. I was a hard core mormon so I dont hold hopes that any list of anything will change an idiot mind. 

[Rafael Thundercat]

Analizis of his denail about the Project 

 

[Rafael Thundercat]

this guys dont rest.. give me a break

 

[DocWatts]

[Bobby_2021]

On 7/5/2024 at 11:38 PM, Leo Gura said:

Deep state does not have immunity. They can all be arrested for breaking laws.

They wouldn't be arrested because they're are not doing the actual crimes. They will get someone else to do it for them. There will be several layers of plausible deniability or even decoys in the way.

And they have connections with the heads of investigative agencies to botch the investigation before it getting any further.

With the tech, power, information and connections at their disposal these things are too easy to do.

That's what the deep state is: It's the heads of all the security agencies collectively operating in shady ways. 

The last audit of the cia was in the 60s or 70s. Ask yourself what are they hiding. Why do they have immunity from audits? Because they do plenty of illegal stuff. 

[Danioover9000]

@DocWatts

4 hours ago, DocWatts said:

   Yeah that 900 page is crazy. I still think Trump won't likely win, and the deep state will not let him win, so another Biden win. I wish Berny wins and be president but Biden is the only figure most Americans can handle in their fragile psyches. 

[Oppositionless]

1 hour ago, Danioover9000 said:

@DocWatts

   Yeah that 900 page is crazy. I still think Trump won't likely win, and the deep state will not let him win, so another Biden win. I wish Berny wins and be president but Biden is the only figure most Americans can handle in their fragile psyches. 

I have to agree with you, the deep state won't let Trump win. And, honestly, I think that's just fine. I'm not even totally against magas who say the election in 2020 was rigged, how could I possibly know? All I know is, Trump's bad for capitalism, and some people who are much more intelligent than conservative politicians know it.

Plato is pretty well known for disliking democracy, and it's easy to see why. People are tribal apes with little foresight. Why should a bunch of clueless people run society? Not that I think all or even most elections are rigged, but I would be shocked if this upcoming one isn't, to be honest, it's just too important not to be.

Edited July 7, 2024 by Oppositionless

[Danioover9000]

@Oppositionless

10 minutes ago, Oppositionless said:

I have to agree with you, the deep state won't let Trump win. And, honestly, I think that's just fine. I'm not even totally against magas who say the election in 2020 was rigged, how could I possibly know? All I know is, Trump's bad for capitalism, and some people who are much more intelligent than conservative politicians know it.

Plato is pretty well known for disliking democracy, and it's easy to see why. People are tribal apes with little foresight. Why should a bunch of clueless people run society? Not that I think all or even most elections are rigged, but I would be shocked if this upcoming one isn't, to be honest, it's just too important not to be.

   True. Hopefully nothing bad happens to Trump, other than them trying to prosecute him. I meant like an assassination attempt of Trump really wants to win. If they give Trump the JFK thing, then that's likely all the right wing needs to martyr him and go for a civil war. At that point it's bad for everyone in the country. Honestly this is a circus show getting needlessly serious.

[Leo Gura]

41 minutes ago, Oppositionless said:

the deep state won't let Trump win.

By your logic they let him win before.

[Bobby_2021]

11 hours ago, Oppositionless said:

the deep state won't let Trump win.

The deep state gets their way no matter whoever wins. Trump is only going to make to make it slightly difficult for them. So, it is not worth the effort to not let him win at all. 

Do you think the most powerful people in the whole world leave their lots to a bloody election that happens every four years? Lol. That exercise is meant for democratic fools like us so that we can argue on genders and racism.

They are laughing at us for getting heads deep in identity politics while they are playing class politics. 

Trump is also a part of the deep state, just that he will not fit in so neatly among them. That is what we want. To shake up things and hope someone with morals gets things back in order. 

Edited July 8, 2024 by Bobby_2021

[Danioover9000]

@Leo Gura

16 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

By your logic they let him win before.

   Because at that time Donald Trump won fair and square when Obama left office, and the Americans were pissed off enough at Obama and the left then. They didn't know then what he was capable of. If they knew deep state would make him disappear.

[Rafael Thundercat]

LenPen,speaking about her ideials on the Politics of France and the Difference of the Rigth Wing of America and the Rigth Wing in France. 

She kind of make sense for me. Even if the interviewer try to trick her into a rabbit Hole

https://youtu.be/-ABH1PxK3Co?si=TuNHxWg6ISBTUMGJ

[nerdspeak]

1 hour ago, Rafael Thundercat said:

She kind of make sense for me.

These people always “kind of make sense.” If they were totally incoherent, no one would vote for them. 
 

What makes them effective is they mix legitimate grievances with a lot of toxic appeals to anger and scapegoating.

[DocWatts]

2 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Leo Gura

   Because at that time Donald Trump won fair and square when Obama left office, and the Americans were pissed off enough at Obama and the left then. They didn't know then what he was capable of. If they knew deep state would make him disappear.

According to the skewed rules of the game he won, I wouldn't call it 'fair and square ' since he lost the popular vote by 3 million.

[Raze]

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/americas/north-america/us/2024/07/why-donald-trump-rejected-american-conservatisms-favourite-think-tank
 

Quote

Why Donald Trump rejected American conservatism’s favourite think tank

He knows he will never win as the tribune of the right.

Quote

The least persuasive argument against Donald Trump is that he is a committed ideologue bent on delivering the conservative movement’s long-standing wish list. In reality, Trump won the 2016 GOP primary by defying conservative policy orthodoxies, and he continues to disappoint the purists this time around. Behold his hilariously cruel dismissal of Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation-led effort to staff and set the agenda of his next administration.

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform on Friday afternoon. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying, and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

Students of Republican history will have heard echoes of Richard Nixon’s dismissal of Young Americans for Freedom, the group founded in 1960 by William F. Buckley to push the GOP away from the New Deal settlement and in a more libertarian and aggressively anti-Communist direction. Swatting away the YAFers as “nuts and second-raters”, Nixon governed as the last New Deal president at home while pursuing détente with Moscow and an opening to Beijing.

Buckley’s group, rebranded as Young America’s Foundation, is on the advisory board of Project 2025, alongside some four dozen right-of-centre think tanks, colleges, journals, and advocacy outfits. The authors of its policy playbook, Mandate for Leadership: the Conservative Promise, are a who’s-who of the conservative intellectual movement, ranging from libertarians to conventional conservatives to New Right types, including not a few alumni of Trump’s first administration.

Some of these advising groups and individuals are serious and praiseworthy. Among the advisory groups, for example, is the economic reformer Oren Cass’s organisation, American Compass, which has won plaudits across the spectrum for articulating a pro-worker agenda on the right and for exposing the corrosion of the real economy by Wall Street. The report also acknowledges Elbridge Colby, the fresh-thinking Pentagon strategist whom I recently profiled for The New Statesman, for providing feedback, though Colby himself is not featured as an author.

But the document’s overall orientation clearly owes more to the numerous free-market and libertarian figures and entities that shaped it more directly. Project 2025 is thus all too typical of today’s Heritage Foundation: It presents the same old obsessions of movement conservatism and the donor class, only now repackaged as hard-hitting Trumpism. The foreword by Heritage boss Kevin Roberts sets the tone, in his elisions even more than what he does mention. Summing up America’s domestic crises, Roberts has much to say about the ravages of “woke” than about issues like wages, job and health security, and retirement for working- and lower-middle-class Americans.

Roberts and many of his authors are more interested in “dismantl[ing] the administrative state and return self-governance to the American people”: OK, Kevin, I invite you to take the first flight after the Federal Aviation Administration has been dismantled. Or to eat the first can of sausages after the American people have been freed from under the tyrannical yoke of the Food and Drug Administration. Many of the foreign policy sections, meanwhile, could have been penned by any starry-eyed George W. Bush official circa 2005: “The correct future policy for Iran is one that acknowledges that it is in US national-security interests, the Iranian people’s human-rights interests and a broader global interest in peace and stability for the Iranian people to have the democratic government they demand.” Back to regime change!

On healthcare, Project 2025 offers the same old libertarian nostrums about letting “consumer choice” and “competitive markets” and “health-savings accounts” (HSAs) take care of the problem. Translation: encouraging individuals and families to seek less care and permitting private insurers to cover shoddier plans, while affluent Americans get to use the HSAs as one more tax shelter. Elsewhere, the document waffles on core populist demands, staging debates over issues like industrial policy and trade with China rather than taking a decisive position that would match Trump’s own worldview and that of the GOP’s increasingly working-class base. On trade, there is a point-counterpoint standoff between Peter Navarro, Trump’s trade warrior (as The New York Times has described him), and Kent Lassman, a standard-issue market fundamentalist from the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Navarro, whose position on tariffs and import substitution has emerged as the new conventional wisdom among Bidenites and even many in the UK Labour party, admirably makes his case. But Lassman disagrees: “The next president should ignore special interests and populist ideologues who want… industrial policy, trade protectionism, and other failed progressive policies.” This single derisive reference is the only time the word “populist” appears in a document supposedly prepared for a populist administration.

By the time we get to education policy – “the federal Department of Education should be eliminated” and school meals for kids should be cut back – it becomes painfully obvious why Trump distanced himself from Project 2025. Contrary to his mainstream reception and to the chagrin of movement activists and donors, Trump isn’t a conservative ideologue. He favours reducing regulatory burdens, which may be prudent in some areas – especially, for example, where green diktats would hinder manufacturing revival. But he knows that dismantling the administrative state in a complex economy is a libertarian fantasy; that the Department of Education can’t be eliminated; that attempting to do so would make him look like an ineffectual lunatic.

Hence, “I know nothing about Project 2025.”

 

[Rafael Thundercat]

There is another Project going is called Agenda 2030

I dont know if is all great ideials but good to know 

https://sdgs.un.org/goals

[hoodrow trillson]

Also consider:  the "deep state" does not exist.

[Bobby_2021]

25 minutes ago, hoodrow trillson said:

Also consider:  the "deep state" does not exist.

The only thing that's non existent is democracy. 😂