this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2024
509 points (98.8% liked)

News

23608 readers
3582 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 138 points 4 months ago (2 children)

one does not simply write a 900 pages plan for sport

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 74 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Right?

Like, even if Trump doesn't win you can bet your ass a lot of conservatives are on board and pushing the agenda

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 47 points 4 months ago (3 children)

If Trump doesn't win, it'll just become Project 2029.

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 19 points 4 months ago

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

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I wonder how long we have left with Trump, though. I mean, the dude's pushing 80 and already pretty senile.

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 23 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Trump didn't write Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation did. This is the agenda of the Republican party, not any one figurehead.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Fair point.

[–] randompasta 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

In 2029 it will be Dementia Don: Full Dementia

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Likely they'll have DeSantis running in his place instead by then...

[–] Captainvaqina@sh.itjust.works 3 points 4 months ago

Nah twinkletoes boots McGee was burnt, he's toast.

[–] randompasta 1 points 4 months ago
[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Isn't that what 2025 is? A plan for if Trump doesn't win.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Thanks, I hadn't been following it closely. Political news has been too depressing lately.

[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 months ago

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

[–] tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I've spent three years writing a fantasy campaign setting. The result is about 30-40 pages long so far.

900 pages is insane

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 27 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] negativenull@lemmy.world 95 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The Chevron case the SCOTUS just ruled on was in direct support of Project2025. They aren't waiting for a new potential president.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 43 points 4 months ago (2 children)

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 :(

[–] FilthyHookerSpit@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 6 points 4 months ago (2 children)

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. :(

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

If you're looking for another Supreme Court watch podcast, I recommend Strict Scrutiny.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 4 months ago

I miss that show

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 64 points 4 months ago (1 children)

p2025 is a comprehensive wishlist that ranges from staunch conservative to bananas christofascist stuff.

Now we can tar all of that with the P2025 brush.

This is going to bite them hard.

[–] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 24 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

P2025 sounds like a check engine code.

Edit: looked it up and it is one. It gets better though - related to emissions (OBDII)! 🤣

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

P2025 - Evaporative Emissions Fuel Vapor Temperature Sensor, Performance Out of Range.

"Project 2025- smells like hot farts"

[–] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Excellent! I knew we could get funnier. 😁

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 50 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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.)

[–] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 months ago

It's beautiful.

[–] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 25 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] dogsnest@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago
[–] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Xtallll@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Manchin voted for it in the defense spending bill in committee.

[–] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

He's gotta go

[–] qooqie@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Oh boy they’re going to push project 2025 with or without Trump aren’t they

[–] Butterpaderp@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago

They rallied against roe v wade for 50 years, yeah they're gonna keep going no matter what

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 4 months ago

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.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

“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?

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

“House GOP Moves to Budget Project 2025 Efforts”

?

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

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.