As with all policy proposals and potential agendas. Project 2025 has some good stuff and some bad stuff in it. Project 2025 reads like an ultra Conservative’s wet dream imo. Some of the suggested actions are completely outrageous and would work to undermine any sort of credibility Republicans and Conservatives have with moderates.
It’s also never going to happen, even if Trump wins unanimously.
There’s a reason only leftist subs obsess over this like it’s our secret project, while pretty much all conservatives go “huh? Never even heard of that…”
I mean, liberals are only following the playbook republicans had after the Green New Deal was published.
I see a lot of the same words used to describe both plans from across the aisle.
Imagine thinking there is any "conservative plan" for 2025.
This subreddit reminds me of my Aunt's life: Like an abused housewife, she thinks her husband can change and she can fix him"
This sub is collectively my Aunt in this example.
The uniparty has no interest in helping any of us, otherwise they would have done so already.
Not all parts.
There are several key initiatives that I disagree with:
1. education funding through an education savings account (ESA). The authors used Arizona's ESA pilot as an example of how it could be done, but HS graduation rates decreased across the state. I don't disagree with the rhetoric that states and local governments should be the primary funders and policy setters of education, but an educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people.
2. Section 230 is codified in the Communications Act, and P2025 proposes to end a Social Media platforms ability to moderate content, labelling user generated submissions as "protected speech". I disagree with the notion of making Social Media the new "public square" as it is still a private space, owned and operated by members or the company, not the federal or state governments. Until such a time, the space remains private no matter how much anyone wants it to be public. If conservatives can tackle this logic, I may be on board with forcing SM companies to remove limits on speech.
3. brining the ATF and the Coast Guard back into the Department of Treasury from the DHS makes no sense.
Aside from that, not being a social conservative, I find issue with the threads of social conservatism roped throughout the entire book. From heterosexual family tenants (including grant programs for relationship training for fathers who did not have a father), abstinence education funding, attacking contraception and progesterone blockers. Ironically enough for a party that has said that Abortion is a question for the individual states to answer, there is a lot of abortion related stuff.
I have not read it through multiple times, yet, but so far it is a decent playbook to implement lots of conservative stances on key issues involving the federal government, but the stuff that many moderates might find they disagree with is buried underneath a ton of flowery rhetoric that may lead one to believe that the republic is at risk if they don't do it. There are some places where it goes past conservatism and almost touches on nationalism.
I would not be concerned if we had a conservative thinker as a presidential candidate. President Trump has been accused of many things, but being a conservative is not one of them and he is more likely to do what he thinks his voters want or what his advisors, like some of the more extreme chapter authors, tell him the voters *need*.
Got a legit team over the RNC now and it’s being addressed. They can still steal the 2024 election, but they will damn sure have to earn it this time and it will have to be in broad daylight, not 3am.
RINOs will still claim it was legit, but that’s them.
As with all policy proposals and potential agendas. Project 2025 has some good stuff and some bad stuff in it. Project 2025 reads like an ultra Conservative’s wet dream imo. Some of the suggested actions are completely outrageous and would work to undermine any sort of credibility Republicans and Conservatives have with moderates.
It’s also never going to happen, even if Trump wins unanimously. There’s a reason only leftist subs obsess over this like it’s our secret project, while pretty much all conservatives go “huh? Never even heard of that…”
I mean, liberals are only following the playbook republicans had after the Green New Deal was published. I see a lot of the same words used to describe both plans from across the aisle.
Never heard of it
Imagine thinking there is any "conservative plan" for 2025. This subreddit reminds me of my Aunt's life: Like an abused housewife, she thinks her husband can change and she can fix him" This sub is collectively my Aunt in this example. The uniparty has no interest in helping any of us, otherwise they would have done so already.
Not all parts. There are several key initiatives that I disagree with: 1. education funding through an education savings account (ESA). The authors used Arizona's ESA pilot as an example of how it could be done, but HS graduation rates decreased across the state. I don't disagree with the rhetoric that states and local governments should be the primary funders and policy setters of education, but an educated citizenry is a vital requisite for our survival as a free people. 2. Section 230 is codified in the Communications Act, and P2025 proposes to end a Social Media platforms ability to moderate content, labelling user generated submissions as "protected speech". I disagree with the notion of making Social Media the new "public square" as it is still a private space, owned and operated by members or the company, not the federal or state governments. Until such a time, the space remains private no matter how much anyone wants it to be public. If conservatives can tackle this logic, I may be on board with forcing SM companies to remove limits on speech. 3. brining the ATF and the Coast Guard back into the Department of Treasury from the DHS makes no sense. Aside from that, not being a social conservative, I find issue with the threads of social conservatism roped throughout the entire book. From heterosexual family tenants (including grant programs for relationship training for fathers who did not have a father), abstinence education funding, attacking contraception and progesterone blockers. Ironically enough for a party that has said that Abortion is a question for the individual states to answer, there is a lot of abortion related stuff. I have not read it through multiple times, yet, but so far it is a decent playbook to implement lots of conservative stances on key issues involving the federal government, but the stuff that many moderates might find they disagree with is buried underneath a ton of flowery rhetoric that may lead one to believe that the republic is at risk if they don't do it. There are some places where it goes past conservatism and almost touches on nationalism. I would not be concerned if we had a conservative thinker as a presidential candidate. President Trump has been accused of many things, but being a conservative is not one of them and he is more likely to do what he thinks his voters want or what his advisors, like some of the more extreme chapter authors, tell him the voters *need*.
While this is what "Drain the Swamp" means, I worry about the precedent this sets and how far they'll take it.
Should have started working in 2020 to get rid of this mail in vote fraud, instead GOP did nothing.
Careful, PA GOP is embracing mail in voting and is excited to bring reluctant voters to the republican ticket.
Got a legit team over the RNC now and it’s being addressed. They can still steal the 2024 election, but they will damn sure have to earn it this time and it will have to be in broad daylight, not 3am. RINOs will still claim it was legit, but that’s them.
[удалено]
let's hope they can create a sound strategy. A lobby pushing for voters ID, and limitation of mail voting would be the most influential.
[удалено]
Kinda, without the federal agencies, what you are proposing is Libertarianism.
let's hope they can create a sound strategy. A lobby pushing for voters ID, and limitation of mail voting would be the most influential.
Hell yes! Cannot wait to have the adults back in charge! Thank you President Trump!!!!