quote:

Republicans long fantasized about a very different government: one run by a strong president indifferent to media pressure, empowered by a Republican Congress, backed by a conservative Supreme Court and lower court system, and free of administrative state handcuffs and hostile federal employees.

Change the Party to Dem, our system was not designed to work as the above.

Both parties are convinced of their own rectitude.

Both want it their way or the highway.

Thus it is in the citizen’s interests to have power split between parties until we return to a system like the founders originated with no parties.

No matter how smart or caring you are, you can be flat out wrong. People in power need to have that tattooed on the insides of their eyelids…

Well Parties emerged right behind Washington. Frankly, those lines were forming during his tenure as President,

Parties are not the issue above. The issue is consolidation of power in the Chief Executive through willing participation of the Legislative and Judicial Branch.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Republicans long fantasized about a very different government: one run by a strong president indifferent to media pressure, empowered by a Republican Congress, backed by a conservative Supreme Court and lower court system, and free of administrative state handcuffs and hostile federal employees.

Change the Party to Dem, our system was not designed to work as the above.

it's kinda weird, aint it, that what dems want is a weak president, controlled by party, no media oversight, a strong dem congress, backed by a liberal court system, and free to run roughshod over states --

and neither position cares a whit about Joe-the-voter, rather they play to their base --

literally identical wants, with a different adjective to signify the different party ...

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:

it's kinda weird, aint it, that what dems want is a weak president, controlled by party, no media oversight, a strong dem congress, backed by a liberal court system, and free to run roughshod over states --

and neither position cares a whit about Joe-the-voter, rather they play to their base --

literally identical wants, with a different adjective to signify the different party ...

Let me interpret your post and thoughts:

What's a weak president to you? Maybe one who doesn't have autocrat dreams. Maybe one who doesn't claim to be the chosen one who, alone, can fix the system, and declare himself to be the warrior for retribution against the vermin opposition.

Controlled by the party? Hummm, I suppose you rather have one who controls the party.

Roughshod over states? Hummm, maybe you disapprove of adherence to constitutional differentiation of states' rights vs federal?

"neither position cares a whit about Joe-the-voter, rather they play to their base -- " Who is their base, if not the voter? GOPers claim Soros is the Dem's base, which is ridiculous and projection, since their base is the GOPer elites who play them for power and profit.

"literally identical wants" - I don't think so

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...8fb2015b96b859&ei=20

Project 2025 Is a Pro-Trump Plan To Overhaul the US Government. Here's What To Know
Story by Aleksandra Wrona & Nur Ibrahim • 5h • 25 min read

==================================

I know this link is a long read, far in excess of many who have short attention spans.

But project 2025 is almost 1000 pages, far too long to read except for the summaries.

But if you really want to know, here is one summary explanation. It's pretty easy to see the differences left vs right.

For those with short attention spans, here's an abbreviated version of how Trump will deploy project 2025.

https://youtu.be/NpLpOtFNFWg?si=aRgsjU8-6J4guDpk

Aftermath

These are very short videos, for your entertainment. The last one is special:
 
https://youtube.com/shorts/Ufh...?si=XUONkXtex_L15WA5

How things change

In their own words

https://youtube.com/shorts/Ref...?si=06b8ZGrMqG2UZ0mh

https://youtube.com/shorts/Bhh...?si=zAid5nEaPID1cpBp

https://youtube.com/shorts/Tom...?si=nhP4Uzl-0CZjNBoK

https://youtube.com/shorts/5Ko...?si=dMGux4eu_XvPsY1g

https://youtube.com/shorts/B0O...?si=oB7Zv4Cou53RPEDH

https://youtube.com/shorts/2aX...?si=qnEqxtZk73S92Wlj

She had to ask him three times before getting somewhat of a straight answer.

https://youtube.com/shorts/9US...?si=a7h5qv-6AH0RoqP5

https://youtube.com/shorts/08d...?si=rFiHdsk0BSvaDL-L

Unless things change from how they look now,
we are due to find out how Trump and 2025 intwine.

The GOP has come out with a platform to be presented and adopted at the national convention.

Project 2025 influence is evident, and more.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...SPp?ocid=socialshare

Trump denies knowledge of Project 2025, despite multiple connections to allies

Amid intensifying attacks from Democrats, former President Trump is struggling to deny the connections between his closest allies and Project 2025.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...hbW?ocid=socialshare

Jen Psaki Eviscerates Trump For 'Hiding' Project 2025 Agenda

Former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki eviscerated former President Donald Trump on her MSNBC show tonight for 'hiding' his Project 2025 Agenda.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
Well, Bill, what is the non-partisan response to Project 2025 and heritage foundation's head saying it's the Second America Revolution, success inevitable, and the Left should just get used to it and get out of the way, or else they will be the cause of bloodshed?

Better yet, what is the appropriate bipartisan response, realistically of course?

A non-partisan (or critical thinker's) response to something like project 2025 would not be nearly as simplistic as the stated goals or the stated objections, because things are just not that simple. First, it is my belief that a rigid adherence to any ideology requires a suspension of free thought. So it is that "Project 2025" is tragically flawed from the get-go because it is predicated on molding society to fit an agenda. The same objection might be applied to the liberal playbook as well.
As a blueprint for reasonable conservative values and governance, the stated aims and goals as touted by Canadian Conservative Party leader, Pierre Poilievre is a pretty good one. Now, whether or not he will adhere to his stated intentions, or if he will even be able to, remains to be seen. In general though, his "common sense" approach to governing might be a pretty good example of how things can be done.
If one accepts personal freedom as the basis of our cultural identity, there is no place for the government to make decisions on behalf of women about reproductive rights, for instance. There is no justification for government to decide how or if one should worship.
It is pretty hard to argue with the concept of addiction rehab and mental health treatment instead of the provision of free drugs to addicts and the mentally ill. I think the idea of concentrating on sound, basic education in our elementary schools and the exclusion of "woke" indoctrination at schools makes perfect sense.
There are undoubtedly some aspects of Project 2025 which have some merit (though I will admit it is pretty difficult to pick them out), but it reads a lot like "Cultism 101".
After the conclusion of WWII, North America, and the rest of the world, got chance to reset. I believe, in the last 75 years, when we have come to a fork in the road, and we have occasionally taken the wrong path. Often, we have simply chosen the path of least resistance. Project 2025 is one faction's take on how to correct our mistakes. While I definitely agree that some effort has to be made, this is more of a promotion of an ideology than it is a blueprint for remedial action.
Looking at some of the issues facing us, a somewhat ham-fisted approach may be what is needed. On immigration, for instance, it might be necessary to stop it entirely while (a) the illegals are dealt with, and (b) a system is devised which can logistically handle the desired volume of immigration.
In the end, I do find Project 2025 to be somewhat repugnant but not because I don't agree with the ideology. I don't agree with the stated methods or intent. Substitute liberal ideology for the so-called conservative ideology, and I would feel the same way. Conservative or liberal, a premise should be able to stand on its own merits. Regards, Bill

Bill, I picked up on two issues you mentioned. In summary:

"So it is that "Project 2025" is tragically flawed from the get-go because it is predicated on molding society to fit an agenda."

"I think the idea of concentrating on sound, basic education in our elementary schools and the exclusion of "woke" indoctrination at schools makes perfect sense."

Of course there's more in your post, but two are enough.

Here's two articles which add or address your concerns:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...44aa45badc58d&ei=138

Project 2025 contains seeds of MAGA's potential destruction: Historian
Story by Brad Reed • 1h • 2 min read

(excerpt)

Historian Rick Perlstein recently read through the plan and found something else contained within alongside the alarming authoritarian plans: Sheer incompetence .

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...44aa45badc58d&ei=105

MAGA Oklahoma official hires Project 2025 mastermind to write state history standards
Story by Matthew Chapman • 14h • 2 min read

(excerpt)

Project 2025 outlines a strategy to enact a sweeping right-wing vision that includes codifying Christian nationalism into law.

Also on Walters' task force are Dennis Prager, the namesake of the right-wing youth propaganda video mill known as PragerU which has, among other things, produced animated cartoons of abolitionist Fredrick Douglass calling slavery a "compromise;" and David Barton, a Texas-based activist who preaches that the First Amendment's guarantee of separation of church and state is a myth.

Walters has previously authorized the use of PragerU materials as classroom instructional content in Oklahoma, and gave a state library standards advisory position to Chaya Raichik, the operator of the anti-LGBTQ "LibsOfTikTok" account, despite her having no expertise in public education or libraries, and despite her social media activity having allegedly inspired domestic terrorism threats against schools and hospitals. He has also ordered schools to teach from the Bible as a "historical" document.

===============================================

The first article brings up something that is evident but hasn't been a focus.

"Sheer Incompetence"

Think about it. They plan to replace practically all the administrative state with either vacancies or loyalists. Competency is not even a consideration. Towing the ideological or cult's line is utmost.

Imagine people like Steve Bannon in a position where actual governance qualifications or technical expertise mattered.

The sheer incompetence starts at the top. Trump is grossly incompetent at the job of governance in a pluralistic society. Supposedly JD Vance is a contender for VP. That's certainly not based on his competence, having none, but on loyalty.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...SPp?ocid=socialshare

Trump denies knowledge of Project 2025, despite multiple connections to allies.

Trump wants the appearance of neutrality, so he can pitch this as a discovery.
Transparently deceitful, as they used to say...

And Kabob doesnt think Soros is any threat.
The single biggest dem donor is Soros at 128 million last election cycle. He expects nothing in return??? Yeah, right!

https://www.reuters.com/world/...ng-trump-2024-04-26/

US election 2024: Who are the mega-rich donors backing Trump?
By Alexandra Ulmer and Jason Lange

A handful of mega-rich donors have emerged as key backers of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, collectively donating more than $50 million to support his candidacy against Democratic incumbent Joe Biden.

=================================================

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...6q4?ocid=socialshare

'Trump doesn't have a plan': Rep. Frost torches 'incredibly unpopular' GOP platform

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
https://www.reuters.com/world/...ng-trump-2024-04-26/

US election 2024: Who are the mega-rich donors backing Trump?
By Alexandra Ulmer and Jason Lange

A handful of mega-rich donors have emerged as key backers of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, collectively donating more than $50 million to support his candidacy against Democratic incumbent Joe Biden.

=================================================

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news...6q4?ocid=socialshare

'Trump doesn't have a plan': Rep. Frost torches 'incredibly unpopular' GOP platform

The concept of not teaching LGBTQ etc. values in elementary schools, does not include the replacement of these classes with Bible study or any far right ideology. This is one of the troubling aspects of project 2025. Later on, beyond elementary or junior high levels, religion can be taught as an historical component. Sex education is part of any biology course. Grooming has no place in any school.
Here is the thing, for both sides, it is all or nothing. If one is pro choice regarding reproductive rights, then they must be 100% liberal. If one is opposed to the teaching of woke ideology in elementary schools, then they must be far right extremists.
I do not believe bible study should be mandatory in public elementary schools, but I do believe religious documents should be studied later on in the context of their relation to history. Any study of the crusades would be fairly incomplete without some biblical knowledge, for instance.
To make myself perfectly clear, I think project 2025 is partisan, ideological, bullshit. Cultism 101. I also think, if you substitute left wing ideals and goals, it would be just as repugnant. This is because strict adherence to any ideology requires the suspension of critical thought. That's all. Regards, Bill.

quote:

To make myself perfectly clear, I think project 2025 is partisan, ideological, bullshit. Cultism 101. I also think, if you substitute left wing ideals and goals, it would be just as repugnant. This is because strict adherence to any ideology requires the suspension of critical thought. That's all.

So, Bill, is it critical thinking to make blanket equivalences, leaving out important nuance - just lump them both into the "repugnant" bin?

You do know, in the dictionary, that republican is much closer to repugnant than democrat.

However, deplorable is closer to democrat in the dictionary.

So, critically thinking, republicans must be worse in comparison since they captured both labels - repug and deplorable.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

To make myself perfectly clear, I think project 2025 is partisan, ideological, bullshit. Cultism 101. I also think, if you substitute left wing ideals and goals, it would be just as repugnant. This is because strict adherence to any ideology requires the suspension of critical thought. That's all.

So, Bill, is it critical thinking to make blanket equivalences, leaving out important nuance - just lump them both into the "repugnant" bin?

You do know, in the dictionary, that republican is much closer to repugnant than democrat.

However, deplorable is closer to democrat in the dictionary.

So, critically thinking, republicans must be worse in comparison since they captured both
labels - repug and deplorable.

You left out the part where I said adherence to any particular ideology, requires the suspension of critical thought.
Tell me about the important nuance which would give liberals a pass. I will admit I have no partisan leanings. For that reason, I pick and choose with no regard for the party behind a given concept. It might be easier to just go with the party flow. Y'all seem happy enough. Bill.

quote:

Tell me about the important nuance which would give liberals a pass.

Since you like to capture ideas in a nutshell, perhaps you can accept the nuanced magnitude of my answer:

Liberals oppose Trump/Trumpism and what they want to do to the nation.

Maybe that's not a good enough answer for you since you make the false equivalence of lumping them all in the repugnant basket.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:

quote:

Tell me about the important nuance which would give liberals a pass.

Since you like to capture ideas in a nutshell, perhaps you can accept the nuanced magnitude of my answer:

Liberals oppose Trump/Trumpism and what they want to do to the nation.

Maybe that's not a good enough answer for you since you make the false equivalence of lumping them all in the repugnant basket.

Is it then your contention that only liberals are opposed to Trump/Trumpism? Further, reading between the lines (to find nuances, you know), it seems like the opposition to Trump is sufficiently noble to give the liberals (Democrats) a pass on any other plank of their platform which might be detrimental to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, in the United States.
I am not making a false equivalence by lumping them all in any basket because I used the word "if". You may have missed that. It's a very small word. The point that I am trying to make is that any plan, created out of adherence to any particular dogma or ideology, is unlikely to
benefit the nation or any but a portion of the population.
I sense that I may not be making myself clear, the consequence of being an old man with only the most basic education. I also sense that you know exactly what I am saying, and your nuanced ridicule is just a form of deflection. Regards, Bill.

quote:

I also sense that you know exactly what I am saying, and your nuanced ridicule is just a form of deflection. Regards, Bill.

IMO, you are correct on one count out of three.

I think I do know what you are saying.
I do not intend to ridicule you or your thoughts.
Nor do I intend to deflect.

I've tried to be careful with my words in response to yours, to avoid slur.

Mostly, I'm just messing with you for fun, while hoping you are having fun too. Best regards.

Actually, I mostly agree with you.

And I, sometimes, with you. I note that I came across as overly testy. A fault of mine. Regards, Bill.

https://youtube.com/shorts/P5K...?si=qiE_gStrZGGJQM6v

Why Project 2025 Should Be on Your Radar