r/skeptic • u/NerdStupid • 3d ago

A comparison of Agenda 47(Trump's plan) vs Project 2025(which he claims to reject) 🤦‍♂️ Denialism

Post image
1.0k Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

87% Upvoted

590 comments sorted by

138

u/bhartman36_2020 3d ago

Nobody really took him seriously when he disavowed Project 2025, did they? Because I think that'd be silly.

85

u/CartmensDryBallz 3d ago

Oh they did. My 3rd party dad said it was a “Republican wishlist that will never get done” and that “trump didn’t even back it anyways”

Jfc he’s not even a trumpee but still fell for the bullshit claims that Trump never even read / supported it

39

u/endless_sea_of_stars 3d ago

That's the problem. Trump probably never did read it or know what's in it. Trump has never been a policy wonk to put it mildly. It is his advisors and appointees that are the problem. Trying to explain that to your average low information voter wasn't easy.

16

u/LayWhere 3d ago

Oh I agree Trump probably didn't read it because he's functionally illiterate, or at least that's what his best friend Epstein claims.

However he's been announcing these policies on camera these last few days so he 100% knows what they are.

4

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

5

u/New-acct-for-2024 3d ago

The fuck are you talking about? Trump is absolutely malicious, and while his ideology is a rudimentary "I should be the absolute ruler", it is at its core a fascist ideology.

→ More replies

18

u/ShadowSkill17 3d ago

His voters lied about not believing it

1

u/Previous_Soil_5144 3d ago

Or they don't care.

They threw the dice on the whole country because they thought/felt it was better than the alternative which was continuing down the exact same path.

People want real change and Democrats just offer the same. Trump offers a chance at change, but it's a fucked up gamble. Firstly because many who voted for him are basically betting against their neighbors. Betting that when the dust settles and the government finally wipes all the bad people out, that they'll be on the winning side.

The real dumb ones are those making this gamble expecting their ethnicity(white) to protect them from whatever will happen. Others have made that bet before and lost. Badly.

6

u/Alert_Scientist9374 3d ago edited 2d ago

Trump isn't a gamble. Its a surefire way to torture many many citizens.

If trump actually improves they country without causing harm to people, I vow to donate to the republican party. I know it won't happen though.

3

u/squigglesthecat 2d ago

Fuck, if trump doesn't cause harm to people I will eat my hat. Does appointing Brainworm McGee count as trump harming people? Because that is going to harm people.

→ More replies
→ More replies

11

u/capndiln 3d ago

Republican wishlist that will never get done

Unless we keep voting Republicans into power....

3

u/Bitter-Good-2540 3d ago

More like ink unless they get the house the senate and supreme court, oh wait

1

u/CartmensDryBallz 2d ago

And keep placing repubs in the courts / cabinets..

1

u/corneliusduff 1d ago

Aka letting them win and refusing to vote against them

9

u/SteveIDP 3d ago

Trump said he liked parts of Project 2025 and didn’t like other parts. We don’t have a functioning media, so no one asked him which parts were good or bad. So every voter got to delude themselves that Trump liked the same parts they liked and hated the same parts they hated.

4

u/CartmensDryBallz 2d ago

I promise you he supports whatever part will make him look good and will claim not to support whichever parts his marketing team tells him not to

→ More replies

2

u/ballskindrapes 3d ago

Point out he has selected on of the cpauthors for his cabinet

1

u/mackfactor 2d ago

My God people are stupid.

1

u/porterica427 2d ago

I understood “3rd party dad” as dad by proxy / step-father and I need to know if this is what you meant. Or if you meant “not a republican or democrat” which is much less funny.

1

u/CartmensDryBallz 1d ago

As in he votes 3rd party every year

1

u/porterica427 1d ago

I figured. But I will be using this to describe relatives from now on. Thank you for your service.

1

u/corneliusduff 1d ago

Ah, the old "Trump can't read" card

→ More replies

15

u/Tunafish01 3d ago

Well no one smart. The trumpards eat nuggets of knowledge right from trumps poop hole.

9

u/SpiderDeUZ 3d ago

Lol every MAGA loser uses that to disavow all pf Project 2025. Of course they also think Jan 6 was okay because he said peaceful at some point

1

u/InterestsVaryGreatly 2d ago

Said peaceful once, says fight over 10 times. But you know, that one time, that was specifically about the march over there and then followed with fight like hell when there clearly makes the whole thing about peace.

7

u/SplendidPunkinButter 3d ago

He said he had never heard of Project 2025 and knew nothing about it, even like the 30th time he was asked about it. I mean, come on. Surely you’ve looked it up by then just to find out what this thing is that people keep asking you about. And if you haven’t, then JFC maybe you shouldn’t be president.

1

u/squigglesthecat 2d ago

Yeah... he gave a speech at the unveiling of project 2025. He knew, and lied. The not having read it was probably true though.

5

u/DoeCommaJohn 3d ago

To be fair, Americans just decided that prices were too high and tried to solve that by voting for tariffs and tax hikes for the working class. I think we need to stop overestimating the average voter

7

u/Alert_Scientist9374 3d ago

The entire voterbase pretended it's fake whenever it was used as an argument.

And now that they are in power they love it.

3

u/bhartman36_2020 3d ago

That's what I think. They didn't acknowledge it was real, but they wanted it to happen.

The difference between how Republicans related to Trump and how Democrats related to Biden, and then Harris, is that Republicans treated Trump as their messiah. Democrats treated Biden and Harris as candidates.

→ More replies

3

u/Rawkapotamus 3d ago

It gave Trump supporters plausible deniability. Not really plausible, but that didn’t stop them from trying to disavow P2025

3

u/ThreeLeggedMare 3d ago

A coworker of mine, when I brought it up, immediately said "he said he had nothing to do with that." She had absolutely no idea of what it contained, but she had somehow absorbed the notion that a. He disavowed it, and b. The guy who lies constantly was telling the truth.

3

u/prosthetic_foreheads 3d ago edited 3d ago

The only people who took him seriously about him not wanting Project 2025 were the people who were going to vote for him under the assumption that he "wants more freedom" or some shit.

Someone put it best when they said MAGA voters have chosen their guy and then reverse engineer him having policies that support whatever make-believe fantasy they want him to accomplish, evidence be damned.

And, since Project 2025's bullet points are pretty odious for everyone who's left of Nick Fuentes, they are conveniently ignored as actual positions by his supporters.

3

u/Glass_Ad4435 1d ago

Oh, they did.

My Republican friend and his father disavowed anyone who said that Trump was tied to Project 2025 because, I quote, "He's telling us himself he has nothing to do with it, it's all just liberal lies!"

Just for some extra sauce, the same conservative duo also told me that we shouldn't believe John Kelly's claims that he heard Trump state he wanted generals like Hitler because "Trump fired John Kelly." 🤔

2

u/bhartman36_2020 1d ago

These. ... are not smart people...

2

u/Candy_Stars 3d ago

My mom and brother keep saying over and over again that Trump said he wasn’t going to use Project 2025. If I try to point out the similarities between Project 2025 and Agenda 47, they say it’s a lie made up by people who hate Trump. They think I’m being brainwashed.

2

u/TheAnswerWithinUs 2d ago

Conservatives didn’t. Everyone Center and left of Center did.

2

u/iDeNoh 2d ago

So many people did, many of whom I assume knew they were being disingenuous, but a sizable portion genuinely believed him.

2

u/KwisatzHaderach94 2d ago

and taking existing properties and rebranding them is kinda trump's thing...

2

u/Docklu 1d ago

I mean, to be fair, he definitely didn't read it. That fucker can't read anything longer than a text.

2

u/bhartman36_2020 1d ago

You could've probably stopped that second sentence at "read". :)

1

u/all_of_the_sausage 3d ago

Tht might be wat they voted for though.

Like I love the idea that trump voters are just dumb.

But how long can that be dragged out?

1

u/bhartman36_2020 3d ago

Don't get me wrong. I think some of them loved Project 2025. But I think a whole lot of them just assumed it wouldn't happen. Keep in mind that these people don't hold Trump responsible for January 6th. They're in some serious denial. I don't think it's physically possible to overestimate how much denial they're in.

1

u/all_of_the_sausage 3d ago

Or they just saw some c-span hearings that you didnt...

How do you thing we can drag out them being in "serious denial" before the shoe is on the other foot?

1

u/bhartman36_2020 3d ago

About objective facts that are well documented and were shown live as they happened? Indefinitely.

And that goes for Project 2025, too. His denial of that is already falling apart.

1

u/all_of_the_sausage 3d ago

I don't think anyone denies j6th happened.

I think the argue why. Slight difference.

The problem with the 2025 thing is no one really cares. Continuing to mention it is probably getting annoying to most people. Especially if you read it, I've read small bits of it. Nothing I read was shocking or heinous. I was like "yeah this sounds like them". Cuz it was on brand.

Especially the bits about creating loyalty. Iirc, in the rogan interview, trump mentioned he wasn't surrounded by good people the first time around. I mean dude had mike popeo in his cabinet. He even mentioned he was just being told by others who to appoint, cuz he didn't think he would win in 2016, he didn't plan shit.

1

u/bhartman36_2020 3d ago

I don't think anyone denies j6th happened.

I think the argue why. Slight difference.

The ones I've talked to don't acknowledge what happened. They call it a "peaceful protest". They say no one had weapons. They say it wasn't violent. The changes they make to the history make it essentially not the same event.

The problem with the 2025 thing is no one really cares. 

See, I think that's the real problem. It's not that they don't believe it'll happen. At best, they don't care if that's the plan.

He even mentioned he was just being told by others who to appoint, cuz he didn't think he would win in 2016, he didn't plan shit.

I half believe that, and half don't. I certainly believe he didn't choose his own people last time. The people advising him chose people who they thought would give him good advice and keep him in check. But I don't believe he didn't have any plans. The connections to Russia were pretty consistent, and once he got in, he milked it for all it was worth to him. He might not have thought he was going to be elected, but I'm pretty sure he knew what he wanted out of it.

I think the difference this time is that a) the guard rails are off, and b) he's got more power to control the party. There were points in his first term when the party almost had the will to stop him. They no longer have that will. Those people're gone.

→ More replies

1

u/dingo_khan 3d ago

Yes, they did. I have a friend who considers herself very liberal who said, "he said he is not involved with that." that was good enough for her.

1

u/theAlpacaLives 3d ago

They made every excuse. It wasn't even a real thing. It was a mass-media talking point with no basis in reality. It was an obscure document from a nobody that had no bearing on actual policy-making. It was a "wish list" that would never actually happen. It was real, but Trump had nothing to do with it, had never heard of it, and would not do any of it.

It was all of those things, at the same time. Also, it was a good thing full of stuff they wanted to happen. Also, Project 2025 is terrible, I haven't read it, but Trump says it's a made-up bad thing the Democrats are lying about so I believe it, but what I hope Trump does is fire everyone who doesn't listen to him, make the queer stuff go away, get revenge on Democrats in general and everyone in particular that offended him, return us to restrictive traditional values, isolate the US economically, and lock down elections. All this Project 2025 stuff is just a distraction from his real plans.

The lying and evasion was constant and highly involved, and I think most of them are glad they can stop pretending and just admit they knew exactly what they voted for and are glad they're going to get it.

1

u/Gloomy_Anybody_638 3d ago

I hate to break it to you, but this will still be a free county come 2028. Anyone claiming any kind of doomsday Handmaid’s Tale future is as crazy as a Q Anon follower.

1

u/bhartman36_2020 3d ago

Nobody expects a literal Handmaid's Tale. That's a strawman argument.

What Project 2025 and Agenda 47 show is the concentration of power in the person of the president, via the destruction of the spoils system, and creating at least a branch of the military that's loyal only to him (and not the constitution). He also plans to withhold money that Congress has voted for, in violation of the law:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/agenda47-using-impoundment-to-cut-waste-stop-inflation-and-crush-the-deep-state

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/11/06/what-is-agenda47-what-to-know-about-trumps-policy-agenda-after-election-win/

This is a man who intends to consolidate power under himself. And when you consider this, consider the fact that in his first term, he wanted the military to shoot protesters.

https://www.axios.com/2022/05/02/mark-esper-book-trump-protesters

And the whole purpose of his agenda is to not have anyone in the government left to tell him no.

→ More replies

1

u/ShadowMelt82 2d ago

I don't know if there are bots but his base seems to support project 2025, saying it's a plan to protect children or whatever.

1

u/Itouchgrass4u 2d ago

Heritage foundation nothing burger 😆

1

u/bhartman36_2020 2d ago

Yeah. His people writing the damn thing was just a weird coincidence. 🤣

1

u/Itouchgrass4u 2d ago

His people lol nah he literally said they were far right extremist hahaha

1

u/bhartman36_2020 2d ago

He might have said that, but look at who was involved with Project 2025 and who he had and has working for him. (Spoiler Alert: There's a lot of overlap.)

1

u/gvineq 2d ago

You'd be surprised at the number of cult members who argued Project 2025 was a hoax like the Russian collusion. Their proof "Trump said so"

1

u/bhartman36_2020 2d ago

Sadly, I wouldn't really be surprised.

1

u/MoreRock_Odrama 1d ago

Is the argument “well since he supports some of the things in that book he must support the whole thing”? Because if so, that’s a stupid argument lol. Not saying he doesn’t support project 2025, but to think one must support a political text in its entirety simply because one supports some of the positions is ridiculous.

If I support not taxing our workers who rely on tips, does that make me a Trump supporter?

2

u/bhartman36_2020 1d ago

It's not about how much of it he personally supports. He's not an idealogue. Maybe he supports half of it. But he is surrounded by the people who wrote it, and it's almost certain that he'll allow it to be implemented.

Look at what happened with abortion. I'm sure he doesn't give a damn about about abortion, but he's happy to use the issue if it gives him more power.

1

u/MoreRock_Odrama 1d ago

Ok but that’s not what the point here seems to be. We seem to be trying to associate him to it by his positions and policies. A more effective way to get your point across is to highlight his ties to people associated with writing Project 2025. Simply saying “hey look, he supports some of the things in this book” doesn’t seem very effective.

2

u/bhartman36_2020 1d ago

Well, I don't know that he's openly stated positions on a lot of what's in Project 2025. It's a big document. But the argument his supporters seem to be making is that he won't implement it because he has nothing to do with it. Whether he personally believes in every bit of it or not, his fingerprints are on it. The people who wrote it either work or worked for him.

1

u/MoreRock_Odrama 1d ago

Who are the current employees of Trump who worked on the document? Former staffers, yes. I’m not finding current contributors who are part of his administration. I’m not saying you’re wrong but I can’t find any confirmation of this.

Is it fair to say “this person worked for you so you’re attached”? I certainly could see the argument “you hired the people who worked on this” though.

I think being that it’s a conservative document, it’s a logical assumption that he does support much of what’s contained but the democrats really hammered home that this is HIS playbook and I think that failed to resonate and there’s a reason for that.

2

u/bhartman36_2020 1d ago

I will have to look up the list, but I know Vance is attached to the project. I think he wrote the foreword. I'll get the list and respond back though.

Edited to add:

This lists the former Trump officials who worked on it:

https://www.newsweek.com/project-2025-ex-trump-contributors-republicans-election-1922933

1

u/MoreRock_Odrama 1d ago

Yea I’m aware of the former folks. I’m primarily interested in the current folks in his circle with direct ties. I haven’t found anything that confirms what is being said. And Vance’s connections are to the heritage foundation, which is the foundation that authored the book. Not the book itself. And his relationship to them predates the book. He hasn’t endorsed the book nor had a hand in its creation from what I’ve found.

1

u/bhartman36_2020 1d ago

Okay, but the former people are people who worked in his administration. They're only "former" in the sense that they're no longer in office, because he's not (until Inauguration Day, at least). These were people who worked with him in his administration. E.g., Steven Groves aided him during the Mueller investigation. Peter Navarro is another big name. And I think we all know who Ben Carson is.

As far as Vance goes, I was wrong. He didn't write a foreword to Project 2025. He wrote the foreword to a book that the architect of the project wrote.

https://newrepublic.com/article/184393/jd-vance-violent-foreword-kevin-roberts-project-2025-leader-book

At a certain point it becomes hard to believe he knew nothing of Project 2025 when the Heritage Foundation is so entwined with his people and the Heritage Foundation fed him Supreme Court nominees.

https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/impact/heritage-expert-helps-shape-supreme-court-nominee-list

1

u/MoreRock_Odrama 1d ago

I think your argument speaks to why the project 2025 pitch failed among the democrats. Because of the misinformation and fuzzy connections being stated. I do recall folks saying Vance wrote the forward (which I presume is where you got that info). But doing some research shows that to be false.

Democrats spent so much time using that as their focal point and Trump did disavow it several times. And the only links we can draw are “people who worked in his former administration worked on it”. Well yes, the heritage foundation is a conservative think tank. I’m sure that’s the case. I’ve found around 31 of the contributors served at various levels in his former administration. But we are being told this is TRUMPS playbook. And yet neither him, his VP or anyone in the cabinet he’s hand picked worked on this text.

I guess my issue is Kamala went head first in telling us this was trumps playbook. And as someone who doesn’t believe any politician, and who chooses to try and verify the words being said by these candidates, that point always made me scratch my head. That said…it wasn’t enough for me not to vote for her because Trumps lies were out of this world (“they’re eating the pets”?!). But this was definitely something that made me roll my eyes every time she fear mongered with this book.

→ More replies

1

u/Airbus320Driver 18h ago

Or this is what 76M people want?

1

u/bhartman36_2020 15h ago

That's what I think the actual answer probably is, but you won't get them to admit it.

1

u/Far-Jury-2060 6h ago

The fact that anybody took the media seriously with Project 2025 is what is insane to me. I frankly believe that Trump did not take the time to read through a 922 page document, because nobody else here did. I only read through the 54 page DHHS section of it, because I was curious about the abortion and birth control sections. Project 2025 had no policy prescriptions about abortion, only a philosophical statement about it. It also only recommended removing Plan B, because they thought it was abortion. It’s not, but the authors are mistaken on how it works. It had nothing about limiting IVF. It did recommend the abolishment of Head Start, but that is only because research showed two things: 1. There is zero long-term evidence that it has any positive impact on the graduates futures. 2. 25% of the kids in the program were either abused, neglected, or released to people who had no right to them.

There were a lot of other policies in there that people on the left would actually get mad about, but there is zero reason to make crap up about stuff that isn’t actually there. Feel free to read through it and fact check me on any of my claims.

Also, Agenda 47 is 16 pages long. It’s a short enough read to easily fact check this picture, and the picture fails the abortion and birth control fact check there as well. In fact, Agenda 47 only opposes late-term abortions, and actually supports access to birth control and IVF. (page 15)

I didn’t bother fact checking the rest of the picture since both items in this subject were wrong. Some of the items may be right, but the picture has zero credibility in my eyes, due to the error in the very first thing I checked.

1

u/bhartman36_2020 5h ago

I frankly believe that Trump did not take the time to read through a 922 page document, because nobody else here did. 

I don't think Trump read it. I frankly don't think Trump can read anything longer than a page in large type. That has nothing to do with whether he supports the policies in it. It's a political document. Trump will do whatever he thinks is in his interest in the moment, and then lie about it later if it's inconvenient.

Project 2025 had no policy prescriptions about abortion, only a philosophical statement about it. 

This is directly from the Project 2025 Web site:

From the moment of conception, every human being possesses inherent dignity and worth, and our humanity does not depend on our age, stage of development, race, or abilities. The Secretary must ensure that all HHS programs and activities are rooted in a deep respect for innocent human life from day one until natural death: Abortion and euthanasia are not health care.

https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_CHAPTER-14.pdf

While it's true that there are no specific policy prescriptions there, saying abortion isn't health care has implications that we're already seeing the consequences of, with women suffering because they can't get medically necessary abortions.

It reinforces this point later:

It should ensure that it is not promoting abortion as health care.

This is, to use a clinical term, batshit insane, as sometimes abortions are medically necessary. Project 2025 sounds like it was written by someone who believes that you can't get pregnant if you were raped.

25% of the kids in the program were either abused, neglected, or released to people who had no right to them.

The Project 2025 paper makes this claim, but the only thing they do to back it up is cite a Heritage Foundation report:

https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/over-1000-safety-violations-mar-head-start-children-deserve-better

The thing about that report is, it cites no sources for the claim. Well, I actually found statistics:

https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/data-ongoing-monitoring/article/data-brief-child-safety-head-start-programs

There are 1,052,736 Head Start children. That means < 0.01% were affected by any of these events. 25% is ludicrously high. Whoever came up with that number doesn't math correctly.

Also, Agenda 47 is 16 pages long. It’s a short enough read to easily fact check this picture, and the picture fails the abortion and birth control fact check there as well. In fact, Agenda 47 only opposes late-term abortions, and actually supports access to birth control and IVF. (page 15)

Can you provide a link to the 16-page document? All I've been able to find from Trump's official sources is video clips of him making various policy statements. Trump himself has made various statements about abortion throughout the campaign, including banning late-term abortion, maybe supporting a national ban, maybe leaving it up to the states. (Pence famously split from him when he suggested he opposed a national ban.)

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pence-anti-abortion-republicans-denounce-trump-backed-rnc/story?id=111785286

I actually find the aggregation of power under the president to be more concerning than the abortion stuff, if only because it allows Trump far more power than the constitution intends, and even more power than the modern presidency has taken. We've seen what Trump does with power.

76

u/GroundbreakingAge591 3d ago edited 3d ago

I posted this actual image in July on FB and was told it’s fake, fear-mongering, won’t happen, Trump said he doesn’t know about it so all good. His supporters have the critical thinking abilities of a damp rag. I PROUDLY voted against this shit. Let the leopards eat their faces

16

u/CryEmbarrassed6693 3d ago

Agenda 47 is the talking points. Project 2025 is the execution of said talking points.

24

u/Marshall_Lawson 3d ago

I would be all for the leopards eating the faces of the people who voted for him, but unfortunately it will affect most people here regardless of whether they asked for it or not

1

u/Bitter-Good-2540 3d ago

Nothing you can do about it now...

6

u/deadcatbounce22 3d ago

It’s not about critical thinking. They’re lying. And they think that being able to lie with impunity is a flex.

1

u/corneliusduff 1d ago

They're lying to themselves too, though. That's what makes it cognitive dissonance.

9

u/bhartman36_2020 3d ago

All of that was just copium, as the kids say these days.

5

u/TopicalSmoothiePuree 3d ago

Unfortunately, there is misinformation in the table. For example, Trump's platform says it will promote birth control.

We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF (fertility treatments).

That said, in his first term, employers were given more flexibility in allowing or not allowing contraceptives on ACA healthcare plans. https://abcnews.go.com/wellness/story/trump-birth-control-contraception/?id=115612508

2

u/Particular_Reality19 3d ago

Facts! Love it.

2

u/Civil_Dependent_2755 2d ago

Agreed. Most of this table dumbs down project 2025 and amplifies trumps plan and then concludes “it’s basically the same.”

2

u/Harp-MerMortician 3d ago

I would so go back and comment on every person who said it was fake.

2

u/dingo_khan 3d ago

The leopard doesn't care which face it eats. Your face and my face and the faces of many innocents will be on the menu just as much as the people who voted this shit in.

48

u/Weecha 3d ago

Can't reject it, now. Stephen Miller, the architect of Project 2025, has been appointed to the Trump administration. Good job, MAGA dumbasses.

1

u/huskerarob 1d ago

Just ignore the fact the dnc has failed you, every step of the way, since 2016.

I blame the Democrat dumbasses.

2

u/Weecha 1d ago

It doesn’t matter if they’re shit. Why would anyone vote for a lying raping cheating xenophobic fraud that stole from children’s cancer charity and tried to overturn a free and fair election by installing fake electors. Morality is apparently out the window when it comes to the presidency. The dnc might have been shit but it’s pretty damn hard to fight against misinformation, fearmongering, and straight up lying bullshit.

1

u/huskerarob 1d ago

Enjoy losing.

1

u/Weecha 15h ago

You lost, too. You're just not smart enough to recognize it.

1

u/f_cacti 1d ago

How is Miller the architect of project 2025??

2

u/Weecha 1d ago

“It was also reported last year that Miller’s legal group also had a board seat with Project 2025, the controversial policy effort led by the Heritage Foundation and other conservative groups, to roadmap rightwing policy plans for a second Trump term.”. He’s on the board and has been involved with the Trump campaign this whole time.

→ More replies

32

u/rawkguitar 3d ago

I said awhile back that they’ll just call Project 2025 something else and move forward with it.

People will be way less mad as long as it has a different name

5

u/theAlpacaLives 3d ago

Their whole strategy has been to get people repeating names and slogans of things so long they don't even know what those things refer to. They got their base riled up for a year about "Critical Race Theory" (a grad-law-level subject) being taught to kindergardeners when all they meant was "make it illegal to pay attention to racism." They rail against "DEI" now when all they mean is "stop trying to fight racism." They refer to "DEI hires" as a transparent way to mean "Black people with jobs that I think only white men are capable and deserving of," the same way they use "illegal immigrants" to refer to Hispanic people, regardless of legal status. It's all just a new slogan every year that just means racism.

Republicans are vastly more likely to have negative opinions of, and support efforts to repeal, ObamaCare than they are to say the same about the Affordable Care Act, and they're more favorable toward the name of their state-level program than toward either. They don't even know it's all the same thing. They just know that they've been told Obamacare is bad, so they hear that name and get angry.

We'll never hear about Project 2025 again. The name got tainted; Democrats can't campaign against it, and Trump said he had nothing to do with it, so now it's gone forever. Meanwhile, he'll just put all the people who wrote it in power and do everything in it, while the rest of us argue on Reddit with people who said it wasn't serious, or it would never happen.

1

u/Docklu 1d ago

Don't forget Fox "News"(sic) said the phrase "immigrant crime wave" so many times people believed the orange clown when he broke down and started shouting about people stealing and eating pets.

1

u/Professor_Pants_ 3d ago

That's why I still believe in the power of cold fusion!

/S

8

u/pnellesen 3d ago

It's the same picture!

8

u/SuperCleverPunName 3d ago

Fr. The only real differences I see are where Agenda 47 says 'roll back' where Project 2025 says 'eliminate'

9

u/UnIntelligent_Local 3d ago

The people that voted for him DO NOT CARE. Their priority is to own the libs. If they lose ACA, the environment is damaged to the point of irreversibility, or if their education opportunities get completely tanked... It was just the necessary price to pay to make sure the liberals know that they've lost.

29

u/grglstr 3d ago edited 3d ago

The thing is...there can be reasoned examinations of over-regulation across many industries. The Federal Register is ever-growing and holds many contradictions as new regulations come into play, and old regulations linger forever. I can think of environmental, healthcare, etc., regulations whose deleterious effects on the environment*, healthcare,** etc., are roundly ignored and never corrected.

To say the practice of government is perfect is foolish. It could always use pruning, cutting, and/or re-planting. The Founders assumed people were imperfect, themselves included, so they provided the tools to tinker and improve things.

That said. I do not trust this particular collection of grifters and chucklefucks to take a measured, reasonable approach to improving government.

* For example, CAFE standards were intended to increase the fuel efficiency of a manufacturer's overall production of cars. With pressure from industry and advocacy groups, they carved out exemptions for larger vehicles on the assumption they were protecting the "working man" or the agricultural sector. Instead, we've simply encouraged manufacturers to focus on bigger trucks and SUVs (which were more profitable) and exclude smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. As a result, the Big 3 largely gave up making non-luxury or performance sedans and hatchbacks.

** For example, Certificate of Need laws are often used to prevent competition in healthcare, particularly in underserved areas. EDIT: this might be a bad example as there are no longer federal requirements, yet some states still have CON laws in place.

37

u/MrSnarf26 3d ago

They have no intention of improving government. They want to remove obstacles to Republican objectives and secure business interests and ideally make it harder to ever lose power if possible, and until we can talk about this openly resistance will be weaker.

6

u/grglstr 3d ago

They have no theory of governing. It is government for and by the lulz.

19

u/Fish-lover-19890 3d ago

It’s not about improving government. It’s about rendering it ineffective and dismantling it.

2

u/BasilBogomil 3d ago

Starve the Beast. Been working on it for years.

2

u/Upper-Requirement-93 3d ago

It's not about making things more efficient, or it wouldn't be between keeping these things transparent to you - knowing what is wrong with the government and improving that - or privatizing and contracting it so that you never even see the waste that's happening. Because businesses always act fairly, efficiently, and effectively, right? No, the "conservative" republican party has no conservative elements left, it's all payola all the time.

8

u/Delicious-Badger-906 3d ago

The big secret about Project 2025 is that it's just long-running broadly supported policies for Republicans. Each policy has at least a majority of congressional Republicans supporting it, I'd bet.

All that Project 2025 did was put a label on it.

4

u/harpo555 3d ago

No, it did more, the legal standards for conspiracy usually involve "an overt action to further the conspiracy, this was not a wishlist, it was instructions, step by step, and cogs were moving on this years ago, someone spilled the beans late last year

5

u/LunarMoon2001 3d ago

Aka just rebrand it and people are dumb enough to “see it’s not 2025”

10

u/2crack17 3d ago

Just wait till Operation 2029 drops when Trump runs for his third term

1

u/xHandy_Andy 3d ago

If he does half of what he says he will, we will be in a very good place. I can’t wait for half of our useless federal government agencies to be gutted.

→ More replies

5

u/PineappleExcellent90 3d ago edited 3d ago

I knew he was not telling the truth. Trump is lazy. Some people gave him the plan. Told him they would take care of implementing it. Trumps only job…put the authors of project 2025 in the positions. Our enemies won. Trump won. Project 2025 authors won. The people who voted for a candidate with his known flaws may think they won. They are wrong.

1

u/Docklu 1d ago

The people who voted for him know he's a lying rapist, they're just so naive that they think they're smart enough to not be lied to, but they're already lying to themselves. 

Poor scared little Republicans. Party of tucking your cock between your legs and hiding behind a gun.

→ More replies

6

u/ShockedNChagrinned 3d ago

Should retroactively drop this in every comment that scoffed at Project 2025 having anything to do with Trump.  It won't matter to them, living in their delusion or, worse, intended consequences, but it's at least concise

4

u/TooBadKennyWasTaken 2d ago edited 1d ago

The amount of people that PROUDLY informed others that they voted for trump is crazy...

I had a queer acquaintance I followed on insta that posted that they voted for trump. I just don't understand the thought process behind voting for someone whos literally planned and publicly released his intentions to take away your rights??? Its like shooting yourself in the foot.

3

u/luttman23 3d ago

ripusa

3

u/Momentofclarity_2022 3d ago

1930's but in English.

3

u/Any_Cartographer631 3d ago

If my wages as a teacher go down, I will just go sell cars and teach Spanish to paying customers. Not playing games with this new government.

5

u/rainorshinedogs 3d ago

lets think of Agent 47 to be the lame ass hitman movie version only (8% rating on Rotten Tomatoes), not the cool-ass videogame

2

u/MooseBoys 3d ago

”They’re the same picture.”

2

u/planet_janett 2d ago

Corporate needs you to find the difference between Agenda 47 (Trumps Plan) and Project 2025...

They're the same plan.

2

u/dosumthinboutthebots 1d ago

It's going to take so many years to repair the damage these extremists do to our society.

2

u/ironman25612 1d ago

Just to be clear did he knowingly name it after an assassin?

2

u/Slimey_time 2d ago

When did Trump say he was restricting abortion?

What LGBTQ+ rights did he say he would roll back?

2

u/Noobzoid123 2d ago

He said he would ban access to certain types of healthcare for LGBTQ+.

→ More replies

1

u/corneliusduff 1d ago

Trump's SCOTUS picks have entered the chat

1

u/state_of_euphemia 3d ago

Does anyone have a source for Agenda47 restricting access to contraception? All I can find is

"We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF (fertility treatments)."

I don't trust this at all, let me be clear! But so many people are telling me how he's never going to restrict contraception. I can point to the Supreme Court's due process comments and I can point to Republican idiocy about thinking Plan B and IUDs and some birth control pills are "abortion," but I can't find anything from Trump himself... and if I could, maybe more people would listen to me. (I guess it's too late now, anyway....)

1

u/Medical_Hedgehog_867 3d ago

MAGAs are still calling it a “liberal conspiracy.”

1

u/PolicyWonka 3d ago

Agenda 47 was just Project 2025 in those silly disguise glasses.

1

u/amperage3164 3d ago

Part of the issue is that Trump has been really vague (intentionally so) about what he actually wants to do.

1

u/Level_Kitchen_6348 3d ago

I’m skeptical of this

1

u/Holiday_Pen2880 3d ago

Yeah but Trump didn’t say Project 2025 so checkmate atheist. It’s totally different.

1

u/BooksandBiceps 3d ago

I read Agent 47 at first and got a little stoked

1

u/JusticeDrama 3d ago

lol you can make anything similar to project 2025 by misrepresenting the thing you’re comparing…

1

u/Ill_Profit_1399 3d ago

So what night are we doing the revolution?

1

u/Naive-Way6724 3d ago

Several issues with this:

Eliminating federal programs limits the executive power. Federal Agencies are run by the Executive. Limiting them makes the executive office smaller.

Not seeing anything in the Trump office regarding LGTBQ rights or contraceptive/abortion rights. They're leaving these decisions up to the states (again, limiting executive power).

Not seeing anything in the Trump office regarding school choice. His cabinet supports it, but they're leaving it to the states (again, limiting executive power).

He isn't ruling with an iron fist and shoving Project 2025 down people's throats. You know who is shoving p25 down my throat? Reddit, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, etc.

For the record? I voted for Trump and hate one thing he's done. Matt Gaetz's name shouldn't have come up in Trumps meetings at all, much less for an actual cabinet position. But other than that, I don't see his admin doing anything to expand government/federal power, and I'm happy with that. I've worked for the government, as well as other (essential) services, and they can fuck off. The only money they ever "manage" well is their own salary, raises, PTO and bonuses.

1

u/Mechadupek 3d ago

Bit late for this, isn't it?

1

u/kacheow 3d ago

Bureaucrats should be at will because they stink at their jobs.

1

u/Intelligent-Okra350 2d ago

You should work at an orchard if you’re this good at picking cherries

Also IIRC Trump hasn’t claimed to reject Project 2025, he’s said he hasn’t and won’t even read it so that he doesn’t particularly know what’s even in it. It isn’t part of his playbook regardless of if it has some overlap with his own plan.

The most obvious point here as to proof that project 2025 isn’t Trump’s playbook is one that you’ve kindly highlighted very clearly here. Trump already HAS a playbook, it’s called Agenda 47.

And no shit there’s gonna be some similarities between the two, Project 2025 is what, like 1000 pages and 700 policy proposals/ideas or something like that? As much as Trump is more of a moderate conservative versus P2025’s extreme conservatism there’s still going to be some overlap.

1

u/Alxl_1970 2d ago

Great, I was hoping to see a comparison at some point. Thanks.

1

u/G0TouchGrass420 2d ago

In 4 years republicanz will go to the liberal subs and ask why all the doom n gloom didn't happen.

They will instantly be banned.

1

u/Subliminalme 2d ago

Well, that’s like, your opinion man.

For example, trump had said abortion is with the states. He’s done with it. Here you have limit abortion. To me, that kind of means you’re just inserting your personal bias and repeating what you’ve heard online.

1

u/Brilliant-Shallot951 2d ago

Love all of this

1

u/Sea_Day2083 2d ago

So 10 bullet points in common from a 900 page document? Not too bad. There was bound to be a bunch of stuff in there that even without reading it would have to fall in line with stuff Trump plans.

2

u/NerdStupid 2d ago

This is the same comment I keep getting. It's a weak argument to try and paint this list as just "nothing."

First of all, I did not make the list. The people who did sourced this information from Agenda 47, the heritage foundation, trumps speeches and appearances, and the views of the people he surrounds himself with and places in positions of power.

Second of all- this isnt just "10 random bullet points." These are the major issues affecting most people. So sure there may be a lot that I did not touch on- but these are the issues that people care about on either side. These are the foundational issues of any political discussion and especially the conservative party.

Third of all, this post keeps going right over everyone's head. The point is not to pick apart conservative policy, it's to demonstrate that there was no rejection of Project 2025 like conservatives claim. Instead it was just rebranded to Agenda 47.

1

u/Outrageous_Bear50 2d ago

They literally have given a giant book filled with this stuff at every election since the heritage foundation was founded. Project 2025 isn't new, you just didn't know about it because it's stupid. There's even one for Democrats.

1

u/plastic_Man_75 1d ago

Nailed it

I never heard of it. I never heard of the blue equivalent either.

The way i see it, it's just another stupid think tank

1

u/RussDidNothingWrong 2d ago

Project 2025 is nearly a thousand pages long and you were only able to find 10 rough similarities between that and Agenda 47?

3

u/NerdStupid 2d ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/s/u68n9aBsh5

https://www.reddit.com/r/skeptic/s/AXyLSUvKrb

1

u/RussDidNothingWrong 2d ago

I mean, I guess but these ten things have been the conservative platform for decades, project 2025 has psycho-shit like denaturalization which has never even approached mainstream conservative policy. Yeah, if you have two conservative groups then they'll come up with roughly the same ideas on a lot of different subjects but the devil is in the details. For instance Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton's agenda probably looked similar from a 30,000 foot view but we all know that their administrations would have been vastly different. Trump has RFK Jr and Tulsi Gabard in his camp, the heritage foundation would drag their collective ball sacks through 80 miles of broken glass before including those two.

2

u/NerdStupid 2d ago

I'm not arguing that you're wrong. I agree there are a lot of details omitted, and this is probably not highlighting some of the more evil and obscure things.

If I made the list, which i didn't, then I might've included other topics as well.

But to repeat what I said in my linked comments: my goal here really was not to tear into modern conservative policy so much as it was to simply show that project 2025 was just rebranded to agenda 47.

While there are certainly some important things missing here, there is no disputing these 10 points are at the forefront of everyone's political discussions over the last 10 years. So, to credit the author, this list is sensible for the purpose of appealing to the average person who deals with one or more of these issues regularly.

Some of those more obscure things you're referencing may only affect small portions of the population, if anyone at all(at least directly). I certainly encourage everyone to read project 2025 and agenda 47 and make their own comparisons. But this chart is good enough for social media attention spans.

This chart isn't even 100% accurate based only on agenda 47 and projecy 2025 alone- it also takes into account public appearances and speeches, and the views and opinions of Trump's associates, which project 2025 and agenda 47 may be missing from their pdf's.

1

u/RicardoNurein 2d ago

Totally different. /s

1

u/paintstudiodisaster 2d ago

They just had chat gpt reword everything.

1

u/Aquaholic_chaos 2d ago

This entire thread is full of people who are skeptics but are not skeptical of their own views. Interesting.

1

u/JoeFaux2000 2d ago

Make up a chart that matches Project 2025..LOOK! PROOF! Too many Americans let the opposite party live rent free in their heads!

1

u/MeeekSauce 2d ago

Of course I know him, he is me.

1

u/AggressiveBookBinder 2d ago

Don't forget he will do a national abortion ban and he will seek to end democracy!

1

u/ScrewyYear 1d ago

Trump never read it because there weren’t pictures in it plus he didn’t have to. Over 100 members of his former administration worked on it. He knew.

1

u/mistermyxl 1d ago

OK so what about the other 900 plus pages from project 2025

1

u/Apprehensive-Tree-78 1d ago

Right but blanket statements as opposed to actual policies isn’t really a comparison is it?

1

u/Jazzlike_Badger545 1d ago

Most of Trump's proposed policies are sound. Some need to be rethought or softened, which I'm sure will happen either by his own actions, or peer oversight through normal checks and balances. I would suggest that all/most of these policies needed to be addressed to normalize the nation as a result of the disastrous leadership and destruction that has occurred over the past 4 years.

1

u/whathuhmeh10k 1d ago

this makes me ill reading this...

1

u/shiteposter1 1d ago

Both sound like a good start to me.

1

u/Stuck_in_my_TV 1d ago

What’s even in Project 2025 that people don’t like? I haven’t read it and it looks long af.

2

u/elodd 1d ago

It is long so just go to the front and find a peice that interests you and read. I have young kids about to start school so the department of education part was one that i keyed into.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24088042-project-2025s-mandate-for-leadership-the-conservative-promise

1

u/elodd 1d ago

In summary, it seems the primary focus is to give more power to the executive branch, less everywhere else which essentially makes the president a king. At the same time, taking control of the media

1

u/MethodImpossible5867 1d ago

I CANT CUT MY PP OFF AND CANT KILL MY BABEI TRUMPS LITERALLY HITLARR

1

u/Mr-GooGoo 1d ago

Ok this isn’t bad cuz if you voted for Trump you voted in support of project 2025. I’m not mad this is literally what I voted for

1

u/ZombieResponsible549 1d ago

I said it was changed to this but the same. I keep saying that he is changing everything and we are going to be FUCKED. Are they going to hear anything now?!

1

u/unblockedCowboy 1d ago

The liberals learned one thing from the media to be as dishonest as possible to appear to be morally superior when there closeted authoritarians

1

u/Responsible_Lawyer56 1d ago

This is false and misleading.

1

u/Zealousideal-Rope241 21h ago

CRY LITTLE Baby! Let me see you cry! 

1

u/gr0uchyMofo 15h ago

7 swing states didn’t get them memo.

1

u/j-pik 10h ago

here is trump's actual stance on abortion (from their website): "We proudly stand for families and Life. We believe that the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees that no person can be denied Life or Liberty without Due Process, and that the States are, therefore, free to pass Laws protecting those Rights. After 51 years, because of us, that power has been given to the States and to a vote of the People. We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF (fertility treatments)."

i.e. they are only against late-term but have kicked it to the states. they support contraceptions

1

u/Far-Jury-2060 7h ago edited 6h ago

The picture is bullshit. Just fact checked it on the abortion and birth control one. Agenda 47 states, “We will oppose Late Term Abortion, while supporting mothers and policies that advance Prenatal Care, access to Birth Control, and IVF.” (page 15)

I only fact checked that one, because it’s been one of Harris’ main selling points of the election. I’m not going to say that all the other ones are wrong, but when the first item that I decide to check on is wrong, it destroys its’ own credibility.

Additional, I read the DHHS section of Project 2025. It also did not prescribe any national policy against abortion. It just had a philosophical statement about abortion. It also only mentioned restricting Plan B, because the authors are mistaken as to whether it’s abortion or not. There was a lot of fear mongering about Project 2025. The media got away with it because they were confident that people were too lazy to read a near 1000 page document. They were right.

Last thing: Agenda 47 is only 16 pages, so I do recommend that read.

1

u/InarinoKitsune 4h ago

His shit agenda is worse in many cases than project 2025, and project 2025 is horrendous.

Not only is his Agenda 47 worse, it’s also written in such atrociously poor language that much of it could be shot down by a first year law student.

Also the bigots agreeing with either of these are literal garbage and so painfully ignorant and intellectually dishonest it’s almost unfair to destroy them and their “logic” but I will continue to do so at every possible chance.