• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Project 2025

Believing people when they explicitly tell you the things they want to do seems like a more straightforward approach.

True enough. So why, when other politicians disown it, is that mocked as lies? They explicitely told you they disown it.


Speaking of which, don't forget to loudly trumpet you wish to pack the court. In the actual form of the phrase, as when FDR tried it.

Speak loudly and clearly of your intentions! Especially as the election approaches, so The People can all understand your plans, then, in their infinite wisdom, set the course for the future. Buy megaphones and stand atop buildings! Do not be shy!
 
Last edited:
Haha.. okay.

Someone who floats conspiracy theories about election fraud clearly doesn't have the firmest grip on reality, but I see that we have now moved on to full-blown reality denial. I look forward to anti-vaxxer screeds to follow.


As the champagne meme goes, it's only a coup if it's from the Coup region of France, otherwise it's just sparkling sedition.
 
Originally Posted by zorro99 View Post
Project 2025 would ban abortion pills nationally . It would also build the federal apparatus to track and monitor all pregnant women throughout the United States. Those who obtained or attempted to obtain abortions would be imprisoned.

Link?
Quote?
Page number?
Chapter?

Anything other than Prison Planet-esque proclamations?

Zorro's post is not accurate. However, P-2025 does include the following:
The word “abortion” appears 199 times in Project 2025. The playbook includes an expansive array of suggestions of ways the government should regulate pregnancy and abortion, including:

1. Removing emergency contraception from the list of preventive services insurers must cover under the Affordable Care Act.

2. Calling on the FDA to rescind its approval of “chemical abortion drugs” such as mifepristone.

3. Using the Comstock Act to make it illegal to mail abortion medication.

4.Revoking Medicaid funds from states that require private insurance policies to cover abortions.

5. Prohibiting hospital emergency rooms from providing an abortion in order to save a woman’s life.

6. Conducting expansive government tracking of every instance of “spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion”.
See below:

On page 455, it says: "The CDC’s abortion surveillance and maternity mortality reporting systems are woefully inadequate. CDC abortion data are reported by states on a voluntary basis, and California, Maryland, and New Hampshire do not submit abortion data at all. Accurate and reliable statistical data about abortion, abortion survivors, and abortion-related maternal deaths are essential to timely, reliable public health and policy analysis. Because liberal states have now become sanctuaries for abortion tourism, HHS should use every available tool, including the cutting of funds, to ensure that every state reports exactly how many abortions take place within its borders, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother’s state of residence, and by what method. It should also ensure that statistics are separated by category: spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion."

...rescinding FDA approval of abortion medication (which accounted for 63% of all abortions in the US last year) and making it illegal to mail it, combined with the other proposals and existing laws in many states, would make the procedure exponentially harder to obtain.

“You can read the enforcement of the Comstock Act as a way to ban abortion,” says Greer Donley, an associate law professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law and an expert on abortion law. “Project 2025 is extremely aggressive on abortion.”
(Ibid)

P-2025 is extreme and would make legal and safe abortions virtually impossible to obtain in the US. What it would do is force women to do what they did pre-Roe v Wade: resort to back alley or self-induced abortions with a high risk of death for poorer women while those who could afford it would fly to another saner country to obtain them safely and legally.
 
You also said Trump wouldn't be stupid enough to attempt a coup. He ended up attempting a coup. You clearly have no real sense of what Trump will or won't do, and are either lying to yourself or everyone else.

And the idea that Republicans don't want a federal abortion ban is ludicrous. The majority of Republicans support making abortion illegal in all or most cases and House Republicans proposed a budget just a few months ago that endorsed a federal abortion ban. But you want us to believe that the constituents that they represent don't want the thing that they proposed.

And again - and I can't stress this enough - the assurances given by Trump voters about all the ways Trump would be stopped even if he wanted to do the terrible things they insist he won't do only apply if we accept Trump as a normal politician and not what he is: A 34-time convicted felon, sexual abuser, and fraudster who aimed a violent mob at the Capitol because he lost an election and clearly has no compunction about upending norms and breaking laws.
Remember the good old days when we also believed they wouldn't really overturn Roe vs. Wade?
 
Remember the good old days when we also believed they wouldn't really overturn Roe vs. Wade?

We were just being hyperbolic. They would never make it easy for states to ban abortion. Nor will they call for a national ban. Or even try to ban medication based abortion. Or work to ban birth-control.
 
Of course it wasn't, thank you for acknowledging that.

Thank you for acknowledging all the extreme anti-choice provisions listed in P-25:

The word “abortion” appears 199 times in Project 2025. The playbook includes an expansive array of suggestions of ways the government should regulate pregnancy and abortion, including:

1. Removing emergency contraception from the list of preventive services insurers must cover under the Affordable Care Act.

2. Calling on the FDA to rescind its approval of “chemical abortion drugs” such as mifepristone.

3. Using the Comstock Act to make it illegal to mail abortion medication.

4.Revoking Medicaid funds from states that require private insurance policies to cover abortions.

5. Prohibiting hospital emergency rooms from providing an abortion in order to save a woman’s life.

6. Conducting expansive government tracking of every instance of “spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion”.

Oh, wait.....you didn't!
 
Thank you for acknowledging all the extreme anti-choice provisions listed in P-25:



Oh, wait.....you didn't!


I also did not acknowledge that water is wet.


The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank, they oppose abortion. Shocking!
 
Beau of the Fifth Column had a tip for reading P2025, by the way: a lot of the scary stuff is 'hidden' behind code words like "woke" and whatnot (forgot what they were, but think various insults/code words/dog whistles they are wont to use. I think "family values" was one).
 
I also did not acknowledge that water is wet.


The Heritage Foundation is a conservative think tank, they oppose abortion. Shocking!

Opposing abortion is one thing. What P-2025 wants isn't opposition to abortion: it wants to ban abortion entirely including emergency intervention to save the life of the mother.

It also wants "to track every instance of spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion”.

That IS 'Shocking'! Why is that the government's business? What about conservatives' claimed belief in government keeping its nose out of our private business? Reeks of Big Brother to me.
 
The 'Aftermath' ad on Lincoln Project envisioned a future where the state even tracked women's periods.
 
After declaring he knew nobody from Project 2025, Trump just promised to put Project 2025’s author, Tom Homan, in his Administration.
 
Opposing abortion is one thing. What P-2025 wants isn't opposition to abortion: it wants to ban abortion entirely including emergency intervention to save the life of the mother.

It also wants "to track every instance of spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion”.

That IS 'Shocking'! Why is that the government's business? What about conservatives' claimed belief in government keeping its nose out of our private business? Reeks of Big Brother to me.

Government small enough to fit in a uterus
 
It does call for a national abortion ban, just in a roundabout way. It comes down to the phrase, “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,”

That sounds like they are backing off a national ban if you don't know the background, but if you know about their stand on Fetal Personhood, it's a pretty clear argument for banning abortion based on the US Constitution.

It's amazing the number of media outlets that buy into this "Trump is becoming moderate" BS...

The same people will then turn around and argue that the 14th amendment is illegal because it passed when the traitor states were still under occupation.
 
Opposing abortion is one thing. What P-2025 wants isn't opposition to abortion: it wants to ban abortion entirely including emergency intervention to save the life of the mother.

It also wants "to track every instance of spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion”.

That IS 'Shocking'! Why is that the government's business? What about conservatives' claimed belief in government keeping its nose out of our private business? Reeks of Big Brother to me.

It wants to go the route of El Salvador where women who had miscarriages have to prove themselves innocent or be jailed for thirty years plus.
 
One writer said the Heritaqe foundation were a bucnh of idiots by being so open about Project 2025. If you plan somenthing like this, you do it in secret and see it does not get out.
 
One writer said the Heritaqe foundation were a bunch of idiots by being so open about Project 2025. If you plan something like this, you do it in secret and see it does not get out.
I certainly would not dispute that they're a bunch of idiots, but I think your writer's itemizing of the idiocy indicates a sort of bias, as if such a project were an act of calculated mischief rather than fundamental stupidity. To promote a policy of idiocy with intelligence would be out of character.
 
One writer said the Heritaqe foundation were a bucnh of idiots by being so open about Project 2025. If you plan somenthing like this, you do it in secret and see it does not get out.

have you talked to anyone who doesn't follow politics as closely as you do about Project 2025?
 
I know Project 2025 has been searched for on Google more often than Taylor Swift recently. And it'll only get more attention in the coming weeks as we near election.
But yes, it's strange. And scary, as it says something about how bold the fascists are becoming.

Then again, Dump was openly horrible in 2016, and he still won, so.
 
One writer said the Heritaqe foundation were a bucnh of idiots by being so open about Project 2025. If you plan somenthing like this, you do it in secret and see it does not get out.
Yes, how stupid of these conservatives to reveal that they're against abortion! If only they'd kept their mouths shut, nobody would have suspected until it was too late! /s
And though I strongly disagree with plenty of the restrictive economic and trade ideas found in Project 2025, that’s not what the left is taking issue with. They’re feigning horror at decades-old social conservative positions and warning us about authoritarian policies that aren’t actually found anywhere in the plan.

https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/0...-a-single-white-christian-nationalist-policy/
 
Last edited:
Yes, how stupid of these conservatives to reveal that they're against abortion! If only they'd kept their mouths shut, nobody would have suspected until it was too late!

There's a difference between someone saying they are pro-life and painting a roadmap to Gilead.

(head-in-the-sand pig-ignorant quote by yet another right-wing apologist snipped)
 
Yes, how stupid of these conservatives to reveal that they're against abortion! If only they'd kept their mouths shut, nobody would have suspected until it was too late! /s
And though I strongly disagree with plenty of the restrictive economic and trade ideas found in Project 2025, that’s not what the left is taking issue with. They’re feigning horror at decades-old social conservative positions and warning us about authoritarian policies that aren’t actually found anywhere in the plan.

https://thefederalist.com/2024/07/0...-a-single-white-christian-nationalist-policy/

It's the methods that make the difference.
And,frankly, it goes beyond abortion. it is at attempt to create a de facto offical religion in the USA which in my opinions would make the Founding Fathers turn over in their grave.
 
There's a difference between someone saying they are pro-life and painting a roadmap to Gilead.

(head-in-the-sand pig-ignorant quote by yet another right-wing apologist snipped)

What is sad is that some of these people know exactly who and what Trump and MAGA Is, but they still support them.
I think they are under the illusion that somehow the more traditonal conservatives can somehow control Trump and company.
Funny, traditional conservatives thought the same way when they supported Hitler in Gemrany. Did not turn out well for them.
I have many opinions, particualy on economic positions, that would be considered conservative by many people here.( I am pretty pro free market, and skeptical bout big govnement programs being the answer to every problems). But i have never liked the conservative social agenda.
But Trump and Maga is just plain batcrap crazy.
 
It's the methods that make the difference.
And,frankly, it goes beyond abortion. it is at attempt to create a de facto offical religion in the USA which in my opinions would make the Founding Fathers turn over in their grave.

And classifying an entire group of people as sexual deviants, dehumanizing rhetoric and an implicit call for violence against them, tbh. I think there's no way to make peace with these scumbags.

Those leftists you sneer at are some of the only people who will stand with you against the Trumpers.
 
Last edited:
And classifying an entire group of people as sexual deviants, dehumanizing rhetoric and an implicit call for violence against them, tbh. I think there's no way to make peace with these scumbags.

Those leftists you sneer at are some of the only people who will stand with you against the Trumpers.

I only sneer at some on the Left.
And I amnot so sure the Left is the only people who will stand agians Trump .
 
I know Project 2025 has been searched for on Google more often than Taylor Swift recently. And it'll only get more attention in the coming weeks as we near election.
But yes, it's strange. And scary, as it says something about how bold the fascists are becoming.

Then again, Dump was openly horrible in 2016, and he still won, so.

What is rarely, if ever, acknowledged is the sheer anount of cheating that the republicans engaged in in 2016 (well, every election since at least 2000). Hilary Clinton started on election day with a balance of -10,000,000 votes (at the minimum) and still was the winner of the democratic vote.
 
And classifying an entire group of people as sexual deviants, dehumanizing rhetoric and an implicit call for violence against them, tbh. I think there's no way to make peace with these scumbags.


The variety of unity Trump seeks is not achieved by making peace.
 
I have many opinions, particualy on economic positions, that would be considered conservative by many people here.( I am pretty pro free market, and skeptical bout big govnement programs being the answer to every problems). But i have never liked the conservative social agenda.
But Trump and Maga is just plain batcrap crazy.

It's not just economy. It's everything that's crazy.

Even take this issue of pro-life. If the issue was about protecting life then you'd expect them to do things like increasing maternity leave? How about providing easier healthcare?
Making a better foster care or safer and easier adoption options?

You know, things that would actually make the pregnant woman's and the baby's life easier?

But no, they rather make their lives even worse.
 
It's not just economy. It's everything that's crazy.

Even take this issue of pro-life. If the issue was about protecting life then you'd expect them to do things like increasing maternity leave? How about providing easier healthcare?
Making a better foster care or safer and easier adoption options?

You know, things that would actually make the pregnant woman's and the baby's life easier?

But no, they rather make their lives even worse.

I think a lot of it is virtue signaling. When push comes to shove, a lot of these public anti-prochoice people would be rushing to a doctor for an abortion when it affects them personally.
 
I think a lot of it is_______ virtue signaling. When push comes to shove, a lot of these public anti-prochoice people would be rushing to a doctor for an abortion when it affects them personally.
In too many cases "would be" has become "were." But damn, I HATE the term "virtue signaling" even though it sort of fits here. Most of us signal our virtue when our opinion is given. The term presumes hypocrisy without taking responsibility for accusing it directly, and all too often, used as it is by right wingers, it's an accusation of hypocrisy by people who cannot believe a position contrary to their own could be real. Virtue, social justice, and fact have all become dirty words in the right wing vocabulary.

So yeah, bla bla bla again and I will step off the soapbox with the request that we insert "fake" or "hypocritical" or some similar term into the space above.
 
Yeah, 'virtue signalling' is just an empty word they like to throw at people they don't like. It's only useful as a litmus test to show that the person you're discussing with isn't arguing in good faith and isn't worth replying to. It's also projection, of course, how often don't you see trumpkins and other far-righters reply with something meaningless just to show the world (and each other) that they are there?
 
Project 2025 has a goal of making american families look like the "nuclear family" again. The man goes to work, the woman is a home-maker the kids have good grades and everyone is heterosexual.

It doesn't fit in with the reality that non-binary people have always existed in history. It is also because of conservative economics that single-income homes are impossible for 95% of the population.
 
That's just laziness.
People can just pull themselves up by their bootstraps by getting themselves born into a rich family.
Republican donors managed to do it, so everything else could, too, if they just made the effort.
 
You want to tax away my billions just because you were too lazy to swim to the right egg?
 
Project 2025 has a goal of making american families look like the "nuclear family" again. The man goes to work, the woman is a home-maker the kids have good grades and everyone is heterosexual.

It doesn't fit in with the reality that non-binary people have always existed in history. It is also because of conservative economics that single-income homes are impossible for 95% of the population.

That's just liberal propaganda. Next thing you know, you're going to tell us a stud like Rock Hudson was a homo.
 
Back
Top Bottom