How much do you know about Project 2025?

[abc3643]

About Project 2025

Project 2025 is the name given to the Presidential Transition Project published by the conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation. In short, the project towards a radical reformulation of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.

Their published document is "Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise " and describes the suggestive actions that the next (conservative) President's administration should focus on. It's basically a conservative Christmas list.

This is how The Heritage Foundation describes it and where you can read it piecemeal:
https://www.project2025.org/policy/

"This book is the product of more than 400 scholars and policy experts from across the conservative movement and around the country. Contributors include former elected officials, world-renowned economists, and veterans from four presidential Administrations. This is an agenda prepared by and for conservatives who will be ready on Day One of the next Administration to save our country. The Heritage Foundation is once again facilitating this work, but as our dozens of partners and hundreds of authors will attest, this book is the work of the entire conservative movement.

The next conservative President will enter office on January 20, 2025, with a simple choice: greatness or failure. It will be a daunting test, but no more so than every other generation of Americans has faced and passed. The Conservative Promise represents the best effort of the conservative movement in 2023—and the next conservative President’s last opportunity to save our republic."

You can also download the entire document as a PDF:
https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL.pdf

WSJ Analysis

The Wall Street Journal is generally a somewhat conservative newspaper. Yet, they published a somewhat disturbing analysis of Project 2025.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/09/opinion/project-2025-trump-change.html?unlocked_article_code=1.JU4.kUNg.HVH3h31LDuPI&smid=url-share

Updates

1 y

CORRECTION:
This was published in the New York Times, which is a somewhat liberal newspaper.

I had been reading the WSJ just before seeing the above-mentioned article and that's why I thought it came from the WSJ.

[strateguy632]

1, looks good prepared by experts who have experienced in politics and policy experts.

2 your link is to nytimes!

So your argument "even conservative newspaper" opposed is just a trick. But i saw the link!

Nytimes opposed? They are fanatic liberal. Nytimes licks the boots of democrat politicians like schumer! Not just "somewhat liberal" unless you mean 5 gallons is less than 8 gallons of the 'squad" liberals in congress!

They are "disturbed " by the alternative not because it is bad. Nytimes is not policy experts in contrast to the book contributers. The Nytimes staff never served as elected officials.

[strateguy632]

"radical reformulation" also they never suggested that , as you falsely misrepresented.
That is all anti trump can do.
Because they can't find anything good about mrs kamala!

[abc3643]

I have no idea what you said.

As to "radical reformulation", I think that's a bit subjective, so interpret it as you will.

As for Project 2025, I won't say it's universally bad. Furthermore, I like Musk's idea supported by Trump of finding ways to make government run more efficiently. If I had been President, I would have done the same thing; taxpayers may have to pay taxes, but their money shouldn't be wasted.

[abc3643]

by the way, I DID correct myself right away. I noticed that I wrote WSJ and not NYT because I thought I was reading the WSJ. (I have subscriptions to NYT, WSJ, and Washington Post.) I had been reading a Musk article in the WSJ just before I saw the article in the NYT.

So, I wasn't trying to deceive anyone; I made an honest mistake which I immediately corrected after I posted the question.

[abc3643]

By the way, this is the Musk article I was reading...

Trump’s Best Idea: Unleashing Elon Musk on Government
The entrepreneur wants to run a commission on government efficiency.
www.wsj.com/.../trumps-best-idea-unleashing-elon-musk-on-government-reform-707cf218

[normalice]

Yeah, it was written by trumps former staff as a blueprint for how Trump can keep power this time. I have no doubt trump is too far gone to understand much of it but was instantly sold on the full power of the executive branch being loyal only to him.

Also, NYT does not lean left since the Citizens United ruling. That was the whole point of the Citizens United ruling, after all..

[abc3643]

The NYT most definitely leans left. I am a liberal and __I__ can see it.
As does Media Bias Fact Check and others.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-times/

"Overall, we rate the New York Times Left-Center biased based on wording and story selection that moderately favors the left. They are considered one of the most reliable sources for news information due to proper sourcing and well-respected journalists/editors. The failed fact checks were on Op-Eds and not straight news reporting."

All-Sides (whose site is under some maintenance, so I can't follow some links) asserts that the NYT's News Leans Left while it's Opinion is Left.
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias


Citizen's United was about establishing who has First Amendment rights. From an abstract perspective, the question revolves around this: "Do only individuals have First Amendment rights or do groups of individuals speaking as a group also have First Amendment rights?"

This was the "holding" in Citizen's United:
"Holding: Political spending is a form of protected speech under the First Amendment, and the government may not keep corporations or unions from spending money to support or denounce individual candidates in elections. While corporations or unions may not give money directly to campaigns, they may seek to persuade the voting public through other means, including ads, especially where these ads were not broadcast."
www.scotusblog.com/.../

While I am liberal and didn't like the results, I agree with the decision and the holding.

[normalice]

The point of the Citizens united ruling was to allow far right billionaires to control the media narrative by flooding media outlets with unlimited cash. That's what far right billionaires bought the ruling for. NYT used to be decidedly left but for "by coincidence" since the Citizens United ruling I've seen an increasing number of editing and framing decisions that are of otherwise inexplicable benefit to republicans.

[abc3643]

From All Sides:

=====
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/left

What does a “Left” media bias rating mean?

"Sources with a Left AllSides Media Bias Rating™ display bias in ways that strongly align with liberal, progressive, or left-wing thought and/or policy agendas. Some of these sources may be considered "left-wing news."

A Left media bias rating from AllSides doesn't necessarily mean the source is extreme, wrong, not credible, or unreasonable, just as a Center rating doesn't necessarily mean the source is the most fair, credible, or reasonable. We encourage people to read outlets across the political spectrum to get multiple perspectives.

=====
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/left-center

What does a “Lean Left” media bias rating mean?

Sources with a Lean Left AllSides Media Bias Rating™ display bias in ways that moderately align with liberal, progressive, or left-wing thought and/or policy agendas. A Lean Left bias is a moderately liberal rating on the political spectrum.

(more)

[abc3643]

=====
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/center

What does a “Center” media bias rating mean?

Sources with a Center AllSides Media Bias Rating™ either do not show much political bias or display a balance of articles with left and right perspectives.

=====
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/right-center

What does a “Lean Right” media bias rating mean?

Sources with a Lean Right AllSides Media Bias Rating™ display media bias in ways that moderately align with conservative, traditional, libertarian, or right-wing thought and/or policy agendas. A Lean Right bias is a moderately conservative rating on the political spectrum.

=====
https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/right

What does a “Right” media bias rating mean?

Sources with a Right AllSides Media Bias Rating™ display media bias in ways that strongly align with conservative, traditional, or right-wing thought and/or policy agendas. Some of these sources or writers may be considered "right-wing news."

A Right media bias rating from AllSides doesn't necessarily mean the source is extreme, wrong, not credible, or unreasonable, just as a Center rating doesn't necessarily mean the source is the most fair, credible, or reasonable. We encourage people to read outlets across the political spectrum to get multiple perspectives.

[normalice]

I don't know how bias checkers make their determinations so I can't really accept it at face value, sorry.

[abc3643]

Don't be lazy and cop-out like that.

Do some due diligence, visit their websites, and determine how they do that.
They are transparent about that and, of course, they have to be to have any merit.

All Sides
www.allsides.com/.../media-bias-rating-methods

Media Bias Fact Check
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/methodology/

So, peruse those websites and judge for yourself.

[normalice]

If someone wants to pay me for my time, sure, but you're asking me to spend several months of research just to have a discussion on the internet that ignores the evidence of my eyes.

[abc3643]

It is your responsibility to be informed. If not for yourself, then for your family, your country, and your species.

If your child dies because you didn't "paid for my time" to research something, you'll be the one who pays.

So, do your due diligence. It may save your life or that of those under your care.

[normalice]

I'm not 100% sure but i don't think anyone's life depends on my understanding of how media bias is graded by some obscure website. I've seen NYT favor the right on multiple occasions that made no sense. If they lean left 99% of the time, great, but that just lends the appearance of credibility to their occasional random push of right wing misinformation, thus making it much more effective. I'm not saying they are doing it on purpose but if your job was to get right wing misinformation in front of liberals, you would be hard pressed to come up with a better business model than NYT or CNN, so it seems suspect.

[menina]

Project 2025 sounds like a nightmare! An huge setback in the US. I hope it NEVER becomes true.

[ManInChains]

I know it's not something Trump has anything to do with like the democrats claim.

[abc3643]

Trump's name is mentioned 312 times in the document. However, many of these times it was either in referencing someone within the Trump Administration or mentioning the Trump Administration in the past tense. That said, there are many times in the document which assert either expanding or following up on Trump Administration efforts and policies. So, in essence, it is connected with him even if he was not part of its writing.

[strateguy632]

Hahaha "mentions trump" doesn't mean trump approved!
I can write an anti nazi book and you would say "look how many times strategy mentioned hitler"?

[abc3643]

@strateguy632 I agree. I never said Trump approved of it nor that he formally had any part of it.

The connection with Trump and Project 2025 is that many of the contributors to Project 2025 likely would be in a second Trump Administration and try to implement it. Thus, there is a lot of animosity against it; in short, electing Trump (or, in principle, any GOP candidate) increases the probability of enacting the changes proposed in Project 2025. Voting Democratic prevents that from happening.

A side note: Trump is not as Washington-savvy as the people in his administration or who are part of The Heritage Foundation or contributed to Project 2025. Thus, more than most other Republicans who might run for President, Trump is easier to sway about these things in the document. It's written sufficiently abstract to gloss over the bad but, upon inspection, would be rather bad for most people.

Here's an example: Project 2025 proposes eliminating all income tax brackets except 2: 15% and 30%.

This is from document page 696:

"Intermediate Tax Reform. The Treasury should work with Congress to simplify the tax code by enacting a simple two-rate individual tax system of 15 percent and 30 percent that eliminates most deductions, credits and exclusions. "

So, how does that affect people?

Project 2025 doesn't say, but this graphic explains it.
https://ibb.co/kq0LcR6

[DrPepper12]

Too much and I am terrified and sickened about it!

[legalboxers]

*watches the GaG Trump Cult put spin on it like a basket ball*

[mandyfire98]

Project 2025 is horrifying in every way.