• hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      74
      ·
      4 months ago

      Right?

      Like, even if Trump doesn’t win you can bet your ass a lot of conservatives are on board and pushing the agenda

        • theneverfox
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          No, it’s a plan for how to quickly replace career administrators to pack the government with loyalists, cripple education and sprinkle in indoctrination, reverse key rights for women, and just generally subvert democracy to keep conservatives in power even though the population is interestingly progressive

          It’s written for a president to put into place in their first year, hence “2025” when the next president will be sworn in

        • hydroptic@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Nah it’s a plan specifically for the president since it also includes things that only he could do, but there’s a lot of it that is just legislation

    • Tiefling IRL@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’ve spent three years writing a fantasy campaign setting. The result is about 30-40 pages long so far.

      900 pages is insane

      • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        4 months ago

        900 pages is a suitable length for a large scale overarching policy agenda. It’s clear that they put a lot of thought into every detail of this.

        The content of that 900 pages, now that’s insane. It’s literally a blueprint for a fascist Christian theocracy.

  • NegativeNull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    95
    ·
    4 months ago

    The Chevron case the SCOTUS just ruled on was in direct support of Project2025. They aren’t waiting for a new potential president.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      4 months ago

      They’ve wanted that forever. Once Goursich was chosen the legal world knew what was coming. A legal podcast I used to listen to called it once he was picked.

      You know it’s corrupt when you can call things like that :(

  • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    4 months ago

    p2025 is a comprehensive wishlist that ranges from staunch conservative to bananas christofascist stuff.

    Now we can tar all of that with the P2025 brush.

    This is going to bite them hard.

    • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      P2025 sounds like a check engine code.

      Edit: looked it up and it is one. It gets better though - related to emissions (OBDII)! 🤣

  • ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s nice to see Democrats properly demonizing a Republican agenda into a standalone buzzword, the way Republicans do with a new variations of “equality” every year (woke, DEI, etc.)

  • DogPeePoo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    4 months ago

    Soon we’ll all be subsidizing Matt Gaetz raping and trafficking underage girls, while he continues to take a taxpayer salary and the DOJ does nothing about it.

  • Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    4 months ago

    I hope some group starts tracking every bill against p2025, so that any time they try to squeeze anything in it into a bill everyone knows and we can make it impossible to pass. We also need to know if any Dems ever allow any of it to pass… Basically it should become the anti-Bible for the left… If it’s in there, it’s never going to be allowed to happen

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Of course they are. They’ve been laying the groundwork for this for literal decades. Trump was just a convenient tool for them.

      My only hope is that it causes a schism among the Republican party, causing it to split in two so a conservative never wins an election ever again.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    “Accused”?

    Look, say it or don’t. These aren’t criminal charges, you don’t need to allege anything. They’re public figures, they’re not going to sue. Why the chickenshititude?

        • catloaf@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          The author is not accusing them of doing it, they are reporting that someone else is. The author is supporting those accusations by showing the evidence.

          Common Dreams is a pretty shitty source, but this is actually reasonable journalism. They should report just the facts.

          • Optional@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yes I know. They’re using “accused” correctly - and limiting the impact of the article. The headline I offered changes no facts, presuming they show them in the article, and doesn’t limit the impact by offloading the premise as an “accusation”.

            House GOP is funding Project2025 efforts. Is it doing so because Project2025 told them to? That’s irrelevant. If that’s the focus of the article, it shouldn’t be.

            Saying “accused” is weak - it limits the impact because they’re not directly tying the budgeting and Project2025 together and they’re not saying who’s “accusing” them. It’s clickbaity.

            My main complaint against commondreams is their adblocker-blocker. This type of headline writing is not unique to them.