The listed excerpts are actually quite tame compared to what the actual plan is.
slashing U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) funding, dismantling the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security
invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807 to deploy the military for domestic law enforcement and directing the DOJ to pursue Trump adversaries
create a federally funded “American Academy” that would deliver online courses and grant free degrees that excluded “wokeness or jihadism”. The plan would also be funded by taxing the endowments of major universities
every state report 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
I stopped looking, not because there was any shortage of further crazy shit. There’s plenty more.
Yeah, and there’s a fair amount of money behind this push…which like…I’m not American, don’t live in the States, but my sister and her wife do…and I’ve gotta figure out how to get them the fuck out if things go Trump again…
Edit: also, living in the UK I run into loads of people who go “Well, if Trump gets in again, that’s not really our problem…” but like…the USA makes they’re problems everyone’s problem. And another Trump presidential term would be a huge problem for the rest of the world…
also, living in the UK
Yeah, I’ve been following UK politics by way of TrashFuture podcast and I gotta say… your immigration plan is to deport people to Rwanda and your government just endorsed a Trans-Panic Committee to decide whether teenagers can consent to gender-affirming care.
And these are the moderate Labour Party positions. Liz Truss wants to do worse.
God damn, dude. Finding the worst people to run the country is not a competition. You can just let the Yanks have this one.
Finding the worst people to run the country is not a competition.
I’m only here on a marriage visa, I’m not a P.R or citizen yet, so I’m not allowed to vote against having these bigots and con-men in power. Also, while labour is somewhat moderate, the Tories are in power, and they’re a bunch of fucking nut jobs. Labour can’t decide what they stand for anymore, which means they will stand for nothing, and the rest of the available parties will never get to power again. The available options are shit, just like in the States. And the Yanks think they invented having a shit government, but lemme tell you, the Brits have been fucking up their own government and foreign governments for a lot longer the the US has been a thing.
In a similar situation here in NZ. On a perm resident visa through partnership, can’t vote, keenly interested in being on my best behaviour here. Labour wasn’t amazeballs, but the current coalition is like watching a pack of dogs with diarrhoea tear through a quiet town. You just know it’ll be on someone else to clean up after them.
What’s even worse, is that there are people dumb enough to think you’ll actually believe them when they try to tell you that both sides are the same thing.
Vote like lives depend on it. Because many do.
you’ll actually believe them when they try to tell you that both sides are the same thing.
I mean, look at that last batch of legislation on Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, and TikTok that got passed through both houses by wide margins. There’s definitely a political consensus on certain issues, particularly when it comes to advantaging American private businesses or pursing certain foreign policy objectives.
You might get a dispute over whether we should be arming Ukraine against Russia or kicking off a fight between Taiwan and China instead. But there’s near-zero daylight on Israel, and its not hard to see why. Same with the TikTok ban, which US social media companies have been salivating over for months.
Ukraine needs to be funded, and the only way dems could get that piece of legislation was to throw in israeli support, but that is not all that bipartisan in congress, only in the streets do i see both conservatives and social liberals both sporting “support Ukraine” stickers. The GOP wanted to pass even more aid to israel that failed.
Not as sure on Taiwan, but agreed that banning Tik Tok was absolutely bipartisan. Also true that US social media companies mist be salovating over that one, but that is not why it was passed. Tik Tok is being banned bc it enables a foreign adversary to spy on our citizens. This one keeps being framed as a privacy issue, but unlike things like the patriot act, there is actual reason to close Tik Toks back door.
Tik Tok was banned because social media companies didn’t want competition.
No, it wasn’t.
Yeah it was.
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/meta/summary?id=D000033563
9th biggest lobbyist group. Now tell YOUR friends at Meta that no one is buying their shit here and you should astroturf elsewhere.
ROFL! My friends at where? Do you make blanket assumptions at everyone you talk to, or am I special?
Not denying it.
If the democrats hold “civility” and “precedent” more highly than outlawing a candidate who, by their own admission, would plunge the country into fascism, then democrats are complicit.
Dog, take a look at what has happened this week alone (under a dem president): arguing in favor of unprecedented levels surveillance to any president, sending billions of dollars to a genocidal regime, the revelation that like 40% of democrats are in favor of mass deportations…
Fascism is already here. Just because it is being formally codified in Project 2025 doesn’t mean it has yet to arrive. Democrats, and liberalism in general, are unable to stomp fascism.
While I agree, it’s still important to vote Democrat just to keep things from getting worse even faster while we drum up support for a better solution.
The only logical conclusion to that line of thinking is, 30 years from now, voting for the candidate who supports 5 genocides as opposed to the candidate who supports 10 genocides. It is a liberal and fascistic strategy. Any vote within the American electoral system, which is kabuki theater, does nothing other than to refine capitalism and the regime.
I love how unhinged your argument is, essentially boiling down to “Voting is a waste”. Get out of here with that noise. You “both sides are the same” fools are just foreign disinformation agents, or useful idiots.
Lemmy is absolutely infested with this nonsense.
I’ve seen it a lot, yeah. I’m proud of how well Lemmy has pushed back on it.
We’re not doing good enough. There’s still a LOT of threads where the “both sides, don’t vote” propaganda has taken over.
ROFL…. I said stupid too when I was a teenager. But not this stupid.
Thanks for the laugh. I really need this.
Bud, what? We need a revolution, yes, but it takes time to build it up - we’re not going to overthrow the government tomorrow. So, what do we do while we’re building up that support? Keep the country stitched up with the knock-off duct tape that is the democrats. Yes, the entire thing is coming apart at the seams, and pieces are falling off, but it’s better than letting people actively break it further. There will be no revolution if there’s nobody left to rise up.
Not only this, but our populace keeps shifting socially leftward. Hence why we have legalized gay marriage and why trans rights are even able to be discussed openly. The dems have been forced to shift their stances from the 90s on these issues bc of their core demographic shifting to the left.
Take note that lgbt rights, privacy, universal healthcare, and sensible climate change policies are no longer fringe, they are at the forefront of what the youth wants. Dont believe the lie that things will only get worse from here if we compromise on status quo joe.
The country is changing whether we like it or not. Either the leftward trend of the majority continues and those who wish to be elected fall in line, or we vote for the biggest boot youll ever see in ur lifetime.
I hope you’re right, but I honestly see our current political options as being the government’s response to our own successful pulls toward the left. “You want to force our Dems to support ever more left-leaning ideals? Well, we’ll just push our Conservatives ever further to the right, so you feel compelled to vote even for a moderate democrat to prevent them from getting power!” The government has just as much ability to force our hand as we do on it - or, more likely, even moreso. I believe this election is an example of that.
Mmm, despite what the FUD crowd here on lemmy would have u believe, the dems are not so keen on donnie dump and co. as their adversaries. They want to retain power, too. Dr. Fascismo is a massive threat to that end. On the flip side, biden and the rest of the old guard care little if we want lgbtq rights to be engrained in law, support abortion outright bc they want women to be happy spenders of money, and see climate accountability as a threat to their lobbyist friends only at the far end of that spectrum- otherwise they will vote to placate.
Obviously far leftist politics can only come via direct action, but even then democrats are a smaller boot to deal with and should be embraced as the enemy of our enemy.
Man it’s like I can hear how white the people you get your politics from are
Nobody who actually lives the difference talks like this, get off your high horse.
Na fuck that. Voting Democrat is voting against progression. Progression will be achieved by igniting the masses. You fuel the fire and the new growth is what will grow to the old forest for your grandkids kids who will never know or thank you will live in. Vote Trump and burn the fucker to the ground.
Sorry kiddo, I don’t discuss politics with people that call me “dog.”
Project 25?
Seen this mentioned twice now. What is it? Sure i can, and will, google it. Just nice to have a record here for others too.
The the heritage foundations wishlist for fascism. The heritage foundation is responsible for all of the conservative judges that get “chosen.” They hand a list to Republicans and those are the candidates that are picked from. The heritage foundation is top on my list of “things that really need to die in a fire.”
Some real “high integrity” content includes:
Rooting out democrats/liberals from federal positions.
The previously mentioned banning porn.
Defunding NOAA and privatizing the national weather service that people literally depend on for their lives. Privatize as in "you no longer get access to life saving weather information unless you pay us.
Etc…
Edit: there’s a good list of a few more from @mozz in a comment below that I’ll tack on here:
slashing U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) funding, dismantling the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security
Invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807 to deploy the military for domestic law enforcement and directing the DOJ to pursue Trump adversaries
Create a federally funded “American Academy” that would deliver online courses and grant free degrees that excluded “wokeness or jihadism”. The plan would also be funded by taxing the endowments of major universities
every state report 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
Over in [email protected] I got banned for posting about Project 2025. They claim it breaks rule 2 which is to only post pro-conservative or anti-liberal posts. Fucking echo chamber over there.
Same as r/conservatives was.
Projection is the game. You see these wackos all over YouTube bemoaning “my comments keep getting deleted” (which doesn’t seem true), yet go on their turf and they’ll happily silence you as that’s different.
Reminds me of “the only moral abortion is mine”. The only people being silenced is us, what we’re doing might look the same but trust me bro it’s not.
Lemmy as a whole is an echo chamber too. Look at how things blew up in this post. This is an extreme scenario, not every conservative cares about project 2025. I have conservative family and coworkers who are conservative because they hate change and want to live in the “good old days”, not because they worship trump or are nazis… And yet everyone here thinks “all conservatives are evil”.
the good old days
So they want slavery back? Or was it something else?
Nah, that’s ancient. Racial segregation, like with the Jim Crow laws, will probably do fine for a start. Maybe also take back women’s voting rights. Needless to say that homosexuality gets banned as well again. I mean, it’s a rather modern phenomenon that it has been legalized at all. /s
You guys are thinking way too extreme once again. My grandfather voted conservative his entire life and yet was friends with the blacks and columbians next door. He was the first in his town to let his wife drive a car.
Why was he conservative then you ask? Because he was raised religious and he felt like liberals were attacking his religion. That’s it. Now granted this was in Canada, before Trump and project 2025, but conservatism is an idea, not a party in one country.
I don’t say that each and every single conservative is an evil asshole who wants to let certain groups of people suffer. But even if the individual reasons for voting conservatives seems innocent, it’s not as innocent what such a party could ultimately do (or actually did in the past).
Even though his only motivation might have been that he saw his religion threatened, voting conservatives still shows a lack of critical thought in my opinion. What about the other goals the conservatives pursued back then and today? Voting them will give them the power to achieve those. Sure, maybe his religion will be protected that way. But what about all of the suffering the other goals will (or did) cause?
It’s a decision to make of what’s worse on the greater scale. Picking a party just because of one point on their agenda with which someone can identify, but ignoring the rest, seems like a short-sighted and potentially very harmful idea to me, which might – in the long run – even be detrimental to the one who voted for such a party.
It feels like voting for a party which will bring doom and damnation over the whole world, but at least you get to pet a puppy once a week.
It’s not a lack or critical thinking. He was working all day, then cooking for the family, then barely had an hour or two to himself. In a primarly conservative town, without internet, and about 3 channels on TV, how do you expect him to learn or care about politics? He voted conservative like everyone else and moved on.
Also keep in mind that most conservative parties in the world aren’t like the US, they don’t want to “bring doom and damnation over the world”.
Didn’t take the time to educate himself, thinks his religion is more important than helping others, voted like a lemming.
Yea a lack of critical thinking went into these actions and into your defence of them.
So it’s not a lack of critical thinking, but not being able to take the time to critically think about one’s decision is not a lack of critical thinking?
I don’t think it’s responsible to vote for a party if one is not able to critically think about their choice. Then he maybe shouldn’t have voted at all, if there was really no time to think a bit about it. And it really doesn’t take that much. However, the limiting the available information is indeed a problem to form such critical thoughts. Still, making a choice despite knowing one is not able to form a well-informed opinion, is again a sign of a lack of critical thinking to me.
No, of course they don’t want to. They just do.
My wording was a figure of speech of course, but still, in my experience and from what I can tell, conservative parties have been more detrimental to the progress and benefit of a society as a whole than being beneficial.
Is this project 2025? Like policies for the voter minorities that mentally liven in the 1950s.
Nah, they wanna take us even farther back to the likes of the Spanish Inquisition.
The Spanish Inquisition is too Catholic and Papist for the fundamentalist Protestant nutjobs here in the states.
Now, the question is, which is the “right” type of Protestant?
Pornography should be outlawed
I mean, it’s quite a departure for a party that whinges about the First Amendment to straight up move to the government controlling what can be published, i.e. actual literal censorship. But hey, conservatives aren’t very logical.
Always remember that if the conservatives who claim to love the US, had been born in 1750, they would have been Loyalist Redcoats.
I mean…if the loyalist redcoats had won, you’d have health care, gun control and there wouldn’t have been a civil war, slavery would just have ended like it did in the rest of the empire.
Big jump in logic here. The decay of the British empire wouldn’t even be a thing if the crown held the states. As long as we’re playing pretend I’d say it would have ended up worse for everyone.
Lol. Why not pretend the Byzantine Empire would still exist if they had North America? I was talking about a much tighter period of time, roughly 50 years. Canada was essentially self governing by the late 1800s.
It is right up there with the same people arguing for abortion because one should be able to decide what medical procedures (including drugs) should be done to them also arguing for COVID vaccine mandates, i.e. arguing that people should be forced to take a drug.
But then that’s one of my biggest grumps about pro-choice arguments (and I am pro-choice) - there’s a tendency to argue that supporting abortion is just an application of some broader principle but also to have abortion be the only controversial case where that principle actually applies.
Except nobody was physically forced down and vaccinated against their will. You can still choose not to be vaccinated, but choices have consequences. I’m not saying the government should arrest people for not being vaccinated, but people, institutions, companies and hospitals should definitely have the choice to not want to let those people inside.
I think he was saying not that it happened, but that people wanted it to happen really really bad, and that many of those same people who wanted it (or supported it, not achieved it), also support pro choice when it comes to what amounts to an ideologically similar issue (my body my choice, bodily autonomy.)
Tbf, if he is indeed saying that, he’s right, pro-choice people did want forced vaccinations by law, though you’re also right that they did not get forced vaccinations by law.
Before any reactionaries jump down my throat, I’m pro-choice myself and am simply trying to clarify what looks to be a misunderstanding in these couple comments here.
I’ve never known anyone who wanted to physically force people to get vaccinated. I did know many people, myself included, who absolutely wanted mandates. Don’t want to get vaccinated? Sure, that’s your choice. But other people get to choose not to be around you, and this includes your employer or any store owner or transport company, etc.
Choosing not to be around someone is you leaving, not them.
No, it’s also choosing not to let them into your building.
That is an entirely different point
I have, so we’re at an anecdotal Mexican standoff it would seem.
“Mandates” doesn’t mean “optional,” in fact it’s quite the opposite of that.
Mandate:
1 :an authoritative command especially : a formal order from a superior >court or official to an inferior one
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mandate
Idk whether the misunderstanding comes from not knowing what a mandate is, but above you say:
I did know many people, myself included, who absolutely wanted mandates (an authoritative command especially a formal order from a superior court or official to an inferior one)
But then go on to say that you didn’t mean “the definition of mandate” by your use of the word “mandate,” instead you meant a new definition created by you that boils down to voluntary association, not “mandates.”
So, which is it? Do/did you support the government forcing people by law to get vaccinated (mandates), or do you simply support people’s right not to employ or hang with people on the other side of their vaccination opinions (voluntary association)?
Please stop, you’re so transparent. Vaccine mandates already existed in places, which has never meant that people are physically forced to get vaccinated. Like in schools, or when you want to work in a hospital. There are mandates. Don’t want to get vaccinated? Then you don’t get to work there. You’ll never be physically forced to vaccinate.
When my employer wanted everyone to get vaccinated, that was also called a mandate. People could still not get vaccinated, it’s their choice, but then they weren’t allowed in the building. No government violence required.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccination_mandates_in_the_United_States#Private_mandates
There, plenty of mandates that have nothing whatsoever to do with physically being forced to get vaccinated. Just that when you choose not to, there are consequences. Actions have consequences, who knew?
If you still insist on pretending not to understand this, think of it this way: If you choose to not shower and never wear clean clothes (this is the choice you make), nobody will physically force you into a shower. But when you’re walking around smelling like weeks old sweat and garbage, your employer will definitely not let you come back to work (and this would be the consequence). Same goes for walking around like a virus dispenser.
Honestly I’m more confused as to why you pretend there weren’t people calling for prison for the unvaccinated. We agree that voluntary association is good, why deny there were also people who wanted a government mandate?
Sure though, I suppose you’re right, “employer mandates” is a thing, I concede that point (well, at least that it still doesn’t mean optional, but it doesn’t necessarily mean governmental). That doesn’t change the fact however that people were calling for more than that, people were calling for arrests, maybe not you but those people did exist. It is that which the above poster was comparing to abortion, not the much lighter version you’re talking about.
“Choices have consequences” is not something that should be said in regards to a government coercing you about a matter of your rights.
Nobody is coercing you to do anything when your employer doesn’t want people spreading disease in their company. Nobody is coercing anyone if e.g. hospitals refuse to hire someone who hasn’t had certain vaccinations. It has nothing to do with coercion. It has to do with the fact that actions and choices have consequences. You don’t get to willingly disregard (the safety of) everyone else and expect to be welcome everywhere.
If I choose not to shower, and stink to high heaven, some employers won’t hire me. If I choose not to wear shoes, or walk around in my underwear, I will be denied access to many places. Does this mean I am being coerced to shower and wear clothes?
Actions have consequences. It’s just that simple. You can always choose to not do x, but when it’s a requirement for y, you won’t get to do y unless you do x. And speaking of rights, what about everyone else’s rights to not have to sit/work/eat/wait next to Typhoid Mary? Or is it really your opinion that whatever someone does, their right to do whatever is more important than the rest of society? Do you think businesses should be forced to allow anyone inside no matter what? Employers are not allowed to set requirements for their employees?
Long answer to a different point, don’t care, try responding to what I actually said.
Dude that’s so rude and doesn’t net you any points in your argument. Gotta respect people.
No…no I don’t.
It’s the exact same point. You disingenuously calling it “government coercion” doesn’t change anything.
But thank you for pointing out you don’t actually care. Means I don’t have to waste more time on this. I wish you a pleasant day.
Oh ok (fucking retard) you’re right
I mean, the FBI SHOULD be reviewed, audited, and have all their nazis purged, but good luck getting that done under either party.
I mean, the FBI SHOULD be reviewed, audited, and have all their nazis purged, but good luck getting that done under either party.
House Republicans All Vote Against Neo-Nazi Probe of Military, Police
Their plan doesnt call for a “nazi purge.” it calls to end any investigation of crime that involves a Republican.
Why make up a completely different scenario just to “both sides” and give the GOP cover for their actual plan that dismants the rule of law as long as youre on their team?
They want to protect free speech, by creating an enforced list of banned words?
Ever heard of the great lie?
No
It was the lie created by the Nazis, and they obviously knew it was a lie.
Well, they want to ban these words from appearing in laws, not from being used by anyone. So I guess it only deprives the government from free speech.
It makes sense, recently in NC we unbanned gender-affirming care for Government funded medical programs, as the Judge ruled that since the legal team arguing in favor of the unban showed that trans healthcare is not substantially more expensive (for insurers) than everyone else’s and there was enough evidence to show that the care could not be considered elective under these cirucmstances, that discrimination was the only possible motive for barring it and since those arguing in favor of the ban had no arguments that hadn’t been debunked… the ban was lifted and now Government Funded Medical Programs in NC HAVE to cover Gender Affirming care
If the Judge wasn’t allowed to talk about LGBT Discrimination, and was forced to frame it in terms of “States Rights” then the ban wouldn’t have been lifted
Wait, we don’t review FBI investigations?
I know they mean their own independent panels etc.
I just think these agencies are going to push back and push back hard. That or quit/resign.
Good luck fighting your own government for 4 years.
Good luck fighting your own government for 4 years.
Unfortunately this also supports Republican goals. The less effective the government is, the easier it will be for them to ignore regulations and run their little scams, and the less support there will be for people who need it.
The deeeeep state is illegally resisting edicts from the emperor
Why do conservatives hate free speech and freedom so much?
No no, why do PROGRESSIVES hate freedom so much whilst conservatives work so hard to make sure everyone has the freedom to own a gun and debt?
Edit: Really? The /s wasn’t obvious here?
What?
/s, /s, /s!
It was sarcasm, which for some reason Boone picked up on
I think it’s supposed to be sarcasm?
No. It’s not. It’s close. They’re mocking the person who took any side. There no side to not commit xenocide and the democrats will knot not do it. We don’t have much time left. Their might be one “president” left after this one. I assure you it don’t matter who because everyone will die on this planet.
Yeah no. Whatever craziness you are talking about, I was sarcastic
I’m talking about the hidden obvious. They’re both on the same side. The lesser of two evils is still a fucking GADDAAR.
