Remember when Trump said, "l have nothing to do with Project 2025"

Well then why does his executive orders mirror that agenda?

Just a coincidence?

Did he lie again?

Trump said he hadn't read Project 2025 but most of his early executive orders overlap with its proposals | CNN Politics


https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/31/politics/trump-policy-project-2025-executive-orders-invs/index.html

"A CNN analysis of the 53 executive orders and actions from Trump's first week in office found that more than two-thirds 36 evoke proposals outlined in "Mandate for Leadership," Project 2025's 922-page blueprint for the next Republican president. The overlap includes early steps taken by Trump to execute some of his most-touted pledges: cracking down on illegal immigration; dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives; and rolling back environmental restrictions on oil and gas exploration."

I'm still confused why Trump disavowed Project 2025 in the run up to the election. Wasn't his disavowal a tacit admission by Trump that the Project 2025 provisions were something that the American people would not support? Otherwise, wouldn't he have owned it and used it to attract the maximum amount of voters.

BI MAGAS: Why did Trump disavow Project 2025?

Simple answer: he knew it was unpopular, so he lied about it.

The announcement of it gave the maggots something to get excited about.
The denial of it gave the center right folks enough reason to ignore it.

Trump speaks out of both sides of his mouth and that's good enough for many people. Nobody is willing to hold him to account.

He will shoot someone on 5th Avenue before this ends.

sycasey said:

---

Simple answer: he knew it was unpopular, so he lied about it.

---

Actual answer. He didn't write Project 2025 or participate in preparing it, but he agrees with (and ran his campaign advocating for) SOME of the policies in project 2025. These are not new ideas and the dems attempt to use Project 2025 as a boogeyman isn't working any better now than it did last November.

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Simple answer: he knew it was unpopular, so he lied about it.

---

Actual answer. He didn't write Project 2025 or participate in preparing it, but he agrees with (and ran his campaign advocating for) SOME of the policies in project 2025. These are not new ideas and the dems attempt to use Project 2025 as a boogeyman isn't working any better now than it did last November.

---

What would move the needle for you to be outraged as some of us are?

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Simple answer: he knew it was unpopular, so he lied about it.

---

Actual answer. He didn't write Project 2025 or participate in preparing it, but he agrees with (and ran his campaign advocating for) SOME of the policies in project 2025. These are not new ideas and the dems attempt to use Project 2025 as a boogeyman isn't working any better now than it did last November.

---

What would move the needle for you to be outraged as some of us are?

---

BG would have to be personally affected.

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Simple answer: he knew it was unpopular, so he lied about it.

---

Actual answer. He didn't write Project 2025 or participate in preparing it, but he agrees with (and ran his campaign advocating for) SOME of the policies in project 2025. These are not new ideas and the dems attempt to use Project 2025 as a boogeyman isn't working any better now than it did last November.

---

What would move the needle for you to be outraged as some of us are?

---

Part of the problem is that much of the left (not necessarily you) are very caught up in performative outrage. It is part of TDS. Demonize then overreact (e.g., calling someone a nazi/fascist). It is no longer impactful - the little boy who cried wolf.

When I disagree with a president's policy or actions (which has been true at times for Bush, Obama, Biden and Trump), I don't feel the need to be "outraged", particularly when the president is simply implementing policies that were part of his campaign platform (e.g., Obamacare).

The progressive left has plenty of policy papers or positions that are analogous to Project 2025. So what? Obama/Biden did some of the things supported by the far left (including self proclaimed socialists). Again - so what?

Trump is a mixed bag. He's deeply flawed. Lots to criticize and I do when I feel its appropriate. As a recent example, I didn't like how he handled the mass pardons of the J6 defendants. If he does proceed with having US troops in Gaza, I will strongly and loudly oppose that - not sure if I would say become outraged, but perhaps that's just semantics.

But I have no problem with the initiatives referenced in the initial post. I'm pretty sure that all of those actions have support of a plurality, if not majority. of voters - and again they were part of the platform he ran on. Project 2025 is irrelevant and its pretty comical that Dems are still posting about that after the election.

"TDS"?

I'm done. You MAGA cultists consider anything the slightest bit negative about Trump as "TDS" - impossible to have an honest conversation with brainwashed cult members.

DiabloWags said:

---

Remember when Trump said, "l have nothing to do with Project 2025"

---

Dear liberals …

After @elonmusk steals all the money from the treasury to build his evil lair in Mordor, he’s going to send the Nazgûl to hunt you down and suck out your brains.

It’s on page 48 of Project 2025.

— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) February 4, 2025

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Simple answer: he knew it was unpopular, so he lied about it.

---

Actual answer. He didn't write Project 2025 or participate in preparing it, but he agrees with (and ran his campaign advocating for) SOME of the policies in project 2025. These are not new ideas and the dems attempt to use Project 2025 as a boogeyman isn't working any better now than it did last November.

---

What would move the needle for you to be outraged as some of us are?

---

Part of the problem is that much of the left (not necessarily you) are very caught up in performative outrage. It is part of TDS. Demonize then overreact (e.g., calling someone a nazi/fascist). It is no longer impactful - the little boy who cried wolf.

When I disagree with a president's policy or actions (which has been true at times for Bush, Obama, Biden and Trump), I don't feel the need to be "outraged", particularly when the president is simply implementing policies that were part of his campaign platform (e.g., Obamacare).

The progressive left has plenty of policy papers or positions that are analogous to Project 2025. So what? Obama/Biden did some of the things supported by the far left (including self proclaimed socialists). Again - so what?

Trump is a mixed bag. He's deeply flawed. Lots to criticize and I do when I feel its appropriate. As a recent example, I didn't like how he handled the mass pardons of the J6 defendants. If he does proceed with having US troops in Gaza, I will strongly and loudly oppose that - not sure if I would say become outraged, but perhaps that's just semantics.

But I have no problem with the initiatives referenced in the initial post. I'm pretty sure that all of those actions have support of a plurality, if not majority. of voters - and again they were part of the platform he ran on. Project 2025 is irrelevant and its pretty comical that Dems are still posting about that after the election.

---

I spoke with my (Utah resident, Mormon) friend since 8th grade yesterday.
He's not well educated or knowledgeable.
He said the 2020 election was unfairly executed (functionally) and so therefore Jan 6 was an alright thing. This is outrageous to me.

I hold that 2020 was fair, that claims of tampering were, as Bill Barr said, "bulls hit", that Jan 6 was a coup attempt.

My friend thinks you need tanks and blood for it to be a coup. I think he's quite wrong.

I then asked him if he thinks it's okay that we try to take Greenland and Panama. He said yes, stated all sorts of reason.
I asked him if he knew what the word "sovereignty" stood for. He said yes. But then gave a list of talking point reasons that rejected the notion of national sovereignty as an international concept that should be honored.

I would ask you these same questions. Do you feel Trump was effectively acting treasonously with his role on Jan 6?
Do you feel Trump is sanctioning the grabbing of another's territory with his moves on G and P?

I think he's incredibly dangerous, and I give rational explanation and support of such a belief. In response, I'm simply called TDS.
Pfft.


I could go on and on and on.
I have gone on and on and on.

In the end, I simply shrug my shoulders at the folly of mankind. I think the breakdown of the societal/international/civilization Order that has been built up over centuries and decades is a "fait accomplis".

Our institutions are only as strong as the willingness of people to respect them. And it's people like Putin and Orban and Trump who bring about the break them down, with assistance or orgs like Foxnews, Trass, etc.

My senior seminar professor, of my International Affairs major, asked the class to write a paper on the concept of CONFLICT AND CHANGE IN THE NEW WORLD ORDER.
This was just after the fall of the USSR. I had not soon prior both visited Moscow and chipped souvenirs off the Berlin Wall. Yet, I didn't see the "new world order" the professor spoke of as that severe. Today, however, I see Trumpism as a new World Order.

It feels very dangerous to me.
You'll call me TDS, without seeking to understand the frightful consequences I see.
If I were able to put together a succinct convincing summary, I suppose I'd be able to go on national tour and convince millions. There's an art to being able to do so.
Trump has that art, although for evil.

AunBear89 said:

---

"TDS"?

I'm done. You MAGA cultists consider anything the slightest bit negative about Trump as "TDS" - impossible to have an honest conversation with brainwashed cult members.

---

We're really going to miss the deeply important perspectives you add, like calling people brainwashed cultists. How will we ever have honest conversations without that?

But thank you for making my point about the name calling/TDS. And also congrats on completely missing the point. My TDS comment was referring to people who overreact to everything Trump does with "outrage" when, in reality, much of what he does is very mainstream and expected (like the items in the original post of this thread). I didn't say anything "slightly negative" was TDS and, in fact, specifically said criticism of Trump was warranted in many cases. Yet you respond with the above nonsense.

Sounds like you have Liberal Derangement Syndrome

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Simple answer: he knew it was unpopular, so he lied about it.

---

Actual answer. He didn't write Project 2025 or participate in preparing it, but he agrees with (and ran his campaign advocating for) SOME of the policies in project 2025. These are not new ideas and the dems attempt to use Project 2025 as a boogeyman isn't working any better now than it did last November.

---

What would move the needle for you to be outraged as some of us are?

---

Part of the problem is that much of the left (not necessarily you) are very caught up in performative outrage. It is part of TDS. Demonize then overreact (e.g., calling someone a nazi/fascist). It is no longer impactful - the little boy who cried wolf.

---

Hmmm.
Perhaps I can ask you to understand to the similarities between Naziism and Trumpism that we see, and not the differences that you see in order to reject the comparison as absurd.

We are the ones making the claim of similar, therefore, should we not be the ones who get to define the compare, which you can then accept or reject?

This is a 5am attempt to do so. It might require modification:

SIMILARITIES

* Rallying the population emotionally through fervent public rallies.
* Blaming of troubles on various groups of people.
* Acting out, sanctioning of physical actions.
* use of propaganda, symbolism, misinformation.


DIFFERENCES

* Nazis wages continental war. Trump has not.
* Nazis committed mass murder of those they persecuted. Trump has not.

REMINDERS: per my similarities, I can hear the response:
"BLM committed vandalism! Ah ha! Ah ha!"
And so on.

Again, I would ask you to try to understand why we say Trumpism is skin the Naziism, and then once it is completely defined, then make your assessment of agree or not agree.

I personally believe the comparison is apt. But then, again, I know what I'm seeing and comparing.

I think Trumpists prefer to just argue, rather than seek to understand.

Okay, that's what I have to say about calling people Nazis.

---

This is silliness and simply reflects your partisan preferences . The comparison is in your words "apt" only because you want it to be and are ignoring facts that don't support your theory.

To copy from your list:

SIMILARITIES

* Rallying the population emotionally through fervent public rallies. [Obama did the same thing as have many popular political candidates. Ironically, calling your political opponents Nazis is exactly this.]
* Blaming of troubles on various groups of people. [The left does same thing - just blames different groups. DEI/BLM and lots of other movements of the left reflect this, as do affirmative action policies. The entire foundation of left thinking is intersectional grievance.]
* Acting out, sanctioning of physical actions. [You mean like the "mostly peaceful" BLM protests that in some cases became riots? There is also Antifa violence, assassination attempts on republican candidates (including Scalise and Trump), threatening of Supreme Court members and a whole host of other violence on the left.]
* use of propaganda, symbolism, misinformation. [Are you really suggesting that only Trump/the republicans do this? You can't possibly believe this. ]

Beyond your list, I would also point out that the left is anti-free speech for the most part, generally favors draconian and authoritarian "emergency" policies under threat of penalty (COVID policies), and has in many cases sought to coopt private companies to prevent the expression of dissenting views. Biden literally defied supreme court rulings on student loans. Who summarily removed a political candidate and replaced them with a different candidate who did not receive a single vote? All indications of fascism/authoritarianism.

To be clear, I'm not saying the left are Nazis/fascists. I'm simply pointing out that under your flawed approach, they would be.

The issue isn't whether you can fabricate similarities between your political opponents and Nazis. The issue is that you feel it necessary or appropriate to do so. Thankfully, the tactic is no longer effective with voters.

AunBear89 said:

---

Sounds like you have Liberal Derangement Syndrome

---

Wait - I thought you were done? Super weird that your still posting here after making that proclamation.

I most assuredly do not have TDS. I don't call people like you names. I have many liberal friends and treat their different views respectfully even when I feel they are deeply misplaced. I admit and give credit when a liberal politician I don't like (on the whole) does something I agree with. I don't reflexively defend conservatives when I think they make mistakes. And I don't overreact when politicians I didn't vote for win.

"I'm done" was as truthful as "the wars will be over in 24 hours". Words no longer have meaning.

I gotta run. I need to turn thePNW water faucet on so water can flow south. MAGA!

Funny - we've never seen you do ANY of this on OT. Maybe you're just virtue signaling?

AunBear89 said:

---

"I'm done" was as truthful as "the wars will be over in 24 hours". Words no longer have meaning.

I gotta run. I need to turn thePNW water faucet on so water can flow south. MAGA!

---

So finally we agree. Both you and Trump lie.

If you aren't a liar, or a hypocrite, I guess that makes you a . . .


I kid. You're also a hypocrite.

A quick search shows that the term TDS has appeared in 28 different OT posts by BearGoggles in the last 5 months.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

A quick search shows that the term TDS has appeared in 28 different OT posts by BearGoggles in the last 5 months.

---

Shocker.

BearGoggles said:

---

AunBear89 said:

---

Sounds like you have Liberal Derangement Syndrome

---

Wait - I thought you were done? Super weird that your still posting here after making that proclamation.

I most assuredly do not have TDS. I don't call people like you names. I have many liberal friends and treat their different views respectfully even when I feel they are deeply misplaced. I admit and give credit when a liberal politician I don't like (on the whole) does something I agree with. I don't reflexively defend conservatives when I think they make mistakes. And I don't overreact when politicians I didn't vote for win.

---

Any supporter of Trump cannot be taken seriously. He committed an attempted coup d'etat. That's a hard line, conversation stopper.

Just like anyone who tries to argue that Hitler did good things without being able to say he killed 6 million Jews is…. There's just no conversation to have if you can't admit Hitler killed 6M Jews and trump attempted to overthrow a free and fair election.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

A quick search shows that the term TDS has appeared in 28 different OT posts by BearGoggles in the last 5 months.

---

OMG - 5-6 times a month? WOW.

And of course context matters, but that is not what people here generally do.

To deny the existence of TDS (that's 29) among many in the left is delusional. It doesn't mean that Trump is not properly criticized - he certainly is and I do. But TDS results in knee jerk and complete overreactions to anything Trump says or does. And the obsession with Project 2025 is absolutely TDS.

concordtom said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

AunBear89 said:

---

Sounds like you have Liberal Derangement Syndrome

---

Wait - I thought you were done? Super weird that your still posting here after making that proclamation.

I most assuredly do not have TDS. I don't call people like you names. I have many liberal friends and treat their different views respectfully even when I feel they are deeply misplaced. I admit and give credit when a liberal politician I don't like (on the whole) does something I agree with. I don't reflexively defend conservatives when I think they make mistakes. And I don't overreact when politicians I didn't vote for win.

---

Any supporter of Trump cannot be taken seriously. He committed an attempted coup d'etat. That's a hard line, conversation stopper.

Just like anyone who tries to argue that Hitler did good things without being able to say he killed 6 million Jews is…. There's just no conversation to have if you can't admit Hitler killed 6M Jews and trump attempted to overthrow a free and fair election.

---

Why did the highly partisan and motivated state and federal prosecutors not charge Trump with that when they brought all manner of other charges against him?

From the 003 playbook(not even one full page):

To deny the existence of LDS among most in the right is delusional.

Quote:

---

Any supporter of Trump cannot be taken seriously. He committed an attempted coup d'etat. That's a hard line, conversation stopper.

---

Please keep talking about J6 until the next election so we can win again.

DiabloWags said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Any supporter of Trump cannot be taken seriously. He committed an attempted coup d'etat. That's a hard line, conversation stopper.

Just like anyone who tries to argue that Hitler did good things without being able to say he killed 6 million Jews is…. There's just no conversation to have if you can't admit Hitler killed 6M Jews and trump attempted to overthrow a free and fair election.

---

Why did the highly partisan and motivated state and federal prosecutors not charge Trump with that when they brought all manner of other charges against him?

---

It's pretty simple.

For starters, there is very limited case law regarding insurrection in the United States.

Moreover, prosecutors needed guidance on EXACTLY what proof is required to establish that an insurrection took place, and how to distinguish an insurrection from a riot. - - - The special counsel's office didn't have that guidance.

To succeed in trying Trump for inciting an Insurrection, Smith would have to prove subjective intent showing that Trump meant to cause the full range of violence that day.

With other, more "solid" charges available to prosecutors that would allow them to forgo clearing any "rigorous" hurdles for (free) speech, dropping pursuit of the insurrection charge was the most legally sound choice.

---

What more "solid" J6 charge did Trump get convicted of?

To be clear, all 53 Republican U.S. Senators just gave their blessing for the lead architect of Project 2025 to oversee federal agencies and administer the federal budget. https://t.co/Qvsi854kHR

— Adam Carlson (@admcrlsn) February 7, 2025