Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
Interesting, I am a conservative woman and I am not any of those things. And did not raise my kids to be or look for any of those things.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I am done with Trump discussions
- Thread starter Clizby Wampuscat
- Start date
Argentbear
Well-Known Member
well good for you
Kathryn
It was on fire when I laid down on it.
The vast majority of conservatives I know believe the same. Men and women.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
The association with Donald Trump is very clear and has never been "debunked", just denied by Trump and supporters like you. I even mentioned in my post that Trump had denied knowing anything about it. The association is between its authors and Donald Trump, who is expected to hire many of them back into his administration. The document itself is also known as the 2025 Presidential Transition Project. If you visit the Wikipedia page on Project 2025 and search on the name "Trump", you will come up with 343 hits. The entire premise of the document is that Donald Trump will win the presidential election. Trump's own publicly acknowledged platform, called Agenda 47, incorporates some of the agenda. In fact, this excerpt from the Agenda 47 Wikipedia page explains the association well:
In 2023, Trump campaign officials acknowledged the Project 2025 aligned well with Agenda 47.[18] Project 2025 has, as of June 2024, reportedly caused some annoyance in the Trump campaign which had historically preferred fewer and more vague policy proposals to limit opportunities for criticism and maintain flexibility.[15] Some commentators have argued that Project 2025 is the most detailed look at what a Trump administration would look like.[15] Agenda 47 and Project 2025 share many themes and policies, including expanding presidential power such as through reissuing Schedule F,[19]: min.00:14 [20] cuts to the Department of Education, mass deportations of illegal immigrants,[21] the death penalty for drug dealers, and using the US National Guard in liberal cities with high crime rates or those that are "disorderly".[22][23][24]
I did make the mistake in my post of confusing the Heritage Foundation with the Federalist Society. As you pointed you, it is a Heritage Foundation document. So I have edited my original post to correct that mistake.
Last edited:
Is that so? Kindly provide an unambiguous definition for the word woman that meets your criteria which you think all Leftists would accept yet couldn't be understood by conservatives.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
not a man.
Like a tree? Or a squirrel? Or a rock? Those fulfill your definition since none of those are a man. Apparently you can't provide a definition for the word woman. Thanks for proving my earlier point!
JD Vance wrote the forward to the book Dawn's Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America, by Kevin Roberts, who just happens to be the President of Project 2025.
I don't know about #1, but IMO, #2 and #3 are fair descriptions of your position when abortion is involved.
Argentbear
Well-Known Member
do they also believe the garbage I was responding to?
Argentbear
Well-Known Member
Not sure of the point of doing that would be. You've already said I couldn't possibly do so and given your bizarre qualifications for a definition and the long history of right wingers posing the question as a means of promoting hate and discrimination against trans people I can't beleive you wouldn't just dismiss any and all definitions as a justification of that prejudice.
Last edited:
Argentbear
Well-Known Member
and there you go
Sure. Nobody's the villain of their own story.
And if they were coming face-to-face with all the negative impacts of conservatism on a regular basis, they probably wouldn't be conservatives.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
That still dosent mean Trump and Vance had anything to do with project 2025 just because they know Kevin Roberts.
It's a Heritage Foundation project. Not a project of Trump and Vance.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
Neither man was an author of the document, but the association between their candidacy and Project 2025 are clear and documented. You can deny the association all you want, but it is a fact. Read post #224.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
No. It just means they knew the man , and it's not even the man who was in charge.
That person was Paul Dans who had lead Project 2025. Roberts was just it's president.
I'm going to hide the Amazon link to the book behind spoilers. You can read samples from the book there to get an idea of what the book is all about. Unfortunately the forward is not part of the sample. Maybe it's available elsewhere.
edit to add: a pdf of the book is available on the Heritage website for a contribution of $100 or more.
Edit to add:
There are five eye-opening excerpts from JD Vance's forward on The Hill
Last edited:
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
No, if you check the backgrounds of both men, you'll find that they are not just mere acquaintances. Paul Dans worked as a HUD senior official in the Trump administration, who was a full-on MAGA supporter, but he made the mistake of saying some critical things about Trump. That led to an investigation by the Heritage foundation that got him fired in July. While leading the project, he clearly saw it as a blueprint for the Trump administration, and it has been embraced as such by other Trump supporters.
Kevin Roberts is an election-denying Republican political strategist and president of the Heritage Foundation. From Wikipedia:
In January 2024, Roberts said that he did not believe that Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election. He also said that he saw Heritage's role as "institutionalizing Trumpism," adding "the Trump administration, with the best of intentions, simply got a slow start. And Heritage and our allies in Project 2025 believe that must never be repeated."[15]
When Trump publicly disavowed Project 2025:Days after Trump released a statement seeking to distance himself from Project 2025, Roberts said, "So no hard feelings from any of us at Project 2025 about the statement because we understand Trump is the standard bearer and he's making a political tactical decision there."[26]
You can squirm and deny everything, but Project 2025 is very closely tied to both Trump and Vance. They'll deny it now, of course, because of how embarrassing the content is. But, as Roberts said, that denial is a "tactical decision". The alignment between Project 2024 and Agenda 47 is no accident.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Well the book itself isn't released yet. It also isn't from the leader of project 2025 who isn't Roberts. It's Paul Dans.
The foreward just shows commentary about the book specifically and not project 2025 itself exclusively which personally , like a lot of people , one would naturally find aspects that one can agree with and aspects over one that would be disagreeable.
Maybe Vance will address the foreword here at some point. But I'm sure to have a fair assessment, one would have to actually read the book first before making a final conclusion about it.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Well the book itself isn't released yet. It also isn't from the leader of project 2025 who isn't Roberts. It's Paul Dans.
The foreward just shows commentary about the book specifically and not project 2025 itself exclusively which personally , like a lot of people , one would naturally find aspects that one can agree with and aspects over one that would be disagreeable.
Maybe Vance will address the foreword here at some point. But I'm sure to have a fair assessment, one would have to actually read the book first before making a final conclusion about it.