Republican 2024 Platform Draft Made Public.

[Pommer]

Is this really a commitment to economic policies which favor deflation? Or just empty rhetoric?

Deflation! The economy killer! Why buy that new car this year when next year it’ll be even cheaper!

 

[essentialsaltes]

Trump will never give you up, let you down​

Furious RNC platform committee member: We spent thousands just to be 'rolled'​

A member of the closed-door Republican Party platform committee meeting unleashed her own fury after the committee voted to pass former President Donald Trump's policies into the party as a whole.

Gail Ruzicka, a platform committee member from Utah ... was incensed.

"I've never seen this happen before. I don't understand why they did it, and I'm extremely disappointed that we do not have any pro-life language," she said about the GOP's new policy that rejects the federal ban on abortion.

Self-described pastor, Stephen Simpson of Alabama took to social media to say, "Donald Trump is not Pro-Life. He has cynically used the Pro-Life movement and played Evangelicals in general. It was all transactional, a Faustian bargain. The GOP is a cult of personality. Sincerely, A Former Longtime GOP Activist and Continuing Christ Follower."

 

[Pommer]

Sounds like something Obama said…

Oh yeah….

“What magic wand do you have?” – Ways and Means

waysandmeans.house.gov

In June 2016, President Obama, in a town hall in Elkhart, Indiana, asserted that American manufacturing was merely a thing of the past.

When asked by an audience member why blue-collar jobs continue to disappear, the 44th President admitted that good-paying jobs in America were moving overseas under his watch. Mr. Obama asserted that “some of those jobs of the past are just not going to come back.”

“When somebody says . . . that he’s going to bring all these jobs back, well, how exactly are you going to do that? What are you going to do?,” Mr. Obama asked.

“There’s no answer to it. . . . What magic wand do you have?”

Just shy of three years later, how things have changed for working moms and dads across the country.

Obama’s running again?
Except for the “magic wand” motif, your post doesn’t address the post you replied to, namely “how to solve Social Security’s funding shortfalls coming in the next decade?”

 

[Pommer]

It would cost a trillion dollars to successfully do this. A full 2000 mile border wall manned by soldiers every 100 yards 24/7 will cost $$$. Rounding up people from all over the country and holding, feeding and transporting them to a country which will need to be paid to accept the people will not be cheap either.

But look at how much we’re saving by not having a National Healthcare System gobbling up all those dollars!

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Absolute rubbish - Show where Trump endorses it. or is this yet another bad Trump conspiracy theory.

Trump Disavows Project 2025 Transition Plan

Donald Trump distanced himself Friday from Project 2025, a massive proposed overhaul of the federal government.

time.com

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” Trump posted on his social media website. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

His claim that he has "no idea who is behind it" is a blatant lie, considering that a significant number of the people behind Project 2025 are from his previous administration, his current campaign staff, and/or were part of the committee that drafted the new Republican platform. Russ Vought, John McEntee, Ed Martin, Tony Perkins, Stephen Miller, Mark Meadows, Karoline Leavitt, Ben Carson, Ken Cuccinelli, Paul Dans, Spencer Chretien, and a number of think tanks and policy groups with ties to Trump are all involved in some way with Project 2025. Overall, of the 38 people who drafted the document, 31 were nominated to roles in Trump's administration or transition team. These people all stand a good chance of landing roles in a new Trump administration, which would give them plenty of opportunity to enact the changes proposed by Project 2025. If Trump truly wanted nothing to do with them, he would disavow and/or fire anyone involved with Project 2025.

And if he knows nothing about it, how can he say that he disagrees with some of it and agrees with other parts?

I think the man doth protest too much.

 

[KCfromNC]

How will all of these great deeds be done?

Same way he got Mexico to pay for the wall he built and same way Obamacare was repealed and replaced with something better, if history is any guide.

 

[A2SG]

Trump will never give you up, let you down​

Furious RNC platform committee member: We spent thousands just to be 'rolled'​

A member of the closed-door Republican Party platform committee meeting unleashed her own fury after the committee voted to pass former President Donald Trump's policies into the party as a whole.

Gail Ruzicka, a platform committee member from Utah ... was incensed.

"I've never seen this happen before. I don't understand why they did it, and I'm extremely disappointed that we do not have any pro-life language," she said about the GOP's new policy that rejects the federal ban on abortion.

Self-described pastor, Stephen Simpson of Alabama took to social media to say, "Donald Trump is not Pro-Life. He has cynically used the Pro-Life movement and played Evangelicals in general. It was all transactional, a Faustian bargain. The GOP is a cult of personality. Sincerely, A Former Longtime GOP Activist and Continuing Christ Follower."

"I'm shocked! Shocked to find that gambling is going on in here."
"Your winnings, sir."
"Oh, thank you very much."

-- A2SG, here's looking at you, kid....

 

[Valletta]

His claim that he has "no idea who is behind it" is a blatant lie, considering that a significant number of the people behind Project 2025 are from his previous administration, his current campaign staff, and/or were part of the committee that drafted the new Republican platform.

• "Project 2025, created by the Heritage Foundation, has been entirely developed without Trump's input or approval, as a supposed wishlist for Republican governance. In fact, many of the policy proposals in Project 2025, such as dismantling the Commerce Department, do not align with Trump's official stances.
• Despite Trump's repeated disavowals, the Biden campaign continues to associate Project 2025 with Trump, using it as a key element in their attacks against the former president."
• MxM News: Trump again trashes Heritage Foundation's "ridiculous" Project 2025

 

[o_mlly]

Except for the “magic wand” motif, your post doesn’t address the post you replied to, namely “how to solve Social Security’s funding shortfalls coming in the next decade?”

Liberals gave us both SS and Medicare. Politicians now call both the "third rail", don't touch them else instant political death. Ever try to take a kid's candy away from them? What is your solution to the candy problem the "liberals" gave us?

Oh, did you know we're broke? Please don't tell us simply that the rich need to pay their fair share w/o telling us what that fair share is. If we taxed the rich 100% the problem will that solve the shortfall long-term? Show us your math.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

• "Project 2025, created by the Heritage Foundation, has been entirely developed without Trump's input or approval, as a supposed wishlist for Republican governance. In fact, many of the policy proposals in Project 2025, such as dismantling the Commerce Department, do not align with Trump's official stances.

Ok? He doesn't need to have direct input in order to know about it or know who is behind it.

• Despite Trump's repeated disavowals, the Biden campaign continues to associate Project 2025 with Trump, using it as a key element in their attacks against the former president."

His "disavowals" are pretty lackluster. He doesn't say what he disagrees with in it, and he continues to be associated with the people who wrote it. It's perfectly reasonable to point out those ties.

Look, if Trump had come out and said something to the effect of "I've read Project 2025, and I think that, while they make a few good suggestions, it's overall a bad plan for America. I'm opposed to [specific items from the plan] for [articulate reasons]. I will do [Trump's plan] instead," I think people would be more willing to believe him. But instead, we get typical Trump bloviation. He "knows nothing" about it, he has "no idea who's involved," etc. All of this is easily recognizable as a lie. And then he doesn't actually call out anything that he specifically disagrees with. We can guess, based on his platform, but it would be nice to hear it from the horse's mouth, so to speak. And when you only call out the most left-field (or would it be right-field?) things as not aligning with Trump's vision (like dismantling the Department of Commerce), that doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. Something like that is an obvious non-starter.

I'll go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of people don't think that Project 2025 will ever be implemented in its entirety. But the extreme proposals in it serve to make the less extreme (but still radical) ones appear more reasonable, and I worry that we'll see some of those come about. And it doesn't matter that Trump isn't directly involved, so long as he surrounds himself with those who are (which he's doing). Advisors and cabinet members have a lot of influence on policy, and as much as I don't want Trump in the White House, I also don't want the people writing Project 2025 to be in positions to dictate policy.

 

[BCP1928]

I think Trump's position is entirely appropriate. He's no policy wonk, in fact he really doesn't care about policy. He can praise Project 2025 with faint damns until he finds out whether it's going to be well received by the voters.

 

[Valletta]

Ok? He doesn't need to have direct input in order to know about it or know who is behind it.

His "disavowals" are pretty lackluster. He doesn't say what he disagrees with in it, and he continues to be associated with the people who wrote it. It's perfectly reasonable to point out those ties.

Look, if Trump had come out and said something to the effect of "I've read Project 2025, and I think that, while they make a few good suggestions, it's overall a bad plan for America. I'm opposed to [specific items from the plan] for [articulate reasons]. I will do [Trump's plan] instead," I think people would be more willing to believe him. But instead, we get typical Trump bloviation. He "knows nothing" about it, he has "no idea who's involved," etc. All of this is easily recognizable as a lie. And then he doesn't actually call out anything that he specifically disagrees with. We can guess, based on his platform, but it would be nice to hear it from the horse's mouth, so to speak. And when you only call out the most left-field (or would it be right-field?) things as not aligning with Trump's vision (like dismantling the Department of Commerce), that doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. Something like that is an obvious non-starter.

I'll go out on a limb and say that the vast majority of people don't think that Project 2025 will ever be implemented in its entirety. But the extreme proposals in it serve to make the less extreme (but still radical) ones appear more reasonable, and I worry that we'll see some of those come about. And it doesn't matter that Trump isn't directly involved, so long as he surrounds himself with those who are (which he's doing). Advisors and cabinet members have a lot of influence on policy, and as much as I don't want Trump in the White House, I also don't want the people writing Project 2025 to be in positions to dictate policy.

It's great conservatives are putting forth ideas. You can bet when asked Trump did a Google search and took a look at the table of contents or asked someone to tell him the main points. But it is extremely doubtful that Trump will have the time to go through the very detailed over 900 page document of proposals with just months left in the campaign and Trump facing many lawsuits. Since a lot of work and numerous people were involved Trump probably will make it one of the documents he examines should he win the election.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

It's great conservatives are putting forth ideas. You can bet when asked Trump did a Google search and took a look at the table of contents or asked someone to tell him the main points. But it is extremely doubtful that Trump will have the time to go through the very detailed over 900 page document of proposals with just months left in the campaign and Trump facing many lawsuits.

That's what your staff is for - they read the document and give you the highlights (as well as whether it fits into the vision you've outlined).

Since a lot of work and numerous people were involved Trump probably will make it one of the documents he examines should he win the election.

Given the negative reactions to it and its association with him, he should probably do that sooner rather than later - without a clear, articulate position on Project 2025, there's a pretty good chance Trump will lose votes in November

 

[Valletta]

That's what your staff is for - they read the document and give you the highlights (as well as whether it fits into the vision you've outlined).

Given the negative reactions to it and its association with him, he should probably do that sooner rather than later - without a clear, articulate position on Project 2025, there's a pretty good chance Trump will lose votes in November

Yes, let's all make the focus of the election about a document neither candidate has read.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Yes, let's all make the focus of the election about a document neither candidate has read.

Personally, I think that a policy statement backed by multiple members of a candidate's past and present advisory team should be talked about. Especially when it proposes such a radical shift in the structure of the government. Would you be concerned if a bunch of Biden's current and former advisors teamed up to write a policy statement that proposed government seizure of industry and a shift towards communism? Or would you say, "Meh, he probably hasn't read it - let's wait until after the election and see what happens"?

Whether or not the candidates have read it (which neither you nor I actually knows) is irrelevant.

 

[durangodawood]

Absolute rubbish - Show where Trump endorses it. or is this yet another bad Trump conspiracy theory.

Trump Disavows Project 2025 Transition Plan

Donald Trump distanced himself Friday from Project 2025, a massive proposed overhaul of the federal government.

time.com

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” Trump posted on his social media website. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

Did you see the debate? Bidens disaster stole the show. But careful observers will note that Trump had his own issue, namely: speaking with absolutely no regard for truthfulness. Takeaway: you cant trust a word he says.

So, I look at the people who created project 2025, and they all seem to be connected to the former Trump admin.

 

[JustOneWay]

Yes, let's all make the focus of the election about a document neither candidate has read.

How do you know Biden has not read the document?

 

[essentialsaltes]

But careful observers will note that Trump had his own issue, namely: speaking with absolutely no regard for truthfulness.

Besides the lies, there was just a complete evasion of many questions.

Would Trump support a plan where Ukraine has to give up territory for peace? Who knows? He probably doesn't himself.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Apart from a pledge to defend the freedom of speech, religion, and the right to bear arms, there is no specific discussion of gun laws.

 

[camille70]

Trump will never give you up, let you down​

Furious RNC platform committee member: We spent thousands just to be 'rolled'​

A member of the closed-door Republican Party platform committee meeting unleashed her own fury after the committee voted to pass former President Donald Trump's policies into the party as a whole.

Gail Ruzicka, a platform committee member from Utah ... was incensed.

"I've never seen this happen before. I don't understand why they did it, and I'm extremely disappointed that we do not have any pro-life language," she said about the GOP's new policy that rejects the federal ban on abortion.

Self-described pastor, Stephen Simpson of Alabama took to social media to say, "Donald Trump is not Pro-Life. He has cynically used the Pro-Life movement and played Evangelicals in general. It was all transactional, a Faustian bargain. The GOP is a cult of personality. Sincerely, A Former Longtime GOP Activist and Continuing Christ Follower."

They were warned for years that Trump was transactional. Trump only supported the forced birth movement because it was his path to power. Now that the overturning of Roe has resulted in such a backlash, he is more than prepared to drop it like a hot potato. The majority won't see him for what he is, though. They will continue to lie to themselves and vote for him anyway. A few may sit out, but many are too invested to do otherwise. They have years of pro Trump social media posts. Trump flags. Trump t-shirts. Trump bibles. Trump hats. Trump bucks. Trump coins. Trump NFTs. Money spent on travel to and from rallies. Hours upon hours standing in line. Hotel accommodations. Doctor bills from heat stroke. Thousands in donations to a supposed billionaire. They've spent hours making signs and other Trump arts and crafts. All this time and money invested in one MAN. It's sad really. They won't come up for air either, they are just going to continue to double down. Interesting times.