this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
124 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19118 readers
2955 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Democrats had attacked Donald J. Trump’s ties to the conservative policy blueprint for reshaping the federal government. Several of its authors served in his administration.

...

Much of the plan’s nearly 900 pages detail extreme executive-branch overhauls. Among many recommendations, Project 2025 lays out plans for criminalizing pornography, disbanding the Commerce and Education departments, rejecting the idea of abortion as health care and shredding climate protections.

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 53 points 2 weeks ago

It’s what’s about to be implemented, and because we no longer have a say in the matter, our understanding is purely for entertainment purposes at this point.

[–] DarkThoughts@fedia.io 30 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Releasing it after the damage is already done. The NYT really went to shits over the past years.

[–] silence7 26 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

They covered Project 2025 before the election, including the ties Trump's circle has to it.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago

That's the beauty of not consuming the MSM, it can have said or not said anything to confirm your worldview about it.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world -3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So why this article then? Because their coverage was flimsy and downplayed at best?

Burn in hell, NYT.

[–] APassenger@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It was well covered. People just didn't pay attention because Trump said he wouldn't do it.

And that was enough. Until now.

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

And now that he's elected, Bannon went on his podcast and literally said "yeah that was the plan all along and we lied straight to your fucking faces about it".

[–] aStonedSanta@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago

No fucking shit. Anyone who thought otherwise is a fucking moron and a drive by facist idiot.

[–] JeffKerman1999@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 weeks ago

I mean trump says a lot of things and none of them are true