Project 2025 if Trump were to win

[Anonymous]

This whole episode really shows the bubble the RW lives in. They've been out there hyping this insane plan for a good year now, going on all kinds of RW talk shows, podcasts, etc. congratulating themselves on how great it is. Almost no one outside the hermetically sealed MAGA bubble knows anything about it because they are just talking to themselves. And at the same time, they don't realize how massively unpopular nearly every part of it is. The second it starts to spread in mainstream media, the MAGAs for the first time figure out that actually everyone else hates the idea of firing the entire civil service and replacing them with Trump apparatchiks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Strange. It's almost like these guys all know each other and are coordinating. But it can't be true since Trump told us so.

What does this (from the book’s description) mean? What foreign flag? The US flag lapel pin?

“In Washington, they wear foreign flags on their lapels, but they don’t protect our border”

They’re b|tching about House members who wore Ukraine flag lapel pins on the day the aid to Ukraine finally passed. Meanwhile they wear AR-15 lapel pins and their god king almost got mowed down by one. And this was the original book title:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WSJ today

“Project 2025 Has a Radical Agenda for Trump. He Has Other Plans.“

As former President Donald Trump prepares to accept the Republican nomination, he has suggested he has no interest in using the trove of planning work assembled by Project 2025 and other outside groups that have spent years preparing for his return to the White House. Trump has privately expressed annoyance that Project 2025 has received so much attention, and he resents the notion that the group is ghostwriting his policies and choosing candidates to fill the top ranks of his administration, according to associates. Those frustrations boiled over last week when Trump distanced himself from the group. “I know nothing about Project 2025,” he said, adding that some of its recommendations are “absolutely ridiculous.”

While Trump’s decision to criticize Project 2025 was politically expedient, people close to the former president said he has at times been genuinely frustrated with the group. His ire centers on two issues: He believes that outside groups like Project 2025 are raising money using his name and he thinks they are overstepping by gathering names for high-profile cabinet positions.

This will be ignored.

Project 2025 and abortion is all the Democrats have at this point.
They certainly cannot run on their agenda.

+100
This whole thread is a joke of LWNJs desperately using anything they hope will stick, regardless of whether it’s true or not. They’re assuming no one will call out their lies. Project 2025 is not Trump’s agenda, but they sure seem to want it to be.
DP

[Anonymous]

Keep pushing on Project2025 and the various Trump ties to it. And Vance's as well.

38% clearly do not know what it is.

[Anonymous]

People should look into NAR- New Apostlic Reformation and other ties to Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keep pushing on Project2025 and the various Trump ties to it. And Vance's as well.

38% clearly do not know what it is.

Harris and all her campaigners are going to be hitting Project 2025 hard.

[Anonymous]

No, he isn't wrong. Crypto is a total scam and how bad actors wash their money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keep pushing on Project2025 and the various Trump ties to it. And Vance's as well.

38% clearly do not know what it is.

They will by the time this is over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When Trump won in 2016 I thought world was going to end. I think I may have cried, I certainly saw people on the bus crying when results were announced. I found his presidency years to be uneventful. Did you feel like the world was ending and chaos was making you feel like there is no future during the 4 years of his presidency? Do you feel more like it now? Be honest.

You might want to get checked for early onset. You seem to have forgotten EVERYTHING.

This. Love that they end with be honest

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I love that one of the very few things Trump is consistent about is kicking his cultists in the teeth. Nearly every page of the last twenty or so has been Republicans trying to tell us normals that not only does Trump not know what Project 2025 is, but it’s nothing to do with him and he doesn’t support any of it.

[Anonymous]

So he knows nothing about it but agrees with some parts but not others, and won't say which is which.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Project 2025 would change the 40hr workweek to a 160hr work-month, so your boss could make you work extra hours with no overtime pay by cutting your hours later in the month.

See page 592.

That's not bad. I'll finish my work in 2-2.5 weeks as I work extra anyway.

NP. You're missing the point. The goal is to reduce or eliminate overtime pay. If they move from weekly to monthly it could lead employers to overload busy workweeks with extra-long shifts and then take advantage of slow periods through under-scheduling, which could effectively eliminate overtime altogether.

A person could work two 50 hour weeks followed by two 30 hour weeks. Its 160 hours, but they would lose 20 hours of overtime pay because under the monthly plan overtime would only come in at more than 160 hours a month. That is different from the current policy that pays overtime after more than 40 hours per week.

It also says they want employers to pay overtime rate for any hours worked on the sabbath.

So I'll play the devil's advocate here - how is this "wrong" - it's just a different way of calculating OT for hourly workers. If I were an hourly worker....this would mean during the 30 hr weeks I could plan for doctor appts/errands without needing to take any time off.

[Anonymous]

PP here...also...sure I might be paid less OT overall...but from the employer-side....the cost savings could mean the potential ability to hire an additional employee in need of a job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Project 2025 would change the 40hr workweek to a 160hr work-month, so your boss could make you work extra hours with no overtime pay by cutting your hours later in the month.

See page 592.

That's not bad. I'll finish my work in 2-2.5 weeks as I work extra anyway.

NP. You're missing the point. The goal is to reduce or eliminate overtime pay. If they move from weekly to monthly it could lead employers to overload busy workweeks with extra-long shifts and then take advantage of slow periods through under-scheduling, which could effectively eliminate overtime altogether.

A person could work two 50 hour weeks followed by two 30 hour weeks. Its 160 hours, but they would lose 20 hours of overtime pay because under the monthly plan overtime would only come in at more than 160 hours a month. That is different from the current policy that pays overtime after more than 40 hours per week.

It also says they want employers to pay overtime rate for any hours worked on the sabbath.

So I'll play the devil's advocate here - how is this "wrong" - it's just a different way of calculating OT for hourly workers. If I were an hourly worker....this would mean during the 30 hr weeks I could plan for doctor appts/errands without needing to take any time off.

You wouldnt know ahead of time I assume...it would likely be employer-based not employee-based so for those of us who make appts 6 months out if its a 50 hour week I cant make my appt.

Also this is slippery slope when it comes to worker protections. You also cant arrange childcare or anything else with those changes. Workers would need to pay for childcare above and beyond 40hours plus commuting and then potentially use less than 30 hours on an employer's whims.