Mon. Jul 22nd, 2024

Opinion | Today’s Opinion: Project 2025 is Scary

By meerna Jul11,2024
Opinion | Today’s Opinion: Project 2025 is Scary

You are reading the Today’s Opinions newsletter. Sign up for emails.

What is Project 2025?

On Tuesday, President Biden tweeted three words: “Google Project 2025.” This week, Google Trends search interest even surpassed Taylor Swift.

Unfortunately for the Biden campaign, searching for the term first brings up the project’s shiny homepage, replete with fireworks, flags, and soaring language. So what is Project 2025 really?

In short, it’s a playbook for a radical overhaul of the federal government if Republicans win control. Technically, it comes from the Heritage Foundation, not the GOP presidential campaign, allowing Trump to claim he knows no more than the average bewildered Googler. “Don’t be fooled.” Catherine Rampell writes. Project 2025 and the MAGA machine are inseparable, and hundreds of Trump officials are involved in the planning.

Planning what? Let’s take a look:

  • The 2025 bill calls for drastic cuts in Medicaid funding and the removal of abortion drugs from the market.
  • It would shut down LGBTQ+ health programs and force the government to declare that heterosexual couples are a better family structure. The term “sexual orientation” would be banned in federal legislation.
  • It would end the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which allows “Dreamers” to stay in the United States, and lower limits on legal immigration.
  • This would lead to direct presidential control of the FBI and the abolition of the Department of Education.
  • The expansion of the electricity grid using wind and solar energy would be stopped.
  • This would make pornography illegal and put the people who create it in prison.
  • The Sabbath would be officially recognized and Judeo-Christian values ​​would be introduced throughout the government.
  • And it shows how a president could purge impartial public officials and hire loyalists who could do all this.

But don’t worry: Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts has promised that this revolution will be “bloodless” if the left agrees to it.

No wonder that Editorial Team writes that Trump wants the official GOP platform “to be as bland and vague as possible.” But his intentions are quite different.

Catherine admits that Trump may not be familiar with some of the details of Project 2025—“few would mistake the man for a political maniac.” Even if he is, that’s just as dangerous; Trump delegated important decisions to his subordinates last time, and he would do so again.

Subordinates writing Project 2025.

Chaser: President Biden said he will do everything he can to keep this from happening. Alexandra Petri wonders: Would we accept the same from a pilot landing our plane?

From political strategists Lake Celinda AND Justin Zorn column on the crisis of trust in government. The article is full of statistics about how Americans’ distrust is not only growing but also spreading, with Republicans putting their limited remaining stock in very different institutions than those favored by Democrats.

But the most important conclusion should be this: it can be better.

Lake and Zorn point out that “Republicans have a strategic advantage in an era of distrust,” and that person-centered skepticism is at the heart of conservative messaging. But that doesn’t mean Democrats can’t adapt to the political culture.

The authors present a roadmap to do just that—for example, “working to redefine voting and political participation not just as civic duties but as ways to challenge the power of lobbyists or transform entrenched systems.”

Chaser: Matt Bai offers some pointers on how Biden should run if he really wants to stay in the race: No more “bridge” presidencies; he has to be a boomer on the go.

More politics

Robert Hur deserves to restore his reputation.

Hooray, Chuck Lane reminds us in his column that it was the special counsel who prepared a report on Biden’s retention of secret documents after he left the vice presidency in 2017. That report made particular reference to the current president’s age-related memory problems.

At the time, many observers questioned Hur’s work—Post Opinions writers called it “blatant abuse” and “political hack work.”

Or was it simply “an honest account from an objective outsider” (if a bit exaggerated)? So says Chuck, who adds that “had Democrats not responded to the Hur report with such effusive denial but taken it as a warning, they might not be in such a difficult position today.”

The smartest, the fastest

  • Robert Wright coined the term “progressive realism,” now adopted — and slightly updated — by Britain’s new Foreign Secretary. But what does progressive realism really mean?
  • Jason Rezaian continues the Tastes Like Home series with a visit to a restaurant that is ready to introduce guests to the flavors of the Balkans once again, first in the form of burek-first.
  • Netflix got us out of the mall and onto the couch. Marc Fisher takes a look at the streaming service’s new stationary projects and wonders: Will it tempt us to come back?

This is a farewell. This is a haiku. This is… Bye-Ku.

Have your own innovative haiku? Send it to me by emailalong with any questions/comments/ambiguities. See you tomorrow!

By meerna

Related Post