President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[YOhio]

The juxtaposition of Trump administrations push towards deregulation in some industries with aggressive increases in regulation in other industries will be fun to watch. Thinking mainly of oil and gas v. food and ag.

[YOhio]

Yes, "Project 2025 seems like pretty much the same conservative policy recommendations we've heard most of our adult lives," but at one point does it promote Christian nationalism, "mingle religious influence with civil government" and eschew the protections guaranteed by the first amendment? We are going to find out.

This is a good point and a valid concern. As Frank pointed out, the document is 900 pages and so I outsourced my doc review to one of my favorite AI tools in Google's Notebook LM. I uploaded the document title "Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, Project 2025."

I asked "Does this document promote Christian nationalism?" Here's the response:

The sources do not explicitly use the term "Christian nationalism," however, the document does promote a conservative agenda, rooted in traditional Judeo-Christian values, with the aim of influencing future presidential administrations in the United States. [1-4] This agenda advocates for policies that align with a specific interpretation of these values and seeks to integrate them into various aspects of American life and governance. [3, 4] Here are some key points:

• The document repeatedly emphasizes the importance of traditional family structures centered around marriage between a man and a woman. It advocates for policies that support these structures and opposes those that challenge them, such as same-sex marriage or alternative family forms. [2, 3, 5-9]
• It strongly advocates for the protection of the unborn, opposing abortion and supporting policies that restrict access to it. This includes overturning Roe v. Wade and promoting legislation that recognizes the rights of the unborn. [5]
• The document supports religious freedom, but primarily focuses on protecting the free exercise of religion for those who hold conservative Christian beliefs. This includes advocating for policies that allow religious employers to make employment decisions based on their beliefs and protecting faith-based organizations from what it sees as discriminatory policies. [10-14]
• It promotes the integration of faith into government and public life. Examples include advocating for the protection of religious expression in the workplace and supporting the participation of religious organizations in government programs. [10, 13]

While the sources emphasize these points, they don't explicitly define their relation to Christian nationalism. To fully understand whether this document aligns with that ideology, it's important to consider a broader definition of Christian nationalism and its implications, which you may want to research independently.

The third and fourth bullets are the ones that concern me most. The references provided by the Notebook for those bullets (10-14) are the following snippets from the source document. I'm not sure if this makes you more or less concerned, but it doesn't strike me as anything particularly new in terms of conservative thought. As a side note, if anyone wants access to the Notebook just hmu and I'll share.

10- RELIGION l Provide robust protections for religious employers. America’s religious diversity means that workplaces include people of many faiths and that many employers are faith-based. Nevertheless, the Biden Administration has been hostile to people of faith, especially those with traditional beliefs
Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise about marriage, gender, and sexuality. The new Administration should enact policies with robust respect for religious exercise in the workplace, including under the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA),8 Title VII, and federal conscience protection laws.

11- l Issue an executive order protecting religious employers and employees. The President should make clear via executive order that religious employers are free to run their businesses according to their religious beliefs, general nondiscrimination laws notwithstanding, and support participation of religious employees and employers as federal contractors and in federal activities and programs.
l Clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions. Congress should clarify Title VII’s religious organization exemptions to make it more explicit that those employers may make employment decisions based on religion regardless of nondiscrimination laws.

12- Provide Robust Accommodations for Religious Employees. Title VII requires reasonable accommodations for an employee’s sincerely held religious beliefs, observances, or practices unless it poses an undue hardship on the employer’s business. These accommodation protections also apply to issues related to marriage, gender, and sexuality.
Unless the Supreme Court overrules its bad precedent, Congress should clarify that undue hardship means “significant difficulty or expenses,” not “more than a de minimis cost” as the Court has previously held.

13- In addition, religious organizations should be encouraged to participate in apprenticeship programs. America has a long history of religious organizations working to advance the dignity of workers and provide them with greater opportunity, from the many prominent Christian and Jewish voices in the early labor movement to the “labor priests” who would appear on picket lines to support their flocks. Today, the role of religion in helping workers has diminished, but a country committed to strengthening civil society must ask more from religious organizations and make sure that their important role is not impeded by regulatory roadblocks or the bureaucratic status quo.

14- Eligibility of Religious Entities for SBA Loans. Current SBA regulations 46 and SBA Form 197147 make certain religious entities ineligible to participate in several SBA loan programs. The Trump Administration proposed a rule that would remove the provisions on the ground that they violate the First Amendment.48 Subsequent Supreme Court decisions have made their unconstitutionality clearer.49
In an April 3, 2020, letter to Congress pursuant to 28 U.S. Code § 530D,50 the Trump Administration SBA advised that two such provisions violate the Free Exer-cise Clause of the First Amendment and that it therefore would not enforce them. On January 19, 2021, the Trump Administration SBA proposed a rule to remove all of the unconstitutional religious exclusions from its regulations.51 The SBA has not acted on the proposed rule

[Moliere]

You don't get that he is being insincere when he "distances himself from it" verbally but nominates and hires a disproportionate amount of individuals involved with that Heritage Foundation and Project 2025 and talks about enacting all of it's tactics?

Additionally, you have multiple right wing media influencers like Matt Walsh, say "oh yeah, we lied, Project 2025 was the plan all along."

I was just quoting the author of the article, which directly contradicts what you said the article was saying.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Because some people worry about what's in it.

Orange man who spews crazy, scary stuff non-stop might support a 900-pg document that contains a few crazy, scary things. Oh no!

Also, LOL at anyone who thinks trump is going to read a 900-pg policy document.

[frank ryan]

I was just quoting the author of the article, which directly contradicts what you said the article was saying.

The article was short. Did you not read the part about how he likes a lot of it?

There is plenty of double speak coming from him in that little article.

It's apparent he was very aware of project 2025 when he said he wasn't. Its puzzles why you and others keep affording Trump more trust than other politicians.

[frank ryan]

Orange man who spews crazy, scary stuff non-stop might support a 900-pg document that contains a few crazy, scary things. Oh no!

Also, LOL at anyone who thinks trump is going to read a 900-pg policy document.

Come on dude, I got pushback and scolded about project 2025 even being a thing when I posted about it during the election.

Heritage Foundation has been very active in trying to push through their agenda which I found sketchy in ways that involve using executive power. I won't go in to why it alarms me because no one wants to hear it right now, but flat denials of it being an issue were unwarranted

Oh, I don't think he read all 900 pages but I don't doubt he is on board with a lot of the concepts. I'm not one of his supporters who thinks he was a good business man or didn't cheat or use his privilege to skate through life.


He also didn't read the Bible.

[Maximus]

Come on dude, I got pushback and scolded about project 2025 even being a thing when I posted about it during the election.

Heritage Foundation has been very active in trying to push through their agenda which I found sketchy in ways that involve using executive power. I won't go in to why it alarms me because no one wants to hear it right now, but flat denials of it being an issue were unwarranted

Oh, I don't think he read all 900 pages but I don't doubt he is on board with a lot of the concepts. I'm not one of his supporters who thinks he was a good business man or didn't cheat or use his privilege to skate through life.


He also didn't read the Bible.

Interesting when people downplay something they haven't read

[Moliere]

The article was short. Did you not read the part about how he likes a lot of it?

There is plenty of double speak coming from him in that little article.

It's apparent he was very aware of project 2025 when he said he wasn't. Its puzzles why you and others keep affording Trump more trust than other politicians.

I’m pretty sure Trump has very little knowledge about what’s actually in project 2025 and I’m also sure he doesn’t care. He likes parts of it because those parts align with his own crazy ideas. He’s not adopting project 2025. He does whatever he wants to do. The fact that some of Project 2025 lines up with his policies doesn’t mean he’s embracing it, it just means there’s a lot of overlap between the two. Is that scary? yes. Do we need to push further fearmongering by calling everything he’s does a page out of the project 2925 playbook? No.

[BlueK]

Orange man who spews crazy, scary stuff non-stop might support a 900-pg document that contains a few crazy, scary things. Oh no!

Also, LOL at anyone who thinks trump is going to read a 900-pg policy document.

I think he probably supports the part about taking away the independence of the DOJ. Not hard for him to understand that one, I bet.

[frank ryan]

I’m pretty sure Trump has very little knowledge about what’s actually in project 2025 and I’m also sure he doesn’t care. He likes parts of it because those parts align with his own crazy ideas. He’s not adopting project 2025. He does whatever he wants to do. The fact that some of Project 2025 lines up with his policies doesn’t mean he’s embracing it, it just means there’s a lot of overlap between the two. Is that scary? yes. Do we need to push further fearmongering by calling everything he’s does a page out of the project 2925 playbook? No.

That is naive. Trump is conventionally average when it comes to intelligence. He is poorly read but he is cunning and understands how to reach people. His narcissism also makes him susceptible to manipulation.

A lot of the architects of 2025 are Trump's people and have access to him. They aren't random conservatives who organically came up with this idea.

Fearmongering is what Trump and the GOP are going with immigrants eating dogs and cats. This concern is merited and the goalposts keep getting moved. First, "It's a conspiracy or made up," then "Trump has just learned of it and doesn't like it," and on to, "Trump does like some of it but that's just coincidental"

[All-American]

Daylight savings...

I mean, geez. He gets focused on the most stupid stuff.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Daylight savings...

I mean, geez. He gets focused on the most stupid stuff.

Populism in a nutshell.

Saw something interesting over the weekend. If you go standard time all year, it gets light at 3am in some parts of the US in the summer. If you go DST all year, the sun doesn't come up until 10am in some parts of the US in the winter. And they tried year-round DST back in the 70's and gave it up after one year.

[myboynoah]

Come on dude, I got pushback and scolded about project 2025 even being a thing when I posted about it during the election.

Heritage Foundation has been very active in trying to push through their agenda which I found sketchy in ways that involve using executive power. I won't go in to why it alarms me because no one wants to hear it right now, but flat denials of it being an issue were unwarranted

Oh, I don't think he read all 900 pages but I don't doubt he is on board with a lot of the concepts. I'm not one of his supporters who thinks he was a good business man or didn't cheat or use his privilege to skate through life.


He also didn't read the Bible.

No way is he going to read it. Even YO hasn't done that! But his minions wrote it and will pull from it to throw ideas into his orbit which he then might champion. Look at this whole DST idiocy. Obviously not part of 2025 (or is it?), but it somehow got to Trump who is amplifying the idea.

The saving grace is that Trump in most things wants to be popular. So he let's ideas out there and then sees what the reaction is. If it's negative enough, then he backs off.

[All-American]

Populism in a nutshell.

Saw something interesting over the weekend. If you go standard time all year, it gets light at 3am in some parts of the US in the summer. If you go DST all year, the sun doesn't come up until 10am in some parts of the US in the winter. And they tried year-round DST back in the 70's and gave it up after one year.

Daylight savings is a great policy. I get that people don't like it, because they pay for it twice a year and don't see the benefits they get over the course of an entire year. But other than in deep southern states, it is enormously positive and we would be dumb to abandon it.

[myboynoah]

Populism in a nutshell.

Saw something interesting over the weekend. If you go standard time all year, it gets light at 3am in some parts of the US in the summer. If you go DST all year, the sun doesn't come up until 10am in some parts of the US in the winter. And they tried year-round DST back in the 70's and gave it up after one year.

Oh, the only reason you want DST is because you don't care about the safety of children who might be going to school before sunrise!