Project 2025 and Conservation

[Dougfirtree]

I think what is being pointed out is the hypocrisy of the party screaming about saving "our democracy" nonstop for eight years is selecting their candidate the same way the Chinese Communist Party does. I would be willing to bet RFK would have won the primary over the current VP.

First point is entirely valid in my opinion and many of my more progressive friends are upset about this. I don't really like it either, but it's also ridiculous to think that if a candidate dies, drops out due to health issues, etc. late in the process, that their side just concedes the election. Time is getting short, so I don't think it's unreasonable to think that some method other than a full primary might be necessary. And replacing that candidate with their sitting VP seems even more reasonable.

Second point...

 

[SAJ-99]

Re-read this @SAJ-99

It’s nonsense and shows a lack of understanding of the process. I don’t mean to be macabre, but if DJT doesn’t turn his head, GOP is selecting another candidate like the Chinese Communist Party too apparently. I’m not saying I like the process. Hate it actually. I’m all for a law that prohibits political advertising until Sept 1.

 

[noharleyyet]

It’s nonsense and shows a lack of understanding of the process. I don’t mean to be macabre, but if DJT doesn’t turn his head, GOP is selecting another candidate like the Chinese Communist Party too apparently. "I’m not saying I like the process. Hate it actually." I’m all for a law that prohibits political advertising until Sept 1.

Good point...but disagree on the nonsense dismissal, and you actually admitted as much.

Campaigning begins the day after inauguration...when ads are free for the incumbent.

 

[Oak]

It's a stretch for Trump to say he doesn't know anything about Project 2025 or the people involved.



Kevin Roberts is the president of the Heritage Foundation. The Project 2025 homepage states: "If we are going to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left, we need both a governing agenda and the right people in place, ready to carry this agenda out on Day One of the next conservative Administration." (emphasis added)

Looking at the website above, there are about 40 authors of Project 2025. About half of them worked in the previous Trump administration.

Trump addressed the Heritage Foundation in April 2022 and said: "This is a great group and they’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do, and what your movement will do, when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1811402883604050216

Kevin Roberts has written a book called Dawns Early Light: Taking back Washington to Save America. (The original subtitle was Burning Down Washington to Save America, and is still shown on the Amazon page)

J.D. Vance wrote the forward of this book.



I have concerns about many proposals raised in Project 2025, which is supposed to be the topic of this conversation. It seems that many here want to dismiss even discussing them because Trump claimed to not know these people or their plan. My research concludes that he probably knows more than he's saying, and that maybe we should take a closer look at the policy proposals in it. Does anyone want to discuss the substance of this "groundwork for what our movement will do?"

 

[SAJ-99]

Good point...but disagree on the nonsense dismissal, and you actually admitted as much.

Campaigning begins the day after inauguration...when ads are free for the incumbent.

iSmith it the same guy who just said this is a Republic. You can't scream at Democrats for not using pure democracy to select a candidate.

Political parties make their rules and I'm sure there are a ton of people involved in each party that don't know their own rules when something abnormal happens. The biggest problems are time and money. There is not enough time to rerun primaries and the donations already made were made to a campaign, which favors selecting the VP nominee. I may not like it, but not much I can think of to improve it.

I don't like a lot of things in politics, particularly our two party system. But until Independents organize behind a candidate that would force them to have a convention in a place larger than an IHOP, it is what we have to deal with. The best thing any American can do is inform themselves and then make a choice. Seems now many select to "be informed" and then choose.

 

[VikingsGuy]

At a high level, the Heritage Foundation (and this plan) have a very strong preference for state govt action over federal action, less funding of govt activity at all levels, less regulatory control over property owners and businesses at all levels, and fewer govt departments and programs - especially at fed level. Not sure the NAM of wildlife management is specifically getting a ton of their attention, but if you believe the NAM and conservation needs more govt $$, is benefitted by more federal vs state control, benefits from a healthy amount of govt regulation, and would benefit from more govt programs, then the outcome is very clear without reading 700+ pages or arguing about party candidate selection. For those who see the govt (esp the fed govt) as a critical part of the conservation solution, P2025 is not a helpful approach. For those who suggest govt action isn't working or that conservation aside they value those same principles applied to areas outside of conservation that they weigh more heavily, then I am sure they will find things in the 700 pages they will like.

 

[VikingsGuy]

OK - let's be clear. We are a democratic constitutional republic. Which means we are represented by others - but those others are democratically selected and they are constrained (often to protect the minority from majority overreach) by certain agreed upon constitutional boundaries. This is contrasted with direct unconstrained democracy which happens literally nowhere. This particular word game gets really old really quick.

 

[Forkyfinder]

It's a stretch for Trump to say he doesn't know anything about Project 2025 or the people involved.

View attachment 334107

Kevin Roberts is the president of the Heritage Foundation. The Project 2025 homepage states: "If we are going to rescue the country from the grip of the radical Left, we need both a governing agenda and the right people in place, ready to carry this agenda out on Day One of the next conservative Administration." (emphasis added)

Looking at the website above, there are about 40 authors of Project 2025. About half of them worked in the previous Trump administration.

Trump addressed the Heritage Foundation in April 2022 and said: "This is a great group and they’re going to lay the groundwork and detail plans for exactly what our movement will do, and what your movement will do, when the American people give us a colossal mandate to save America."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1811402883604050216

Kevin Roberts has written a book called Dawns Early Light: Taking back Washington to Save America. (The original subtitle was Burning Down Washington to Save America, and is still shown on the Amazon page)

J.D. Vance wrote the forward of this book.

View attachment 334108

I have concerns about many proposals raised in Project 2025, which is supposed to be the topic of this conversation. It seems that many here want to dismiss even discussing them because Trump claimed to not know these people or their plan. My research concludes that he probably knows more than he's saying, and that maybe we should take a closer look at the policy proposals in it. Does anyone want to discuss the substance of this "groundwork for what our movement will do?"

Getting this back on track, what are your concerns @Oak ?

 

[noharleyyet]

iSmith it the same guy who just said this is a Republic. You can't scream at Democrats for not using pure democracy to select a candidate.

Political parties make their rules and I'm sure there are a ton of people involved in each party that don't know their own rules when something abnormal happens. The biggest problems are time and money. There is not enough time to rerun primaries and the donations already made were made to a campaign, which favors selecting the VP nominee. I may not like it, but not much I can think of to improve it.

I don't like a lot of things in politics, particularly our two party system. But until Independents organize behind a candidate that would force them to have a convention in a place larger than an IHOP, it is what we have to deal with. The best thing any American can do is inform themselves and then make a choice. Seems now many select to "be informed" and then choose.

Maligning due to semantics doesn't change the message for me...and you're sharp enough to understand what he posted. Yea yea on the rest coz it ain't gonna happen.

 

[RG300]

Disclaimer: No offense to OP, I understand not wanting to wade into the political theater but it is impossible to talk about this subject as non-political & neutral so here are my 2 cents. No offense intended at all so please do not kick me to the curb.....
While i am ALL for preserving our hunting traditions & wild places, a vote for the democrats is no guarantee that they will do any better. To vote them in on a single issue is not reasonable & dangerous for our whole country.
Yes our country needs to preserve land, resources & wildlife to pass on to the next generation but a reasonable balance needs to be struck.
The Dem party of today is not my Grandma's party, once they have the land, next step will be to restrict, & then to eliminate hunting altogether for the average joe.
That said, let me say also say that the Republicans have plenty of well earned warts & there is plenty of mud to sling at them as well.
As of now , nothing is written in stone, Items in the project can still be revised. Write your congressman.

 

[Bonasababy]

I think what is being pointed out is the hypocrisy of the party screaming about saving "our democracy" nonstop for eight years is selecting their candidate the same way the Chinese Communist Party does. I would be willing to bet RFK would have won the primary over the current VP.

His doom was sealed by worms.

 

[Shed God]

Big Finn and others, agree they do more than others but RMEF and the mule deer foundation not as transparent as it seems.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I don't have a candidate right now either. Hoping for Bobby at the convention, but doubt it; the corporations which fund both parties would never stand for it.

And, @Ben Lamb, don't eat candy, and am well supplied with hugs.

A bottle of gin would not go unappreciated

Next time in your neck of the woods, it's a done deal.

 

[Shed God]

Big Finn, glad u didn't post my favorite elk unit in your map though. Lol

 

[Ben Lamb]

I prefer steak particularly Deer elk and antelope steak.

Ok, a hug and some backstrap it is.

 

[Bonasababy]

Disclaimer: No offense to OP, I understand not wanting to wade into the political theater but it is impossible to talk about this subject as non-political & neutral so here are my 2 cents. No offense intended at all so please do not kick me to the curb.....
While i am ALL for preserving our hunting traditions & wild places, a vote for the democrats is no guarantee that they will do any better. To vote them in on a single issue is not reasonable & dangerous for our whole country.
Yes our country needs to preserve land, resources & wildlife to pass on to the next generation but a reasonable balance needs to be struck.
The Dem party of today is not my Grandma's party, once they have the land, next step will be to restrict, & then to eliminate hunting altogether for the average joe.
That said, let me say also say that the Republicans have plenty of well earned warts & there is plenty of mud to sling at them as well.
As of now , nothing is written in stone, Items in the project can still be revised. Write your congressman.

Good job of capturing our dilemma. Despite Biden's dropping out the issue is the same--deciding between the lesser of two evils. Of course, one is an existential evil...

I fear the Dems a lot less on issues related to hunting and conservation. This whole threads reason for being has discussed that. To me it's a LOT more than a single issue--even when restricting concerns to those affecting hunting and fishing and conservation.

Put another way--with the parties as they exist today, I see the Dem's worst desires being thwarted by reality and politics so we need not fear them as much as the current republican situation--who doesn't care about things like rule of law, founding principles, separation of powers, and particuarly the role of the other two branches of government (they see just one branch).

We might see more gun legislation for example but no one is going to take our guns away--UNLESS project 2025 is a resounding success--and we later see that incredibly enhanced power suddenly in their hands, where it wouldn't matter what congress thinks and the SCUS is controlled by them as well...

I joke about existential--people don't get that term applies no matter what flavor of party you approach your politics from.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Ok, a hug and some backstrap it is.

I only share coveted backstrap with widows and orphans (of which thankfully I know none)

 

[SAJ-99]

Disclaimer: No offense to OP, I understand not wanting to wade into the political theater but it is impossible to talk about this subject as non-political & neutral so here are my 2 cents. No offense intended at all so please do not kick me to the curb.....
While i am ALL for preserving our hunting traditions & wild places, a vote for the democrats is no guarantee that they will do any better. To vote them in on a single issue is not reasonable & dangerous for our whole country.
Yes our country needs to preserve land, resources & wildlife to pass on to the next generation but a reasonable balance needs to be struck.
The Dem party of today is not my Grandma's party, once they have the land, next step will be to restrict, & then to eliminate hunting altogether for the average joe.
That said, let me say also say that the Republicans have plenty of well earned warts & there is plenty of mud to sling at them as well.
As of now , nothing is written in stone, Items in the project can still be revised. Write your congressman.

You seem to have equated the Democratic party and the Center for Biological Diversity. They are not the same. Then you proceed to make up a hypothetical scenario you are worried about, even though there is zero evidence it is a proposed idea.

I appreciate your commitment to writing your congressman (or woman). I do have to ask, did you write your congressperson in 2020 on Interior Secretary Order 3388?

Here is a list of the LWCF projects proposed for 2025. Find your favorite and ask if the Governor of that state will reject the acquisition or maybe if the local county board would block it. A reinstatement of 3388 makes that a very real possibility.

 

[Shed God]

What's no. 16 beaverhead national forest

 

[RG300]

no one is going to take our guns away--UNLESS project 2025 is a resounding success

I think its the other way around......but regardless:
MOLON LABE.