Head of Project 2025 Fired!

[impartialobserver]

2 minutes ago, User said:

This is such a lame argument, it is the you agree 100% with all and everything or nothing. That is not how anything works in life. 

When a restaurant hires someone to bus their tables, they are hiring them to bus their tables. That doesn't mean the busser can now implement all his own plans and thing the restaurant never dreamed of. 

Just as when a President is picking people to help run the administration, they are picked for particular reasons. 

Well, the alternative is for the person trying to say 3+3=7 to just admit they can't actually prove that out or that they were wrong... that is always an option too. 

 

And what if the matter is purely subjective such as red cars are better than blue cars? It would appear in that case.. the win is really a measure of who is most bored and has the most time to waste on meaningless debate. 

[User]

4 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

And what if the matter is purely subjective such as red cars are better than blue cars? It would appear in that case.. the win is really a measure of who is most bored and has the most time to waste on meaningless debate. 

Do you think Michael is willing to admit his position here was purely subjective and he can't show the connection between Trump and Project 2025?

 

[impartialobserver]

11 minutes ago, User said:

Do you think Michael is willing to admit his position here was purely subjective and he can't show the connection between Trump and Project 2025?

 

I do not know if he would or not. In the absence of official documentation, I would say any connection between the two is subjective. 

[Five of swords]

1 hour ago, User said:

Was the discussion point or title of this thread:

Does Trump work with the dude on executive orders? 

Nope. 

 

Huh?

The Amendment process is part of the Constitution... 

And yet if the constitution is infallible then there should never be an ammendment. Just basic logic.

[Nationalist]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Paul Ryan is conservative.  Trump is not.

I didn't say he had anything to do with the policy development, but I believe he will be open to implementing some of it despite his denials.

Paul Ryan is a backstabbing little sh1t Mike. A Pelosi stooge.

[User]

28 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

And yet if the constitution is infallible then there should never be an ammendment. Just basic logic.

This is circular logic and a strawman. Not sure who is arguing the Constitution is "infallible" and if the Constitution includes a process for amendments... then that means it is part of whatever "infallibility" argument you are making. 

 

[Five of swords]

8 minutes ago, User said:

This is circular logic and a strawman. Not sure who is arguing the Constitution is "infallible" and if the Constitution includes a process for amendments... then that means it is part of whatever "infallibility" argument you are making. 

 

Well what does it mean to be loyal to the constitution unless thr constitution is infallible?

[Rebound]

2 hours ago, Five of swords said:

Just somebasic logic here. If loyalty to the constitution were a requirement for government service, then ammendments would not be possible. In fact, Black people would not be us citizens.

That’s false. The Constitution stated that slaves were not citizens, not black people. And the Constitution states that it can be amended, and it was amended to end slavery, and it was again amended to make all people born in the US citizens. 

[User]

9 minutes ago, Five of swords said:

Well what does it mean to be loyal to the constitution unless thr constitution is infallible?

Perfection or infallibility is not a prerequisite to loyalty. 

 

 

[Five of swords]

5 minutes ago, Rebound said:

That’s false. The Constitution stated that slaves were not citizens, not black people. And the Constitution states that it can be amended, and it was amended to end slavery, and it was again amended to make all people born in the US citizens. 

" All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

All persons. Slaves or not. Anyone born here. Including all black people born here.

 

In order to ammend the constitution, you would need to be willing to say the constitution is falling short in some higher priority. So you would need to be more loyal to that higher priority than you are to the constitution. Without that amending the constitution makes no sense.

2 minutes ago, User said:

Perfection or infallibility is not a prerequisite to loyalty. 

 

 

How do you know something is imperfect?

[User]

1 minute ago, Five of swords said:

How do you know something is imperfect?

Logic, reason... 

[Five of swords]

Just now, User said:

Logic, reason... 

I could just say that we will treat the constitution as if it is infallible and follow it regardless of any consequences. That doesn't violate any logic. There is no contradiction there.

 

But even so...if we are amending the co situation when it is illogical.. wouldn't that imply we are more loyal to logic than to the constitution? Isn't that elementary logic?

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Yes they do, and in fact I’ll wager you have no idea what my point is. 

They don't at all, which is why you shovel so many tonnes of it in. If they did you could easily just point and say "this line here demonstrates XXX" and that would be good enough, rather than trying to flood it with nonsense that's utterly irrelevant. 

And if people can't tell what your point is at this stage then that's a pretty stinging indictment of your english and communication skills kiddo  

 

 

Quote

1) Trump is a compulsive liar who will say anything and often contradicts himself 

But never  ever ever in history has ever backed an idea without announcing to the world he thinks it's great. Ever. 

You're claiming that's what he is doing now. that would be so far out of character it's not funny. 

 

Quote

2) Trump has extensive ties to nearly 150 people involved in the project, especially its leaders and funders, many if not most of whom were in his previous administration and are widely expected to be in his next one if he’s elected 

Means nothing kid. He has extensive ties to a lot of people who are jewish - doesn't mean he believes in the hebrew god. Doesn't mean he's going to take every sunday off from now on.  Doesn't mean he intends to make circumcision compulsory. 

This is where your logic fails. "Some people like 2025.  Trump knows people. Ergo trump likes 2025".  That is precisely the same logic is "all cats have 4 legs, my dog has 4 legs, therefore my dog is a cat". 

Quote

3) The leaders of project 20205 keep saying Trump has approved, that they are in coordination with Trump’s team and while Trump disavows, he  doesn’t call them liars or attack them or even call them out by name, which is something he loves to do. . Don’t you find that strange?

 Bullshit. 

And trump at the end of the day has made it clear he's not read it, isn't interested in it, it's not his plan.  End of story.

 

 

Quote

They’re miles long because there’s miles of evidence, genius. 

I'm sure there is.  But it's not evidence that supports your point. It's just random filler garbage. 

And that's more 'evidence' that you know you're wrong than anything else. 

[BeaverFever]

21 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Paul Ryan is a backstabbing little sh1t Mike. A Pelosi stooge.

LOL so Paul Ryan is a Pelosi stooge now.  The twisted mind of a right wing extremist, on full display 

[Michael Hardner]

12 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

LOL so Paul Ryan is a Pelosi stooge now.  

He quit on principles.  So he was conservative.

[BeaverFever]

On 8/16/2024 at 2:51 PM, User said:

This is such a lame argument, it is the you agree 100% with all and everything or nothing. That is not how anything works in life. 

When a restaurant hires someone to bus their tables, they are hiring them to bus their tables. That doesn't mean the busser can now implement all his own plans and thing the restaurant never dreamed of. 

Just as when a President is picking people to help run the administration, they are picked for particular reasons. 

When Presidents appoint people to their administration they don’t just pick names out of a phonebook  or put an ad in the newspaper asking the public to submit resumes. And Presidential appointments aren’t for jobs with prescribed tasks like bussing tables. Presidents hand-pick people for roles that have broad authority and discretion and they do primarily based on that candidates ideology and philosophy  For example you wouldn’t appoint a KKK Grand Wizard to your cabinet to run government departments just because they had a qualified resume  

So when Trump picks P2025 people for his administration AGAIN, he is endorsing their stated published ideology. No 2 people on earth agree 100% on every small detail but obviously if he appoints any of these people he is accepting their general viewpoint and trusting them with a great deal of authority. I mean they put out an extremist manifesto which they claim he supports and he claims to disavow, but avoids criticizing…so what are we supposed to believe if he appoints them to his administration anyway?

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

LOL so Paul Ryan is a Pelosi stooge now.  The twisted mind of a right wing extremist, on full display 

Yes. Ryan pushed the "Russia Russia Russia" hoax as hard as any of Pelosi's minions. But when the truth eeked out...the best they could do is say that some people who may be Russian, put anti-Clinton claims in the web, and that Podesta gave a Russian hacker his password. 

He's a backstabbing little pee-on who destroyed his own political career. Stupid him.

Edited August 17, 2024 by Nationalist

[NAME REMOVED]

On 8/6/2024 at 10:10 AM, Black Dog said:

LMAOOOOOO Right that's why he was constantly referring to "the Jewish race"

According to Hitler, Marxism was a Jewish strategy to subjugate Germany. Alfred Rosenberg, the considered one of the main authors of key Nazi ideology, said Bolshevism was "the revolt of the Jewish, Slavic and Mongolian races against the German (Aryan) element in Russia". 

That's racism you retarded baboon.

No you dipshit, in the Nazi worldview Jews and Aryan were completely separate categories. You couldn't be a Jewish Aryan.

They systematically murdered like 8 million people because of their racial beliefs you jizzrag.

Its amazing you can be this wrong about something as extensively documented and as central as Hitler and the Nazis' views on race lol, no hope for you.

 

The more people like WCM and CdnFox post, the more we start to realise just how uneducated they are. 

[BeaverFever]

On 8/16/2024 at 5:40 PM, CdnFox said:

They don't at all, which is why you shovel so many tonnes of it in. If they did you could easily just point and say "this line here demonstrates XXX" and that would be good enough, rather than trying to flood it with nonsense that's utterly irrelevant. 

And if people can't tell what your point is at this stage then that's a pretty stinging indictment of your english and communication skills kiddo  

Well if you’re too stupid to understand things and need them spelled out for you here you go:

The line that says “Vought continued, saying, “He’s been at our organization, he’s raised money for our organization, he’s blessed it. … He’s very supportive of what we do.” demonstrates that Trump’s been at their  organization, he’s raised money for their organization, he’s blessed it. … He’s very supportive of what they do.

The line where JD Vance promotes Project 2025 leader’s book demonstrates that he supports Project 2025

The line where 140 people involved with P2025 have close ties to Trump and served in his last administration demonstrates that Trump has close ties to P2025 

The line that says Republicans call Trump’s move to distance himself from Project 2025 ‘preposterous’ demonstrates that Trump’s move to distance himself from Project 2025 is ‘preposterous’

And so on.  It’s pretty self-explanatory  

But honestly if you’re that dumb and need that much explaining then my posts are only going to get longer 

My point has been explained quite clearly, unfortunately you often have trouble following the plot.   So here it is spelled out for you

Whether or not Trump officially and formally endorses P2025 or not, a Trump administration will end up enacting many P2025 policies. He clearly has endorsed the 140 people involved in it when they served in his last administration and will likely serve in his next one. The P2025 people are insisting publicly he’s on board and Trump’s disavowal of it has been vague, mild in its criticism, and self-contradictory. 

On 8/16/2024 at 5:40 PM, CdnFox said:

But never  ever ever in history has ever backed an idea without announcing to the world he thinks it's great. Ever. 

Sure he has. Look at his acrobatics on abortion. Since 2016 he’s claimed to be the staunchest anti-abortionist in the country. Then just recently he flip-flopped and said it should be up to individual states and Republicans running for election should stay silent on abortion if it’s going to cost them votes. He understands when ideas are unpopular it doesn’t mean you abandon them, you just don’t publicly endorse them and campaign on them. Trump doesn’t have to come out and publicly back P2025 or campaign on it in order for it to be implemented. He just has to sit back and let it happen once he appoints P2025 people to his cabinet and they start doing the things they’re currently promising to do  

 

 

On 8/16/2024 at 5:40 PM, CdnFox said:

Means nothing kid. He has extensive ties to a lot of people who are jewish - doesn't mean he believes in the hebrew god. Doesn't mean he's going to take every sunday off from now on.  Doesn't mean he intends to make circumcision compulsory. 

This is where your logic fails. "Some people like 2025.  Trump knows people. Ergo trump likes 2025".  That is precisely the same logic is "all cats have 4 legs, my dog has 4 legs, therefore my dog is a cat". 

What a bad analogy and faulty argument.  A random assortment of people who happen to have similar private religious beliefs are not comparable to a specific group of Trump associates who have come together to publicly state that they expect to be appointed to the Trump administration and then publish a manifesto on how they will use those appointments to takeover the entire US government. And to state the Trump has privately supported them. BTW, Trump hasn’t disavowed the claim that he will appoint some or all of them to his government even now that their agenda is public. And if Trump hasn’t privately endorsed it like they claim why doesn’t he call them liars?  He loves attacking people but he just can’t bring himself to criticize these people or even clarify if he will appoint any of them to his administration   That’s a dead giveaway that he’s hiding something  

As I’ve said repeatedly now, Trump himself doesn’t necessarily have to believe in P2025, he only has to be willing to let the P2025 people carry out their agenda under his administration, at least as a compromise he’s willing to make to guarantee the support of certain conservative groups.  Considering one of those agenda items is to completely purge the entire federal public service of independent and non-partisan professionals and replace them with diehard MAGA zealots and Trump loyalists whose pledge of loyalty is to Trump the man rather than the office of POTUS, it’s not likely that a known megalomaniac like Trump would be opposed. 

 

On 8/16/2024 at 5:40 PM, CdnFox said:

 Bullshit. 

And trump at the end of the day has made it clear he's not read it, isn't interested in it, it's not his plan.  End of story.

What’s bullshit?  It’s a FACT that Trump has not called them liars, even though they claim he has privately endorsed them and he claims otherwise. 

 It’s also a fact that Trump has not declared that he won’t appoint any of them to his next administration

It’s also a fact that Trump had made contradictory claims, saying he hasn’t read it, but also saying that there are parts of it he likes and parts that he doesn’t like, which isn’t possible unless he’s read it

Its also a fact that Trump lied and claimed not to know any of the P2025 people when in fact he knows nearly 150 of them  

Its also a fact that claiming not to know anything about it isn’t the same as criticizing it or denouncing it, which he hasn’t done   Furthermore his claims to STILL not know anything about it even after all the P2025 furor is highly dubious.  We know he’s by nature an intellectually incurious man but for him to claim he still hasn’t bothered to look in to something that’s become so controversial for his campaign is dubious  

He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth again, as he always does, so his followers can believe whatever version of reality suits them at the moment. Everyone who hasn’t drunk the MAGA kool-aid knows Trump’s a habitual liar whose words are absolutely worthless. So no, his vague and contradictory claims do not mean it’s end of story. 
 

On 8/16/2024 at 5:40 PM, CdnFox said:

I'm sure there is.  But it's not evidence that supports your point. It's just random filler garbage. 

And that's more 'evidence' that you know you're wrong than anything else. 

LOL you just finished admitting that you didn’t know what my point was.  Again, nobody is claiming Trump authored P2025 or that it’s his personal wish list.  The point is that he clearly has had at least general awareness of it and at the very least is open to allowing it or elements of it to be implemented under his administration.  
 

Ample evidence of the above point has been provided. You simply suffer from severe confirmation bias where the only evidence you’ll accept is evidence that confirms your pre-existing beliefs.  The only counter argument you’ve presented is citing the words of Trump, one of the most infamous political liars of all time  

Until Trump condemns P2025 and its authors in specific and unmistakable terms and vows to never rehire any of his 140 acolytes who are involved in it,  he remains suspect. 

Edited August 18, 2024 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

6 hours ago, DUI_Offender said:

The more people like WCM and CdnFox post, the more we start to realise just how uneducated they are. 

ROFLMAO - says the guy who had to be told what a national park is   LOLOL 

Kid you've been wrong factually and substantially pretty much every time we've talked and most of the times i've seen you getting your butt handed to you by others here  

And then there's your poop fetish. 

Don't try to blame ME for your stupid   I get that you're butt hurt but it's not my education that's the problem here 

[NAME REMOVED]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

ROFLMAO - says the guy who had to be told what a national park is   LOLOL 

Kid you've been wrong factually and substantially pretty much every time we've talked and most of the times i've seen you getting your butt handed to you by others here  

And then there's your poop fetish. 

Don't try to blame ME for your stupid   I get that you're butt hurt but it's not my education that's the problem here 

Whenever you are getting an intellectual beating, I ahve noticed you switch gears, and project your insecurities onto others. This is typical of people who are impulsive, and not as intelligent as their peers. 

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Well if you’re too stupid to understand things and need them spelled out for you here you go:

The line that says “Vought continued, saying, “He’s been at our organization, he’s raised money for our organization, he’s blessed it. … He’s very supportive of what we do.” demonstrates that Trump’s been at their  organization, he’s raised money for their organization, he’s blessed it. … He’s very supportive of what they do.

The line where JD Vance promotes Project 2025 leader’s book demonstrates that he supports Project 2025

The line where 140 people involved with P2025 have close ties to Trump and served in his last administration demonstrates that Trump has close ties to P2025 

The line that says Republicans call Trump’s move to distance himself from Project 2025 ‘preposterous’ demonstrates that Trump’s move to distance himself from Project 2025 is ‘preposterous’

And so on.  It’s pretty self-explanatory  

But honestly if you’re that dumb and need that much explaining then my posts are only going to get longer 

My point has been explained quite clearly, unfortunately you often have trouble following the plot.   So here it is spelled out for you

Whether or not Trump officially and formally endorses P2025 or not, a Trump administration will end up enacting many P2025 policies. He clearly has endorsed the 140 people involved in it when they served in his last administration and will likely serve in his next one. The P2025 people are insisting publicly he’s on board and Trump’s disavowal of it has been vague, mild in its criticism, and self-contradictory. 

Sure he has. Look at his acrobatics on abortion. Since 2016 he’s claimed to be the staunchest anti-abortionist in the country. Then just recently he flip-flopped and said it should be up to individual states and Republicans running for election should stay silent on abortion if it’s going to cost them votes. He understands when ideas are unpopular it doesn’t mean you abandon them, you just don’t publicly endorse them and campaign on them. Trump doesn’t have to come out and publicly back P2025 or campaign on it in order for it to be implemented. He just has to sit back and let it happen once he appoints P2025 people to his cabinet and they start doing the things they’re currently promising to do  

 

 

What a bad analogy and faulty argument.  A random assortment of people who happen to have similar private religious beliefs are not comparable to a specific group of Trump associates who have come together to publicly state that they expect to be appointed to the Trump administration and then publish a manifesto on how they will use those appointments to takeover the entire US government. And to state the Trump has privately supported them. BTW, Trump hasn’t disavowed the claim that he will appoint some or all of them to his government even now that their agenda is public. And if Trump hasn’t privately endorsed it like they claim why doesn’t he call them liars?  He loves attacking people but he just can’t bring himself to criticize these people or even clarify if he will appoint any of them to his administration   That’s a dead giveaway that he’s hiding something  

As I’ve said repeatedly now, Trump himself doesn’t necessarily have to believe in P2025, he only has to be willing to let the P2025 people carry out their agenda under his administration, at least as a compromise he’s willing to make to guarantee the support of certain conservative groups.  Considering one of those agenda items is to completely purge the entire federal public service of independent and non-partisan professionals and replace them with diehard MAGA zealots and Trump loyalists whose pledge of loyalty is to Trump the man rather than the office of POTUS, it’s not likely that a known megalomaniac like Trump would be opposed. 

 

What’s bullshit?  It’s a FACT that Trump has not called them liars, even though they claim he has privately endorsed them and he claims otherwise. 

 It’s also a fact that Trump has not declared that he won’t appoint any of them to his next administration

It’s also a fact that Trump had made contradictory claims, saying he hasn’t read it, but also saying that there are parts of it he likes and parts that he doesn’t like, which isn’t possible unless he’s read it

Its also a fact that Trump lied and claimed not to know any of the P2025 people when in fact he knows nearly 150 of them  

Its also a fact that claiming not to know anything about it isn’t the same as criticizing it or denouncing it, which he hasn’t done   Furthermore his claims to STILL not know anything about it even after all the P2025 furor is highly dubious.  We know he’s by nature an intellectually incurious man but for him to claim he still hasn’t bothered to look in to something that’s become so controversial for his campaign is dubious  

He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth again, as he always does, so his followers can believe whatever version of reality suits them at the moment. Everyone who hasn’t drunk the MAGA kool-aid knows Trump’s a habitual liar whose words are absolutely worthless. So no, his vague and contradictory claims do not mean it’s end of story. 
 

LOL you just finished admitting that you didn’t know what my point was.  Again, nobody is claiming Trump authored P2025 or that it’s his personal wish list.  The point is that he clearly has had at least general awareness of it and at the very least is open to allowing it or elements of it to be implemented under his administration.  
 

Ample evidence of the above point has been provided. You simply suffer from severe confirmation bias where the only evidence you’ll accept is evidence that confirms your pre-existing beliefs.  The only counter argument you’ve presented is citing the words of Trump, one of the most infamous political liars of all time  

Until Trump condemns P2025 and its authors in specific and unmistakable terms and vows to never rehire any of his 140 acolytes who are involved in it,  he remains suspect. 

You are wasting your time with him. CdnFox is an intellectual lightweight, and will never comprehend any point you make. It's better not to engage with fools.

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Well if you’re too stupid to understand things and need them spelled out for you here you go:

The line that says “Vought continued, saying, “He’s been at our organization, he’s raised money for our organization, he’s blessed it. … He’s very supportive of what we do.” demonstrates that Trump’s been at their  organization, he’s raised money for their organization, he’s blessed it. … He’s very supportive of what they do.

But nothing about this particular bit of policy.  Just their org in general. 

That was your evidence ? LOLOLOL - HARD fail kiddo  

 

Quote

The line where JD Vance promotes Project 2025 leader’s book demonstrates that he supports Project 2025

Vance is not trump.

Quote

The line where 140 people involved with P2025 have close ties to Trump and served in his last administration demonstrates that Trump has close ties to P2025

Also not trump.  And i'm sure lots of his people believe things he doesn't. Are any of them jewish? Does that mean he's jewish? 

Quote

The line that says Republicans call Trump’s move to distance himself from Project 2025 ‘preposterous’ demonstrates that Trump’s move to distance himself from Project 2025 is ‘preposterous’

Meaningless.  Again - not trump.  Not speaking for trump. not representing trump, people with their own agendas. 

 

Quote

And so on.  It’s pretty self-explanatory  

Yes, it is entirely self-explanatory

You want it to be true, so you find evidence that's absolutely not evidence and pretend it's evidence. You're bordering on self-delusion trying desperately to tie trump to something that he very clearly wants nothing to do with. But it's all you've got so you try and make the most nebulous of connections.

Trump has been clear. He hasn't read it, he isn't interested in it, it's not his policy. That's not distancing yourself from it, that is saying it has nothing to do with you.

But you don't like that so you make all of these fake connections that in no way shape or form indicate that trump has any intention of proceeding with it at all.

Kamalas running mate has a DUI. So I guess she must support DUIs right? He also lied about carrying firearms in combat. So she must support stolen valor right? I mean just because she distances herself from it wouldn't mean that she didn't support it.

Your claim is absolutely childish. I have no doubt there are people around trump who come up with all kinds of policy ideas and try and pitch them. But that in no way shape or form means that trump is interested in them and he has been very clear expressly saying he is not interested in this one.

 

End of story, you lose. When you get a quote from trump saying that he's supporting it or supporting various elements of it or the like then come back and talk to the adults in the meantime if all you want to do is write fanfiction and use your imagination to create a world that has no basis in reality and you'll have to share that with other people on sites where they don't have anyone who likes to use their own brain.

[gatomontes99]

The dems lies are so bad, even CNN is calling them out on it.

 

[CdnFox]

37 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

The dems lies are so bad, even CNN is calling them out on it.

 

They've really got nothing to scare people with anymore so they are trying to foster the lie that 2025 is in some way relevant. It isn't.

The idea that trump would be afraid to speak out in favor of something he really believed in is absolutely asinine. The one thing you can guarantee about trump is that if he believes something is true no matter how stupid or crazy or brilliant or ignorant or dangerous it sounds he's going to say it.

I honestly believe that the reason that they're choosing this is because the book is so long and convoluted that nobody is ever going to read it. So all they have to say is that buried somewhere in this book is something really really terrible and they know that 99% of the people out there will never read through it to see if they're right

All they have to do is say "This is so terrible, oh I can't believe how terrible this is, our world is going to end if they do this and if you don't believe me read it for yourself (wink wink) " And then hope that enough people will believe them without taking the time to read it