#'liberals are making too big a deal of project 2025'

[banji-effect]

In times past, Vought — who famously asked “Is There Anything Actually Wrong With ‘Christian Nationalism?’ ” in Newsweek in 2021 — would have been seen, and dismissed, as an over-the-top extremist well outside the boundaries of mainstream politics. Today, he is a lauded Trump loyalist on the verge of his second tour of duty with the president, in one of the most powerful posts in the federal government.

...Vought, if all goes according to plan, will be confirmed as O.M.B. director by the Senate later this week.

...“The apocalyptic tone adopted by the MAGA minions,” [Laurence H. Tribe, a law professor at Harvard] wrote by email,

reflects a rhetorically effective if not especially original plan to confuse and thereby disarm the resistance, such as it is, by disabling the sadly limited critical faculties of those whose political paralysis enables the ascendant to rule largely unchallenged while the policies they push injure the very voters whose ballots cloak them with a patina of popular legitimacy. Transparently normalizing the aberrant and extreme, they clear the path toward infiltrating, inhabiting and thereby co-opting the political and legal institutions they aim to make their own, in all three branches of government and throughout the federal system. The results they seek conform to no systematic ideology but reflect the age-old pathology of self-aggrandizing power and wealth, spiked with an added dose of cruelty and retribution for imagined slights, and heavily tinged with scapegoating racism and misogyny, magnified by xenophobia and classic antisemitism.

For Vought, whose job at O.M.B. is to oversee spending, the demonization of Democrats provides a rationale for cutting programs for the poor supported by liberals and Democrats.

How would Vought cut federal spending?

In December 2022, under Vought’s direction, the Center for Renewing America produced a comprehensive budget proposal, “A Commitment to End Woke and Weaponized Government.” The proposal called for enormous cuts in domestic spending, particularly in programs for the poor.

A sampling of the size of Vought’s spending cuts in the first year of implementation: Head Start, $5.4 billion; Low Income Energy Assistance, $3.7 billion; the Department of Housing and Urban Development, $25.8 billion, including $12.8 billion for Tenant-Based Rental Assistance vouchers better known as Section 8.

Long-term reforms in the center’s budget proposal would cut Medicaid by $1.1 trillion and Medicare by $766 billion over 10 years.

Vought’s cuts are rationalized without legitimate justification. In the case of the Justice Department, for example, the center calls for spending reductions based on ideology:

The highly politicized Civil Rights Division and Environment and Natural Resources Division, full elimination of the “equity” obsessed Community Relations Service, an immediate zeroing out of the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program and a down payment on a transformative restructuring of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to disarm and defang its weaponized posture toward Americans who do not share the political bent of the bureaucratic elite.

While Vought and the center called for the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget to be cut from $9.2 billion to $6.5 billion and the National Science Foundation budget to be cut from $8.5 billion to $3.9 billion, they not only left the Defense Department intact, but gave it another $83.4 billion.

...Vought served as a key adviser to the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, writing a crucial chapter in the project’s proposed agenda for the Trump administration, “Executive Office of the President of the United States.”

In that chapter, Vought describes how he sees his role of director of O.M.B. and as the key executor of Trump’s agenda:

The director must view his job as the best, most comprehensive approximation of the president’s mind as it pertains to the policy agenda while always being ready with actual options to effect that agenda within existing legal authorities and resources.

What is at the top of the president’s agenda?

The great challenge confronting a conservative president is the existential need for aggressive use of the vast powers of the executive branch to return power — including power currently held by the executive branch — to the American people. Success in meeting that challenge will require a rare combination of boldness and self-denial: boldness to bend or break the bureaucracy to the presidential will and self-denial to use the bureaucratic machine to send power away from Washington.

Vought’s Project 2025 chapter anticipated much of what Trump has done since Jan. 20:

The next Administration will face a significant challenge in unwinding policies and procedures that are used to advance radical gender, racial and equity initiatives under the banner of science. Similarly, the Biden Administration’s climate fanaticism will need a whole-of-government unwinding.

[arizonaconservativegal]

If you’re a conservative with reasonable beliefs, more power to you, that’s great, we need more people like you.

But you’re doing yourself a major disservice if you take a post about anti-social behaviors from our party and showing you don’t socialize much and just stick your head in the sand and go “nuh uh that doesn’t happen!” Just leaves that avenue open to attack from Democrats.

Both my parents are registered republicans, and my mom has had to distance herself from fellow conserative friends specifically bc of that adrenochrome stuff. (Some of the friends were Korean btw, so i don’t wanna hear racism bs) My friend who isnt a republican but whose parents are both R has her mom sick of her dad bc of this stuff. Even at my job, the guys who talk about politics are work go to the exact topics mentioned in that post you said doesn’t happen. Democrats are just gonna pull up screenshots and use that to undermine everything else youre saying and say its fake and made up too.

Project2025, which I have read, wants to abolish overtime pay unless it interferes with the Sabbath - not religious stuff in general, only the Sabbath and only if you believe in the Sabbath for real. That’s literally only christians and jews. nobody else.

I’m not saying those are your beliefs, I’m not saying that’s what’s going to happen if trump is elected president. But Project2025 is a really big thing and not just bc liberals keep on pointing to it to fearmonger. abortion is one thing but how are we gonna tell people “we dont want christianity to be the main thing we just have morals” if we’ve got big think tanks going “actually we wanna test people for their religon at work” ? radical conservatism is gonna kill moderate conservatism and make people vote dem. my dad even voted for biden last election and hes been a republican since before the 90s. the weird stuff is immature but the things they’re calling weird do happen

Okay look I fully understand that no one wants to believe me here so I'm shouting into the void expecting something to happen and that's ridiculous but I'm going to do it anyway because I still have a few minutes until my conference call starts.

I've been working in Republican politics professionally for ten years. A decade. I'm not talking out of my ass when I say no one is taking Project 2025 seriously. I actually do know that directly. When the Heritage Foundation is mentioned in conversation, people roll their eyes. The thing about think tanks like that is that they don't have to deal with the reality of what they're suggesting. They essentially throw spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks. If something does - then they'll write an actual policy prescription or draft legislation so that lawmakers have something to start working on. I know you probably don't know what the difference is (which I don't mean as a knock on you, it's just not something most people know), but Project 2025 contains none of that. Until the conversations I hear at work start to shift or I see one of those ideas become a policy treatment or draft bill, I'm not going to worry about it. From a practical standpoint, all Project 2025 is today is a Democrat fundraising point.

To your other point, there are roughly 70 million registered Republicans in this country, not counting third party members or conservative leaning independents. Some of them suck. A lot. I'm really not trying to pretend that's not the case. But to write a post claiming that all conservatives are like that is absurd and shows that you don't spend time around us. The very vast majority of conservatives are just normal human beings who go to the grocery store and work boring jobs and take the kids to little league practice and hold extremely boring opinions on politics. Just like the very vast majority of liberals. It would be equally unreasonable of me to go around telling everyone that all Democrats are the equivalent of the Bernie bro who shot up a bunch of Republican members of Congress a few years ago or that they're all the like the people who send me rape threats here or call my old campaign office to say their going to firebomb us. It would be really easy for me to believe that if all I did was spend time around other conservatives and my only interactions with the left were with their raging nutcases. But I spend time around liberals so I know they're not like that any more than we are like that jackass last night.

It is so easy these days to put yourself in a little bubble of people who think like you and only ever see the worst of the people who don't. That used to be difficult for conservatives to do because media was all very left-leaning so even if we didn't personally know a lefty, we still saw them portrayed positively on tv, whereas the left didn't see that of us. With streaming and algorithms and alternate media these days, we are heading in that direction too. Very little scares me more about the future than that.

The only way to fix that is if we all start talking to normal people on the other side the aisle again. That's all I'm trying to get people do to. You don't even have to talk to them about politics. Talk to them about baseball or something, I don't care. Just something so that when you think of the other party, you think of the human beings you know instead of some boogeyman. There are nearly 12,000 people following this blog. That guy last night wasn't one of them - why does he get to represent them? They didn't do anything wrong and they outnumber him, literally almost 12,000 to 1. The only reason anyone listened to him was that he 'confirmed' their bias and they didn't think about it any more than that. They saw one example of what they already believed and let that give them a reason to ignore the mountain of things contradicting them. So I'm pissed at that guy for that and for generally being a shithead.

But I'm still going to say it because it's still true: if you think that's how all conservatives are, you obviously don't spend a lot of time around conservatives.

[9800sblog]

https://www.tumblr.com/4433xyz/722490798444347392/did-my-daily-energy-check-in-on-mingi-and?source=share

Hi, would you mind doing the same reading for yeosang or other mmbrs career?and share if you don't mind any pressure, though

ateez tarot reading

next big thing in each member's career

do I have their energy permission to do and share this reading? the emperor, 6 of wands

this is based on tarot and energy reading, don't trust me or rely on my words ☝️

seonghwa

something he used to do or enjoy predebut, a collaboration of some kind, he still developing this skill. it's emotional, intense, scary, a bit aggressive, he gotta juggle a lot at once, speed is also important. so this is making me think of rap, like getting an official position as one, which in ateez's case includes writing lyrics too. big stuff. the idea of a concept is important here too.

this year, next year, around his birthday, numbers 3, 6, 4 stood out.

hongjoong

his spread makes me think of rapping and collabing too (lil uzi vert x ateez 🧍‍♂️). hongjoong has got many options, this next big step is gonna bring him much visibility, he's gonna be showing off a lot, there's a lot of shimmer, which may be related to fashion. he's in a position of big authority delegating this and that, it's an emotional step for him, maybe a dream come true. the next big thing for hongjoong may be a clothing line or something similar 😭🫂

3 is a very consistent number here, 2 and 4 also. this is the consequences of his actions, gradual growth, completely inevitable, may start this year or next year, and get really done around this time of year 2025/6, september may be an important month for this project.

yunho

yunho might be acting again soon. this seems to be in it's early stages yet, like audition process. it's dreamy, a big big deal, it's emotional too, he seems nervous about it. I did read a while ago that yunho may soon live romance vicariously through fantasy and tv.

8 is an important number, may already be in progress, 6 and 3 also consistent. 2024, august, beginning of the year is important too.

yeosang

this spread can be interpreted as the end of his work as an mc in the show, and/or a new opportunity in a different but equally popular program in korean television. this is a skill he already has developed and is proud of, but doesn't get to use often, this would have more national than international reach. it's an opportunity that brings him liberation and excitement but makes him unsure because of real-life complications.

11, 2, 9, date calculation is not reliable for this reading, but the number 11 was super consistent.

san

a solo thing, for sure. his next big thing is related to his individuality and emotional maturity, this has to do with what makes his soul happy. it's an emotional thing that makes him look careless but he's very well prepared and thought about this a lot. the next big step in his career is a path not usually taken, it's scary, he doesn't know what comes next, anything can happen. this requires a lot of self control and introspection. I'm not sure what it is, san is quite secretive these days, but the cards may indicate romance depending on the perspective. this may be the revelation of something very important to him, changing the perspective of the general public, requires a leap of faith.

next august, this was really sure. when he feels confident.

mingi

mingi's thing has to do with discomfort, energy renewal, soul searching and is a big deal, makes him unsure. it's probably something unseen to the general public. mingi may get a big celebrity as a mentor backstage, become a guide for a big name or even take another break, either way, it's his destiny, he needs this. this may somehow relate to his future spouse, like he accumulates money or meets them because of this. it's something he's used to doing but still feels intimidating for him. this may be music, which he usually writes in a very personal and metaphorical manner.

he'll have to lose something to win something even bigger, really important for his future. may start or have started this year and "end" next year. numbers 8 and 7 are very consistent.

wooyoung

connection, relationships, fighting, competing. he comes out successful but not without making enemies along the way, it's almost like a scandal, which may make him look immature or have to do with the way he was brought up/his family. this may have international reach and make him influential, it's probably to do with his artistic side or his opinions. this is something he'll learn from and may taint his image.

november or september of this year or next, maybe next chuseok holiday (description reminds me of isac

jongho

ALL royalty cards, this is a really really big deal, a big influence, big position, maybe an authority figure. something he feels extremely comfortable, maybe even casual in/doing, he has accumulated skill and easily shines in (definitely to do with singing), very likely a solo thing but I see a big, influential female energy, someone or something he may be a fan of.

may happen on his b-day this year

[area51-escapee]

Hello, I am American, and I’d like to add my two cents on things if I can! I really hope this doesn’t come across as rude it’s just. I’m autistic and bad with tone and a little bit. Frustrated with people thinking we don’t know what’s going on for whatever reason?

But yes, we know this, a president will be elected whether I or anyone else as an individual votes or chooses not to. Our reasons for withholding our vote until certain demands are met, or even no matter what are important though, we have thought about this, and I respect people’s decision whether it’s to vote or not. I respect the fact that many, many Palestinians and pro-Palestine people are refusing to vote for either candidate, I will never, ever hold it against someone that they don’t want to vote for someone who has sat by and allowed the genocide of their family and friends.

Personally, I’m willing to consider voting for Kamala if she calls for an arms embargo. Contrary to what people keep saying, there are more issues with her than just her stance on Palestine- and I feel like calling a genocide that our country has been providing the arms for a “single issue” is kind of. Downplaying the severity of what has been going on. Constant bombardment, constant massacres, forced starvation, displacement, imprisonment, torture, those are not small of “single” issues and I don’t like that people keep trying to paint us as unreasonable or petty for drawing a line here.

I also heavily disagree with her stances on border control, her belief seems to be we need to be more strict and that Trump “failed” to secure our border. From 2016-2020, the border was considered a very big deal by liberals here in the U.S., people were very outspoken and rightfully outraged with the way migrants were being treated, but a lot of that died down after Biden won the election, which is frustrating because not only has the situation stayed the same, but Biden also continued building that god awful wall Trump wanted. I’m from Texas, which borders on Mexico, and also recently tried to pass a bill that would allow the police to arrest and detain anyone they even suspected of being an undocumented immigrant. Thankfully it got blocked but they are still trying to pass it, and her rhetoric around border control contributes to things like that. I’m half Hispanic, I’m white passing, I don’t speak Spanish, but the same does not go for the entire Mexican side of my family and this is something I have to seriously worry about.

We have also seen rampant and horrific instances of police violence, including a rise in police brutality since 2020. I don’t feel comfortable with a candidate who has repeatedly called herself the “top cop”. That does not reassure me that anything will get better in this area, despite it being something people have been fighting for for a long time.

We know that it’ll happen no matter what, and we have to decide what we’re willing to support while still being able to sleep at night. If someone wants to vote for Kamala then that’s fine, they have their reasons. But people have plenty of very valid reasons for not voting for her too. Personally, I don’t feel like there is much difference between the parties except for the language they are using. The democrats may make it sound more palatable, but when the republicans call for increased border control and more policing and call anti-genocide protestors “terrorist sympathizers”, that’s seen as horrific. I think the same should go for when it’s a democrat saying those same things. The threat of “project 2025” doesn’t scare those of us who recognize that it’s not a “what if”, it’s not a hypothetical thing that can only be stopped by voting blue, it’s here, right now, the democrats have done nothing to stop it, they have no plan and seemingly no intention to fight it, so no matter who gets elected, we will still be fighting to be heard, to be treated as human beings, to be given equal rights, because we simply cannot trust them to do any of that since they’ve showed time and time again that they really don’t care.

Okay I'm not American but... y'all do realise you have to elect a president right?

Like, it's happening whether you vote or not. There's not really an option there. You just get to nudge it ever so slightly in one direction or the other.

I'm seeing this a bit in Canada too with the 'Trudeau sucks and Poilievre sucks, there's no point'. There are three elections in Canada this year. Yes, they're provincial and yes, options really suck in a lot of provinces but provincial politics play a huge role in federal elections and people need to realise that a premier and a legislature are going to be elected no matter what you do. They just might be elected in your favour if you vote!

I don't know how it works in the US but in Canada you can also show up to the polling station with appropriate pieces of ID (check how many and which ones you needs for your province) and vote then and there even if you weren't registered in advance.

[touristguidebuzz]

Where UK Political Parties Stand on the Big Tourism Issues

Britain's Prime Minister and Conservative party leader Theresa May gestures, during the Conservative Party manifesto launch in Halifax, England. The document does not mention tourism once. Stefan Rousseau / PA via Associated Press

Skift Take: Party manifestos should be treated with a healthy degree of skepticism. Still it is revealing to see who what they priorities are and perhaps more importantly what they decide to leave out.

— Patrick Whyte

On June 8 voters in the United Kingdom will get the chance to decide who will form the next government. The country wasn’t supposed to have an election until 2020 but through a quirk of the electoral system current Prime Minister Theresa May was able to initiate a vote.

May is hoping her Conservative Party make big gains across the country, giving her a stronger hand when it comes to negotiating its exit from the European Union, the biggest challenge the UK has faced “since the second world war”.

Ahead of the election each of the parties releases a manifesto, detailing everything they would do if they formed a government. Current polling suggests that the Conservatives (right wing) are on course to increase their advantage over the Labour Party (left wing) with the Liberal Democrats (central) taking a small number of seats. The Scottish National Party dominate north of the border and are actually the third biggest party, but they do not contest nationally. Since the Brexit vote, right-wing populists the United Kingdom Independence Party have seen their popularity sink.

The UK tourism industry is expected to be worth more than $335 billion (£257 billion) by 2025, and account for just under 10 percent of UK gross domestic product (GDP). Uncertainty surrounding Brexit puts this under threat.

The UK’s airline industry, which helps bring millions of visitors to the country each year, is intrinsically linked to the rest of the European Union (EU). Then there is the reliance of migrant labour from the rest of the to fill tourism jobs. These and other issues relating to travel and tourism need to be addressed if the UK is going succeed on its own.

Skift took a look at each of the three main parties’ manifestos to see how seriously they were taking the subject.

Tourism

Big Ben and Palace of Westminster, London. (Phil Dolby/Flickr)

The Labour Party acknowledges that tourism is often ignored by governments.

“Labour will support tourism at the heart of government. The tourism industry represents 9.6 per cent of UK employment, 4.9 per cent of export and 9 per cent of GDP, but its importance is too often forgotten. Labour will ensure that tourism becomes a national priority again. We will reinstate the cross-Whitehall ministerial group on tourism, and ensure that government ministers across departments understand how their roles t into the national tourism agenda.”

The Liberal Democrats – the party that is campaigning for a second EU referendum – chooses to highlight some of the benefits that might be lost when the UK formally leaves in March 2019:

“Travel and tourism: Britain is an outward-looking country with commercial and leisure interests around the world, particularly in Europe. We will strive to retain traveller and tourist benefits such as the European Health Insurance Card, reduced roaming charges and pet passports, all of which are at risk by leaving the European Union.”

While Labour is focusing on inbound and the Liberal Democrats on outbound, they are at least both looking seriously at the subject.

In contrast, the Conservatives, the party most likely to form the next government, has zero mentions of tourism. Nothing. Maybe they don’t think they need to do anything because the cheap pound is doing all the work for them?

Airports

An Airbus A330-300 of Virgin Atlantic on final approach to landing skims over the rooftops of nearby houses at Heathrow Airport in London, Tuesday, Oct. 25, 2016. Britain’s government will reveal how it plans to expand London’s airport capacity Tuesday, more than a year after a special commission recommended a third runway at Heathrow. (AP Photo/Frank Augstein)

The UK debate about extra runway capacity has been going on for decades. In order to finally put the issue to bed, May’s predecessor David Cameron, created the independent Airports Commission to examine “the need for additional UK airport capacity and recommends to government how this can be met in the short, medium and long term.” It did just this and delivered its recommendation for a new runway at Heathrow in 2015. Since then nothing has really happened and the issue remains a divisive one. Under Cameron and then May a decision has been dodged. The Conservative’s manifesto makes reference to expansion but sidesteps any firm commitment:

“We are investing to reduce travel time and cost, increase capacity and attract investment here in the UK. We will continue our programme of strategic national investments, including High Speed 2, Northern Powerhouse Rail and the expansion of Heathrow Airport – and we will ensure that these great projects do as much as possible to develop the skills and careers of British workers.”

The Labour document doesn’t refer to Heathrow but admits that more capacity is necessary:

“Labour recognises the need for additional airport capacity in the South East. We welcome the work done by the Airports Commission, and we will guarantee that any airport expansion adheres to our tests that require noise issues to be addressed, air quality to be protected, the UK’s climate change obligations met and growth across the country supported.”

It is hard to see, however, how the first and second sentences in the paragraph can be reconciled given the serious environmental concerns over any airport expansion. Politicians love having their cake and eating it.

The Liberal Democrat opposition to expansion is at least clear. They pledge to:

“Develop a strategic airports policy for the whole of the UK, taking full account of the impacts on climate change and local pollution. We remain opposed to any expansion of Heathrow, Stansted or Gatwick and any new airport in the Thames Estuary and will focus instead on improving existing regional airports such as Birmingham and Manchester. We will ensure no net increase in runways across the UK.”

While expanding airports elsewhere in the country is commendable, the problem area is the south-east of the country in and around London.

Leaving the EU

Photos taken at the BoatLeave protest on Wednesday 15 June 2016. (Garry Knight/Flickr)

Delivering Brexit will be a fiendishly complicated process for whoever wins in June. In less than two years, the UK has to extricate itself from 40-plus years of union and then negotiate a separate trading deal with a bloc that accounts for 44 percent of all UK exports in goods and services.

It presents a particular challenge for tourism given how closely linked we are with our neighbors.

Theresa May has been treating the campaign as if it were a presidential race with her name often superseding that of the Conservatives.

“Now more than ever, Britain needs a strong and stable government to get the best deal for our country. Now more than ever, Britain needs strong and stable leadership to make the most of the opportunities Brexit brings,” May writes in the forward to the manifesto. (May has been repeatedly mocked for robotically chanting the phrase “strong and stable” on numerous occasions during the campaign.)

The ability to move freely between the UK and the rest of the EU is coming to an end, something that will present a huge challenge to the leisure and hospitality industry.

“As we set out in chapter three, the next Conservative government will give Britain the technical education it has lacked for decades. This will take time but we must also address the immediate needs of those sectors of the economy suffering shortages in skills. We will make the immigration system work for these sectors, whilst ensuring that we develop the skills we need for the future.

“We will therefore ask the independent Migration Advisory Committee to make recommendations to the government about how the visa system can become better aligned with our modern industrial strategy. We envisage that the committee’s advice will allow us to set aside significant numbers of visas for workers in strategically-important sectors, such as digital technology, without adding to net migration as a whole.”

The manifesto at least makes clear that ending free movement is going to cause problems for businesses and gives the Conservatives wriggle room if they need to relax immigration rules in order to keep the country functioning.

Labour’s position is closer to the Conservatives than many people would have expected:

“Freedom of movement will end when we leave the European Union. Britain’s immigration system will change, but Labour will not scapegoat migrants nor blame them for economic failures.”

The Liberal Democrats define the Conservative’s plans as “hard Brexit” and say that this “means leaving the single market, ending freedom of movement and abandoning the customs union – even though these choices will make the UK poorer and disappoint many leave voters who wanted a different outcome.”

They want a second referendum on the outcome of negotiations between the UK and EU.