politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is such an overreaction honestly and I think it’s just giving a false start to the alarmism about Project 2025 which is exactly what these dumb extremists want. Allow me to explain.
Matt Walsh actually said this as a joke. Bannon is probably only half joking. Both had the intention of making articles like this happen so that when the backlash reaches conservative ears they can swat it away and say hey, it’s an obvious joke. Because it was.
The point is the same as what they’ve done with other phrases. They’ll point out the unjustified alarmism and use it to take the power out of the Project 2025 criticism. This is the problem with sensationalist media, they’ll raise alarms about everything well before people should listen. Then people ignore them.
So, according to your logic, shut up and enjoy it ? If it is inevitable working against is bad ?
So our only choice is to accept it. That is your message ?
Not sure how you got that message at all. These aren’t powerful people. Bannon is washed up and Matt Walsh is just a commentator that says stupid things to annoy people constantly. They’re both mostly irrelevant and don’t deserve the alarm everyone here is sounding. It serves no purpose other than to drive hysteria for people already worried about the project, to anyone not yet worried they’re less likely to be worried and see you as unreasonable. So just ignore it.
"It'S jUsT a JoKe, BrO! TrUsT mE!"
I mean the trick worked, everyone is here panicking despite Walsh having no weight in these things and no insider information.
The statement was designed to scare you so he can make fun of you, that was about it and it worked perfectly.
If what you think is accurate, then I'll take ridicule for overreacting if it means Trump's actual administration thinks it's too terrible to touch as a result.
If everyone says that PJ2025 or anything resembling it is so terrible it can only be considered a troll bogeyman and should never be implemented for real, I'd take that.
Truth is, they didn't write up over 900 pages of this crap and produce a bunch of training videos just to 'troll'. They meant it. Now if, hypothetically, they are no longer 'in' with Trump and their ambitions are scuttled and they are trying to make lemonade out of it by extracting liberal tears over nothing, then sure, let them have those liberal tears and laugh about it so long as that stays the hell out of reality. I sincerely hope you are right, but even then, keep up the awareness and 'overreacting' to keep it as an unacceptable joke instead of what it was meant to be.
The point of what I said isn’t that Project 2025 is actually a joke, it’s that Walsh is making a joke about it being officially implemented (which we have no actual confirmation of) so that he can show the left as irrational when they fall for the obvious bait to report on what he said.
Do they plan to implement a lot of the project? Probably. Is it serious and scary? Yes. But that’s exactly why he knew people would overreact and he could manipulate them. It’s a smart move by Walsh unfortunately because it just makes the left seem paranoid about the project when it is in fact a real danger.