321

Donald Trump’s running mate promoted a radical anti-abortion report from the same conservative think-tank behind Project 2025.

The controversial Project 2025 report has been otherwise disavowed by the Republican campaign and Trump personally after its sweeping proposals for reforms should the GOP secure victory in the November polls came to the public’s attention.

Back in 2017, when J.D. Vance was only just getting into politics, the New York Times reports the Ohio senator “championed” a collection of 29 essays compiled by the Heritage Foundation, the conservative organization behind the highly controversial Project 2025 initiative.

Described as a “wish list” of changes to be enacted by the next conservative U.S. president, Project 2025 contains a number of extreme policies, ranging from massive curtailment of reproductive rights and bans on ‘woke propaganda’ in schools to placing the entirety of the federal bureaucracy under direct presidential control.

Though the Trump campaign has denied any ties to the initiative, with the Republican candidate himself saying “I have no idea who is behind it,” reports have since revealed how at least 140 former Trump employees were involved in drafting the 900-page document.

Much of Project 2025’s vision for a second Trump presidency is keenly reflected in the 2017 collection of essays previously endorsed by Vance. These included an article suggesting that ideally, abortion would eventually become “unthinkable” in the U.S. amid growing restrictions on access to the procedure, as well as a piece slamming fertility treatments for “luring” women into thinking it was acceptable to have children later in life—a sentiment that particularly resonates with Vance’s much-derided recent characterization of Democrat supporters as “childless cat ladies.”

The collection is even prefaced with an introduction from Vance himself, in which he described it as an “admirable” volume, representing “an important effort in advancing [a] conversation” about “our country’s most difficult and intractable problems.”

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Myxomatosis@lemmy.world 45 points 2 months ago

It’s become sofa king clear that we must keep Vance away from the White House, no matter what terms you may couch this warning in.

[-] DogPeePoo@lemm.ee 24 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

JUST SAY NO TO MAO ZE-DON

KEEP VANCE OUT OF YOUR PANTS

[-] futatorius@lemm.ee 16 points 2 months ago

"Architects" sounds so much more professional than "plotters."

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 2 months ago

BuT tRuMp Is cOmPlEtElY UniNvOlVeD!!

I'm so tired of this timeline.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

Couch fucker wants to control what consenting adults do

this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2024
321 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19138 readers
4179 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS