Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
No. of Recommendations: 7
Heather Cox Richardson has a typically well-documented essay on Trump's knowledge of and involvement with the creation of Project 2025.
https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/july-1... "On a right-wing podcast yesterday, Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts said that Trump’s agenda and Project 2025 have “tremendous” overlap. “There are some quibbles and differences of opinion here and there, which not only is okay, but it's actually good,” Roberts said. “I mean, we're gonna be able to sort those out once the presidential administration declares what their priorities are.” He said that Trump’s attempt to distance himself from the project was “a political tactical decision.” Media Matters uncovered a video in which Project 2025 director Paul Dans said that Trump is “very bought in with this.”
The Heritage Foundation, the key author of Project 2025, is a sponsor of the Republican National Convention.
Today the Heritage Foundation preemptively accused the Biden administration of cheating in the 2024 election and warned that Biden might try to hold the White House “by force.” It said that Biden and his administration could “circumvent constitutional limits and disregard the will of the voters should they demand a new president.”
https://www.mediamatters.org/project-2025/heritage...
https://www.mediamatters.org/project-2025/unearthe...
No. of Recommendations: 5
No. of Recommendations: 1
"On a right-wing podcast yesterday, Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts said that Trump’s agenda and Project 2025 have “tremendous” overlap.
Of course it does. That's how it got made. They started with all of Trump's agenda. They then just added some stuff onto that Heritage thinks would be a good idea, so that they could try to lend credibility to their own ideas within MAGA world.
It's like if Justice Democrats (or some other group) took Biden's actual agenda, then added their stuff to it. Say, replacing private health care with a British style NHS, nationalize all the energy companies, and massive reparations to minorities. There would be a ton of overlap with Biden's actual agenda.
But no one would think that Biden supported those other things, just because Justice Democrats said that this was their plan for a second Biden Administration and gave it a name like "Agenda 2025." Because Biden's going to follow his own agenda and ignore JD's additions. JD doesn't have any particular sway with him, and he's not going to nationalize XOM just 'cause they published something that added that into the list of his own ideas.
No. of Recommendations: 1
One of the architects of P2025 was a Trump staffer before. It would be easy to tie him into it via "guilt by association". I know it's a logical fallacy, but most voters couldn't tell the difference (unfortunately).
No. of Recommendations: 2
One of the architects of P2025 was a Trump staffer before. It would be easy to tie him into it via "guilt by association". I know it's a logical fallacy, but most voters couldn't tell the difference (unfortunately).
Not just one - many of them were. Not surprisingly, when Trump was turfed out of office, a fair number of his former staffers landed at GOP think tanks. Which is what usually happens when the WH changes parties.
The problem with "guilt by association" like this is - again - Trump is an egomaniacal narcissist. He doesn't form teams, he doesn't form associations, he doesn't have loyalty to his underlings or build teams to accomplish things. There's no one he trusts or relies on or is a close confidante. Everything is transactional, and he'll throw even his closest former staffers under the bus in a second on a whim.
So if a Trump staffer participated in Project 2025, voters will intuit - correctly - that this means absolutely nothing to Trump. Trump will not think, "Oh, this person that I esteem has put work into this product, so I should give it more consideration than if a stranger had done, out of deference to the service this staffer has shown me." And voters are not likely to think he will.
No. of Recommendations: 5
The problem with "guilt by association" like this is - again
Al. You’re being too literal.
Dukakis didn’t personally open the door for Willie Horton. He wasn’t even at the jail. In fact, he wasn’t even the guy who started the program the let Willie out. But he was tied to it because he supported a program that allowed incarcerated people to get furloughs as a way to rehabilitate them into society. Third or fourth degree of separation. It Does Not Mattter .
“Her emails.” I can’t count how many Republicans, high ranking ones, had the identical or similarly identical set up. Dick Cheney. Reince Priebus. Jared Kuchner. KT McFarland. Steve Bannon. It’s the incessant repetition that does it, not the factual text of it.
“Vince Foster”
“WMD”
“Saddam was behind 9/11”
“Benghazi”
Do you really not understand how this works?
No. of Recommendations: 2
Do you really not understand how this works?
Yes, I do. You can tie someone to a negative thing if there's a connection which fits into or supplements, rather than contradicts, a voter's perception of a candidate.
The key is that Dukakis supported the furlough program, and was a Massachusetts liberal Democrat to boot. So it was easy to tie him to Willie Horton. The story was consistent.
"Her Emails" is the same thing - they fit things that voters were inclined to believe about Clinton, that she might be a little dodgy about following the rules that other people had to follow. Because she did the thing. She had the private email server, so it was easy to paint her with the idea that she had done something wrong with that email server.
But with Project 2025 and Trump, the story doesn't check out. It's not consistent. The story doesn't mesh. Of course, Trump didn't do anything with Project 2025 or Heritage, and I find it completely credible that he regarded both of them as too unimportant to notice or pay attention to, even if someone mentioned them to him.
But the key is that it's completely out-of-character for him to get involved with a think tank at all, unless there was money to be made from it. His entire political identity is based on not being accepted by those types of traditional GOP institutions - he's the oaf that the Heritage folks would have made fun of, had he not been elected President and changed the game.
We can see why Clinton would want an email server, or why Dukakis might support a furlough program - but there's no possible story you can tell for Trump to get involved with a pencil-neck poindexter old-school conservative think tank type thing. It's exactly the opposite of what Trump would do! A scheme to defraud his supporters, a plan to siphon money from his PACs into his pockets....sure. But Trump getting involved with a think tank to promote policy statements? It's the most un-Trumpy thing imaginable.
If you want to run an ad campaign claiming that Trump would implement a national ban on abortion, even though he says he doesn't want that, then do that. You can! It's not the most supportable claim - but no one's going to stop you, and he did kill Roe v. Wade. The Project 2025 stuff is just an out-of-key note that clashes with the story you're telling about Trump - there's no need for it.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Yes, it means absolutely nothing to Trump. But it might mean a lot to some segment of voters. And, as LBJ once said, "I just want to see him deny it".
No. of Recommendations: 7
“Vince Foster”
“WMD”
“Saddam was behind 9/11”
“Benghazi”
Swiftboating.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Of course, Trump didn't do anything with Project 2025 or Heritage,
But Heritage says otherwise.
No. of Recommendations: 3
But Heritage says otherwise.
Do they? Could you provide a link where they actually say that, specifically?
What Heritage actually did was just copy of all of the things that Trump has said he wants to do, mixed in some stuff that they wanted, and took that repackaged product and hawked it in an effort to seem relevant and important again.
It didn't work. "Project 2025" was published a year and a half ago, and was almost entirely ignored by everyone. No one of any importance in its target audience - Republicans and conservatives - was taking it at all seriously. No one who mattered was taking up the offer to let Heritage, rather than people who actually had power in the party, set the agenda.
Mostly that's because, who the F is Heritage any more? They were an important part of the academic conservative think tank apparatus providing legitimacy to the old guard conservative movement. They were useful and important during the Buckley-era effort to expunge the whackjob Bircherists and make the conservative movement "respectable" in the Chambers of Commerce and country clubs. Trump destroyed that. His target isn't the elite, but the "hobbits" that Steve Bannon derided. And the party has shifted to right-wing populism, consigning Heritage's positions to the dustbin of history. So Project 2025 was an effort by Heritage to bend the knee to Trump, to show they could ape and mimic a lot of what he wanted to do anyway.
But they couldn't even do that right. They tried to preserve some of that old-guard conservative stuff that Trump disdains (Trump doesn't want to drown government in a bathtub, rather than in a pool of debt spending to make himself popular). And they packaged this as if they were writing the future of the party, which anyone with any awareness of where the GOP is these days knows is farcical. No one's writing the future of the party but Trump.
BTW - you know the real tell that Trump wasn't involved? That these people were off on their own? He isn't getting a cut. They're selling these books, and Trump isn't getting a piece of that money? They're moving product, and Trump's picture isn't on it? Does anyone actually believe that a thing that Trump was involved in would be structured like that? That's the clearest indication that these are people off on their own trying to capitalize on Trump, rather than the other way 'round.
No. of Recommendations: 4
albaby1, you are trying to apply logic and normalcy to Trump.
There is absolutely nothing logical or normal about Trump.
No. of Recommendations: 2
albaby1, you are trying to apply logic and normalcy to Trump.
There is absolutely nothing logical or normal about Trump.
I'm not trying to apply logic or normalcy to Trump.
Trump is a egomaniacal malignant narcissist, which means he doesn't act normally or logically. It also means that there are certain things that he is likely to do, and certain things that he is exceedingly unlikely to do.
One of the things he is exceedingly unlikely to do is take seriously the policy suggestions of an old-school academic think tank. Instead, he's going to just do what he wants. Only when the old-school academic think tank suggests policies that he was going to follow anyway, there will be overlap.
Heritage has very little influence in a world where the right-wing has shifted into populism, but they have even less influence in a world where Donald Trump is the nominee. There may never have been a politician less inclined to pay attention to a policy brief than DJT.
That doesn't involve a claim that Donald Trump is logical or normal. Just that the argument that Heritage's policy additions have any importance or significance in Trumpworld just doesn't make any sense.
No. of Recommendations: 7
Banksy provided the quote linking Trump to Project 2025 in the "Joe Biden Could..." thread. Here's the fuller quote:
“Our country is going to hell. The critical job of institutions such as Heridges [sic] to lay the groundwork. And Heridges [sic] does such an incredible job at that. 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, and that’s coming.” More...
The comments were made during an April 2022 keynote speech by Trump at a Heritage Foundation event where he was introduced by Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts. In that speech, he praised Heritage Board Chairman Barb Van Andel-Gaby as well as Heritage fellows Tom Homan and Mark Morgan—all of whom he now claims he doesn’t know at all.
“Already we have shown the power of our winning formula, working closely with many of the great people at Heritage over the four incredible years that we’ve worked with you a lot, and we were just discussing it with Kevin,” Trump said during the 2022 speech in his typical rambling style. “They’re going to work on some other things that are going to be very exciting, I think, Kevin, I think maybe the most exciting of all.”His -- and your -- claim that he would not fully embrace the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025 is silly.
https://newrepublic.com/post/183735/trump-caught-c...
No. of Recommendations: 4
Banksy provided the quote linking Trump to Project 2025 in the "Joe Biden Could..." thread. Here's the fuller quote:
Yeah - 'cause he was speaking to them at the time. He was blowing smoke at them because he was in front of them in that moment. It's the literal definition of lip service.
It's just utterly inconsistent with everything we know about Trump to think he would outsource developing his agenda for his second term to an establishment republican institution.
How is it even remotely consistent with all the terrible things we know about Trump to imagine him deciding, "You know what I need? A policy binder!" Or for him to take the next step, that once he concluded he needed a policy binder that he would think, "You know what? I'm going to outsource my policy agenda binder to an establishment republican think tank."
That's just....an absurd idea. It's easy to picture Trump standing in front of a group and lying to them about how their ideas about the country are important, and impossible to imagine Trump actually thinking that anyone else's ideas about the country are important.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Heritage has very little influence in a world where the right-wing has shifted into populism, but they have even less influence in a world where Donald Trump is the nominee
We're not trying to shift the right wing -too late for that We're trying to pick off independents,wobblers, etc. We don't care about those who can't be swayed - only those people who can be swayed, and we want all of them.
No. of Recommendations: 5
Heritage has very little influence in a world where the right-wing has shifted into populism, but they have even less influence in a world where Donald Trump is the nominee.
That may be true, but it doesn't matter. This is all about the intersection of politics and advertising. Political ads and campaigns don't have to strictly tell the truth the way one has to under oath in a courtroom. They often tell the truth without telling the whole truth. And that's what is being suggested here.
There IS overlap between what Trump wants and what is in Project 2025. That is, apparently, by design of the authors of Project 2025. So the campaign advertising would highlight that.
You say that both Trump and Project 2025 want to fill the civil service with political appointees instead of people hired for competence. (That is absolutely true.) You say that both Trump and Project 2025 want to use the DOJ to go after political enemies. (Again, true.) There's another couple of places where the two are in alignment which could be used as well. Toss in a couple of quotes from Project 2025, where they talk about it being the plan for the next Republican administration and where they support Trump for President. (Still true statements). Then you talk about other parts of Project 2025 that hit people more personally. Nationwide abortion ban. Tax cuts for the wealthy but not the average citizen. Eliminating the Department of Education, the EPA, NOAA. On that last one remind people that NOAA forecasts tornadoes and hurricanes - things that help people prepare for dangerous weather events. For the EPA, remind them of Superfund clean up sites, and/or similar things the EPA does that impact people directly. (Still sticking to truthful statements.) Point out how many of the people behind Project 2025 also worked in the Trump administration.
Close by saying both Trump and Project 2025 are bad for America. (In marketing words much better than this accountant can write.)
Vary the ad campaign up by tweaking it for House or Senate races - maybe personalizing it for the race by tying the Republican candidate to Trump and/or Project 2025 with some of their public statements or their voting record.
The target for these ads is not the hard core Trump-Republican base. They are not going to change their minds. The target for Presidential ads is the handful of swing states. Congressional ads would be targeted to those purple districts and states where the race is close.
So it just doesn't matter that Trump is unlikely to listen to Heritage on policy matters. They have some policies in common and that is good enough for an effective ad campaign.
--Peter
PS - I suspect Trump will listen to Heritage when it comes to filling all of the appointed posts that need bodies in them. He probably hasn't thought about that very much, but they have.
No. of Recommendations: 2
His -- and your -- claim that he would not fully embrace the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025 is silly.
Those quotes sound exactly like how Trump would speak to a somewhat friendly group. Tell them how good their stuff is, how great a job they're doing. Remember, he's selling himself to them. Trying to curry their favor with flattery. Flattery that could easily be complete lies. The moment he walks out the door and into his car, I can see him calling those folks a bunch of idiots and fools who are so easily duped by his brilliance.
So I take Trump's comments at that speech to the Heritage Foundation with generous doses of salt. I suspect he's lying to their faces and, like the rest of his cult, they're falling for the lies.
--Peter
No. of Recommendations: 1
The target for Presidential ads is the handful of swing states. Congressional ads would be targeted to those purple districts and states where the race is close.
Sure, but they won’t be very effective ads.
Again, I understand that it’s a simple matter to craft these ads, and that they don’t have to reach courtroom levels of proof for the insinuations they’re making. But they’re just not going to be effective if they contradict - rather than mesh with - what voters already believe about a candidate.
DJT is an oaf who wouldn’t have the attention span to read three pages of material if his life depended on it. He despised and disdained establishment republicans and the array of highfalutin’ credentialed policy wonks they forced him to work with - a mistake he won’t repeat again. And the pitch you’re going to go to voters with is…be afraid of the Heritage policy manual they publish every four years?
It’s not going to land with the voters you need to reach - the double-haters and the ones who non-Trump conservatives. Because it clashes with the stuff they already know about Trump.
Plus - it doesn’t add anything. Your ad man needs Project 2025 to communicate that the main position in the GOP wants to ban abortion nationally? You need to fire your ad man. There’s not a thing you mentioned in your laundry list that needs or even benefits from Project 2025.
If you want to motivate voters on abortion rights, just say in your ad that republicans want to ban abortion and use the Comstock Act to ban mailing of abortion drugs. You don’t need or benefit from spending half your ad time dealing with Heritage - just say the thing!
No. of Recommendations: 3
Do they? Could you provide a link where they actually say that, specifically?
I posted the quote and link by Heritage.
