• TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    In order to avoid violating Rule 3 because we handicap ourselves with these rules and prevent calling a spade a space in service of ‘civility’, I’ll just say this.

    No. This poster is selling you a bill of goods. The vast majority, if not the sole entirety, of Project 2025 is authored by Republicans. It has supported Republicans and opposed Democrats pretty much its entire existance. A quick read of [its Wikipedia Article] should dissuade you from believing this poster’s BS. Why is this poster so vehement that the Dems are as bad as the Reps? Why is it so determined to peel your vote off from the Blue side of the aisle? Why is it willing to lie to you about Heritage Foundation and Project 2025?

    I can’t actually answer this because Rule 3 prevents us from accusing another poster of being a bot, paid actor, or, I assume, a shill, and it’s also not OK to come out and say another poster is a useful idiot. But I leave it to you, dear reader, to make the inference. Read the links. Trust your own feelings about Project 2025 and Trump. And ask: Who benefits when we split our votes multiple different ways while Team Trump keeps his core constituency under his banner? Here’s a big hit – the headline of this article is “GOP network props up liberal third-party candidates” – it’s Team Trump that benefits when we fall for those shiny objects.

    • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      ‘split the vote’ doesn’t exist. we are not democrats and would never vote for a Democrat even if there were no other options. Democrats have fully embraced numerous other Heritage foundation policies, most directly to ACA. And if you’ll notice, the DNC has spoken nothing of trying to defeat project 2025. In fact KOSA that recently passed the Senate 97 to 3 is an item that would be directly out of p2025.

      And trying to circumvent the bot rule by directly quoting it is indirectly violating the rule.