As some one who is in the middle class, I am a little concerned about Project 2025 and do want reassurance that both candidates see that overall it is not a good plan. Trump said it had some good things and some bad things, which is correct.

Why are you concerned about it though?

Supporters apparently wrote it. If those supporters are donors, you need
to be concerned. Also, we know that Trump does not like to disappoint his
most ardent supporters.

I was under the impression that the national GOP would select all the delegates.

The fewer times the national anything tells your state what to do, the better.

I don't trust any of the party, but I trust the RNC more than I trust the NY GOP. The RNC gave us Trump, while the NY GOP hands elections to Democrats ever
year. That's a big difference.

I don't think the RNC "gave" us Trump. In 2016, he was sort of forced on
them by the primary voters. In 2020, he was the incumbent. By 2024, Trump
and his allies have pretty much taken the RNC over, much as Hillary took
over the DNC in 2016.

You don't remember how much the established Republicans initially didn't like Trump?

I will do a lot for Trump but I won't protest for him. If the Democrats cheat, >there's nothing I can do about it. They cheated before, they'll cheat again, I >won't walk out my front door because of it.

I'm critical of people who overreact to things and I try to not do it myself.

That is good on you. I would not, either.


* SLMR 2.1a * Shh! Be vewy qwiet! I'm hunting wuntime ewwows!
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)

That is a problem to me, IMHO. The President isn't supposed to be the cultural and moral leader of the country. That is how Obama got elected.
We need to elect candidates who will set a strong fiscal agenda for the country, not to be our surrogate parents/ministers and not to lead us down some path into whatever their "Brave New World" (or "1984") vision is, consequences be damned.

This.

It's more akin to a European prime minister role, perhaps? General fiscal policy, foreign relations, military command, and pushing legislative priorities.

That is how I was taught that it is.

I abhor the amount of power that particular office has (and/or is perceived to
have), and I'm frustrated that the general attitude continues to appear to wan
to elevate it.

I believe the problem is how much power some people perceive the office of President to have, and agree giving the office too much power is a very bad idea. It is most certainly not what the framers of our Constitution, who
had just freed themselves from such an arrangement, had in mind when they
set up the checks and balances for our new government.

Now, can they set bad fiscal, foreign, or legislative policies/priorites that cause us problems? Yes they can but, in most cases, they cannot do it
alone, and we don't want to cause a situation where they can.


* SLMR 2.1a * WORK HARDER!... Millions on Welfare depend on YOU!
--- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
* Origin: capitolcityonline.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/HTTP (1:2320/105)