“In reality, Project 2025, an initiative put together last year by the right-wing Heritage Foundation to plan for the next GOP administration, was shaped by longtime close allies of Trump. Detailed planning for a second Trump term agenda along these lines is very real, and though the Project 2025 initiative itself has seemingly fizzled out, other groups have picked up the slack.
Furthermore, many of Project 2025’s key proposals — to centralize presidential power, crack down on unauthorized immigrants, deprioritize fighting climate change, and eliminate the Department of Education — are fully and openly supported by Trump.
Yet Trump’s intentions are less clear on a vitally important issue where Project 2025 made some particularly extreme proposals: abortion.
The project’s plan called for using presidential power to aggressively restrict abortions in several ways. Trump, wary of these proposals’ unpopularity, has said during the campaign that he won’t support some of them. He also evidently feels hesitant to outright disavow the social conservatives who have long been a key part of his base.”
https://www.vox.com/politics/373485/project-2025-abortion-ban-trump-comstock-mifepristone
“1) Trump has successfully associated himself with a message of economic nostalgia, heightening nonwhite Americans’ memories of the pre-Covid economy in contrast to the period of inflation we’re now exiting.
2) Trump and his campaign have also zeroed in specifically on outreach and messaging to nonwhite men as part of their larger focus on appealing to male voters.
3) Trump and his party have taken advantage of a confluence of social factors, including messaging on immigration and cultural issues, to shore up support from conservative voters of color who have traditionally voted for Democrats or not voted at all.”
…
“These three theories try to describe how Trump specifically has been able to improve his and the GOP’s standing among a growing segment of the American electorate. They place Trump as the central cause for the majority of this racial political shift. But would these dynamics still be happening if he weren’t involved?
There are signs that some of this shift may be happening independently of Trump. It could be a product of the growing diversification of America, upward mobility and changing understandings of class, and growing educational divides.
For example, as rates of immigration change and the share of US-born Latino and Asian Americans grows, their partisan loyalties may continue to change. Those born closer to the immigrant experience may have had more of a willingness to back the party seen as more welcoming of immigrants, but as generations get further away from that experience, racial and ethnic identity may become less of a factor in the development of political thinking.
Concepts of racial identity and memory are also changing — younger Black Americans, for example, have less of a tie to the Civil Rights era — potentially contributing to less strong political polarization among Black and Latino people in the US independently of any given candidate — and creating more persuadable voters in future elections.
At the same time, younger generations are increasingly identifying as independents or outside of the two-party paradigm — a change in loyalty that stands to hurt Democrats first, since Democrats tend to do better with younger voters.
Regardless of whether Trump just happens to be the right kind of populist at the right time of racial and ethnic change in America or if he’s a unique accelerator and contributor to the changes America is experiencing, November may offer more evidence that something has fundamentally changed in US politics. As America diversifies, it makes sense for its political parties to diversify too — and that poses a reckoning for Democrats in elections to come.”
https://www.vox.com/2024-elections/373535/3-theories-gop-donald-trump-nonwhite-voters-hispanic-black-latino-asian
Jon Stewart on Trump’s McDonald’s Shift & His “Enemy Within” Threat | The Daily Show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5KWZL1blWc
“NATO plans to coordinate the transport of a large number of wounded troops away from front lines in case of a war with Russia, potentially via hospital trains as air evacuations may not be feasible, according to a senior general.
The future scenario for medical evacuations will differ from allies’ experience in Afghanistan and Iraq, Lieutenant-General Alexander Sollfrank, the head of NATO’s logistics command, told Reuters in an interview.
In a conflict with Russia, Western militaries would likely be faced with a much larger war zone, a higher number of injured troops and at least a temporary lack of air superiority close to the front lines, the German general said.
“The challenge will be to swiftly ensure high-quality care for, in the worst case, a great number of wounded,” he said without specifying how many injured troops NATO would expect.
The planning for medical evacuations is part of a much broader drive by NATO, prompted by Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, to overhaul and boost its ability to deter and defend against any Russian assault.”
https://www.yahoo.com/news/nato-plans-large-scale-transport-112444519.html
https://reason.com/2024/10/20/kamalacare-is-just-bidencare/
“We don’t need a formal study to tell us that taking away sex workers’ ability to communicate online makes their lives worse—sex workers have been saying that for a decade now, since the federal government started taking down websites where they advertised (RIP MyRedBook, Rentboy, The Review Board, Backpage, and so on). But here’s a(nother) study saying exactly this.
For the study, published in the journal Social Sciences, researcher Melissa Ditmore and her team conducted a national survey of 440 sex workers, asking about how they used online platforms, how the use of these platforms affected their working conditions, and how laws like the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA)—which led to platforms removing and restricting sex worker accounts—affected their work lives. Survey respondents included folks who had engaged in webcam work, phone sex work, strip club work, pornography, independent escorting, street-based sex work, working at a brothel, working at a massage parlor, BDSM/fetish work, working for an escort agency, and other types of sex work.
Ditmore’s team found—unsurprisingly—that “platform policies and practices often remove and/or limit sex workers’ access to them, which, in turn, restricts their ability to earn income and compromises their capacity to live and work safely.””
…
”
Ten percent said deplatforming led to more interactions with law enforcement, and 11.5 percent said it led to more social service interactions.
Around 9 percent said deplatforming led to more interactions with madams/agencies/managers/pimps.
Around 8 percent said they experienced “exploitative work conditions” after deplatforming” and 6.7 percent said they experienced “abusive work conditions.””
https://reason.com/2024/09/04/deplatforming-doesnt-make-sex-work-safer/
“the four most prominent politicians in the country (sorry, Tim Walz) agree: U.S. Steel, a private company, should not be allowed to conduct a transaction with another private company unless the federal government agrees.
This is absurd—particularly because the deal is obviously in the best interest of U.S. Steel.
“We’ll admit that the competition for the dumbest economic policy is fierce these days—with prices controls on food, a 10% across-the-board tariff, and national rent control on the table,” opined The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board this week. “But opposition to the Nippon deal deserves careful consideration for this distinct dishonor given the deal’s manifest benefits and nonexistent harm.”
Indeed, Nippon’s plan to buy U.S. Steel gives the legacy steelmaker something that Trump’s tariffs and Biden’s blather about blue-collar jobs never could: A chance to actually become more competitive in the global marketplace. Among other things, Nippon has promised to invest $2.7 billion in revamping U.S. Steel’s plants.”
https://reason.com/2024/09/04/leave-u-s-steel-alone/
“Permitting reform isn’t just bureaucratic minutiae; it’s a critical, deeply moral issue for anyone who believes in free markets, individual liberty, and economic progress. Our permitting regime is a web of red tape that stifles innovation, slows growth, and leaves Americans poorer, less free, and increasingly frustrated with a government more interested in regulating than enabling prosperity.
This isn’t some esoteric topic for policy wonks; it’s about the real, tangible effects of overregulation on Americans’ daily lives. Housing costs, job availability, energy prices, and technological advancement all hinge on how our government handles permits. And right now, it’s failing miserably.
Take housing. Some areas like California and New York City face a crisis largely due to onerous permitting processes. Builders must navigate a Kafkaesque labyrinth of regulations just to break ground, assuming they are even allowed to build. These delays add years to construction and inflate costs by tens of thousands per unit.
This isn’t mere inconvenience; it’s a genuine disaster for middle- and low-income families priced out of the market. The American dream of homeownership is being strangled by red tape. Worse yet, Americans are priced out of lucrative labor markets because rents are so artificially inflated in job-rich cities.
But that’s just the beginning. Permitting processes are choking the energy sector. Important infrastructure—pipelines, wind farms, grid modernization—is being held up for years by endless environmental reviews, public comments, and lawsuits. Now, two judges have signaled to developers that permits which took years to obtain could be canceled on a whim if subjected to pressure from the climate activists.
This isn’t just bad policy; it’s economic sabotage resulting in higher prices, less reliable supply, and missed opportunities for cleaner, more efficient energy.
What about other infrastructure? Roads, bridges, and transit systems fail to get fixed when approval for repairs takes years or sometimes decades. An outdated, bloated process prioritizes procedure over results, making some projects obsolete before they begin. Meanwhile, the government wastes massive amounts of money on infrastructure subsidies when all we need is to allow people to build.
The free market thrives on innovation and speed, allowing swift responses to societal needs. The current system is its antithesis—slow, cumbersome, and designed to prevent change rather than facilitate it.
It’s not just harming businesses; it’s harming everyone. Imagine what we could achieve with reform: affordable housing, more jobs, lower energy prices, modernized infrastructure. We could unleash a new wave of American innovation and growth. Yet these reforms are repeatedly blocked by bureaucrats protecting their turf, politicians appeasing special interests, or activists who believe halting progress is virtuous.”
https://reason.com/2024/09/05/the-governments-permitting-regime-is-choking-the-economy/
“In July, the Dutch government expanded nationwide rent controls—which had already covered about 80 percent of rental units—to almost all remaining rental properties. Fully 96 percent of Dutch rental housing is now subject to rent caps.
A report from Bloomberg published last week details the results: Owners of rental properties are selling their buildings and getting out of the rental housing market.
The tenants of those units are being forced to try and find one of the few remaining market-rate units or purchase a home in the Netherlands’ hot housing market. In either case, home hunters face spiking prices and limited availability.
These results are what one would expect from rent control. The economic literature is unambiguous that when rent control effectively holds rents below market levels, the result is a shortage of available rental housing.
More honest boosters of rent control will argue that while the policy limits housing supply, it increases stability for tenants. Protected from sudden, unaffordable rent increases, renters are able to stay in their homes for longer.
But in the Netherlands, at least, rent control is having a pro-displacement effect. Tenants who had an affordable rental unit are now being forced to move.
Proponents of rent control like to wave away the problems created by the policy as something that can be fixed with better and/or more sweeping controls of rental housing.
In fact, different rent control designs just produce different problems.
Apply rent control to new construction, and developers build less rental housing. Apply rent control to existing rental housing and landlords sell out to owner-occupiers. Prevent landlords from taking their units off the market, and housing quality deteriorates. (In the long run, this also reduces supply by preventing the redevelopment of existing rental housing.)”
https://reason.com/2024/09/05/the-netherlands-rent-control-disaster/
“In the abstract, Americans don’t want a dictator. But if it’s their preferred leader, many are willing to throw checks and balances out the window so favored policies can be jammed through.”
https://reason.com/2024/09/06/voters-yearning-for-a-dictator-is-a-danger-to-the-country/