Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (43) |
Author: WatchingTheHerd   😊 😞
Number: of 84349 
Subject: Re: Project 2025
Date: 07/25/24 5:50 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 6
Why attempt to incorporate Project 2025 into campaigning against Trump/Vance?

Any reference to Project 2025 is a great way to highlight the contrast between the things not just a fringe sect of Republicans but nearly ALL Republicans care about:

* rolling back voting rights protections
* adding more anti-democratic measures to State Constitutions to make legislatures LESS responsive to voters
* eliminating protections for civil service workers
* paralyzing the ability to create new meaningful regulations for safety, environment, health
* imposing nationwide abortion bans via federal law

and the real things all voters and politicians should be focused on. One great example is another "Project 2025," the effort to secure a new legal framework governing water rights between the states in the Colorado River basin, the American Indian tribes and Mexico. The existing treaty governing those rights was crafted nearly 100 years ago and is built upon statistics for rainfall and available water which are now off by probably twenty five percent. If a contract says 20 parties get to divide 100 units of water equally, it doesn't matter how hard each party jumps up and down screaming for its "5 share" it is legally entitled to if the ACTUAL total supply is only 75 instead of 100. There is NO WAY for all twenty parties to get their 5 in perpetuity without destroying the resource.

That existing legal agreement expires in 2025.

That's something every person living in the western Unitied States can grasp with a sound byte.

"While the Republicans devised a NEW Project 2025 to re-fight old battles and further redistribute power and wealth to the already powerful and wealthy, the rest of us would like to focus on NEW problems that are REAL problems that effect our very EXISTENCE and lead every citizen to ask the most basic question... Where is my next glass of drinking water going to come from? How much will it cost? Will I be able to afford it? Will I be able to drink it?"

PBS ran a 90 minute special program on the natural and legal aspects of the effort to negotiate a new water rights regime for the west.

YouTube: Tipping Point: Colorado River Reckoning (PBS NewsHour)

WTH
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to WatchingTheHerd here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (43) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community