Like many people, I have been stunned and angered by the pace and amount of change we are experiencing in the USA currently. Since the election, I have been reading, researching, listening, and learning to try to understand the process and the situation. As a political science major, marketer, retailer, and lifelong learner, I find it necessary to look at things from multiple perspectives. Not a fun, but a necessary, project.
Of course, as an out and proud gay man who is getting married in September, 2025, my inquiries and studies have taken on a greater significance. It is not just about me and my community, however, I truly want to understand the motivations and decision-making process that America used to make their choices.
It is obvious how I voted and why I voted that way (I hope). I am, however, a big D Democrat who believes in Democracy and the majority’s right to vote and choose.
Now, I am part of a not so silent minority. One made up of over 75 Million people who did not vote for our current President.
One topic I keep returning to in my analysis and research is the Heritage Foundation and Project 2025.
And, I have a simple question: Where is the counterpoint and strategic plan from the Left/Center/Democratic Party?
Where is our Manifesto?
Who should be driving the creation of a strategic plan?
The Democrats plan seemed to almost demonize Project 2025 and its draconian approach to preserving the white, heterosexual patriarchy, but why did we not have an alternative plan to discuss?? It is not enough to simply say Trust Us, and look our way. Why do we not have something tangible to rally around?
I spent time reviewing the history of the Heritage Foundation and the actual text of Project 2025.
The Heritage Foundation, established in 1973 as a counterpoint to liberal think tanks like the Brookings Institution, has played a pivotal role in shaping conservative policy and governance. Its influence peaked during the Reagan era with the "Mandate for Leadership," which guided much of that administration's actions. In recent years, the Foundation has been instrumental in judicial appointments, state Attorney General races, and a comprehensive 50-state local officials strategy.
Project 2025, developed by the Heritage Foundation, serves as a comprehensive conservative blueprint for governance. Its key components include:
Policy Recommendations: A broad set of proposals covering tax policy, regulatory reform, immigration, healthcare, national defense, and cultural issues.
Personnel and Staffing: Plans for system-wide reductions and efforts to hire and replace staff based on ideology.
Infrastructure for Transition: A blueprint for staffing the national government, judiciary, and state governments from day one.
Reversing Progressive Policies: Utilizing executive orders and other means to change course, especially in areas of civil rights and social justice.
Upon assuming office, President Trump implemented several executive orders and personnel decisions that closely align with Project 2025's objectives. Notable actions include:
Environmental Policy: Withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, emphasizing a departure from international climate commitments.
Immigration: Heightened enforcement measures, including the deployment of National Guard troops to the border and suspension of refugee admissions.
Government Restructuring: Efforts to reduce bureaucratic influence and reclassify federal employees, aiming to shrink the government's size and scope.
Furthermore, several key authors and contributors of Project 2025 have been appointed to significant roles within the administration, indicating a direct implementation of the project's vision. For instance, Russell Vought, a top architect of Project 2025, is expected to lead the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the agency responsible for developing the president’s proposed budget and executing the president’s agenda.
With that foundation in place, I return to my thesis question and several key areas for consideration.
1. Where is the Alternative?
Unlike the Right, which has institutions like Heritage developing long-term strategies, the Left lacks a central ideological and organizational framework. The Right’s think tanks, legal organizations (Federalist Society), and grassroots networks have worked in tandem for decades.
While groups like the Center for American Progress (CAP) and the Roosevelt Institute exist, they have not played as decisive a role as Heritage.
The Democratic Party itself often operates in a reactionary mode rather than proactively shaping policy over a 10-20 year timeline.
2. Who Should Be Driving the Strategy?
The party leadership should be spearheading a long-term vision, but as you noted, many leaders are too focused on personal legacy rather than movement-building.
Think tanks, grassroots organizations, and political operatives should collaborate to create a Project 2025 alternative.
Deep-pocketed donors need to be convinced that long-term investment is necessary beyond election cycles.
3. Key Elements of a Counter-Strategy
Policy Blueprint: A progressive/centrist equivalent of Mandate for Leadership that outlines executive, legislative, and judicial strategies.
Institutional Development: Funding and strengthening progressive/centrist legal groups, media outlets, and grassroots organizations.
Leadership Pipeline: A talent pipeline for judges, executive branch staff, and state/local officials—modeled on the Federalist Society’s playbook.
Marketing and Messaging: The Right excels at framing issues in simple, effective terms. The Left needs a sharper, emotionally resonant, values-based message that reaches rural, middle-class, and centrist voters.
50-State Strategy: The Right has spent years winning local offices, influencing education policy, and shaping judicial appointments. The Left must adopt a similar approach, investing in local and state races.
4. Challenges to Overcome
Infighting & Fragmentation: The Left has multiple factions that compete rather than collaborate.
Urban vs. Rural Divide: Messaging and policies need to address concerns of rural and working-class voters, not just urban progressives.
Complacency: Democrats often assume demographic shifts alone will secure future victories. The Right shows that organizing and messaging can shift political landscapes.
5. Call to Action
Who is willing to build this strategy? It will take leaders from multiple sectors—policy, business, academia, grassroots activism—to unify and push forward.
Where is the political “think tank” that is crafting this roadmap?
How do we fund and structure this for long-term impact rather than just reacting to each election cycle?
Overcoming internal divisions, bridging the urban-rural divide, and combating complacency are essential steps toward building a cohesive and effective progressive movement. By uniting leaders from various sectors and focusing on long-term goals, progressives can develop a strategic plan that offers a tangible alternative to conservative initiatives like Project 2025.
In conclusion, the conservative movement's success in implementing Project 2025 underscores the importance of strategic planning and cohesive action. For progressives to effectively counter such initiatives, a comprehensive and unified strategy is imperative.
I am ready, willing, and able to support any coordinated effort. I am watching for signs of who will step up to lead, fund, and participate in this project and process.
What do you think?
Jim
