Where I’m Coming From
I’m seeing a lot of pundits say, “Trump said he wasn’t involved with Project 2025,” and treat that like the end of the discussion. Here’s where I am on this.
I don’t chase conspiracies. I try to ground what I say in facts. When I share a post, I’ve usually spent time checking sources and clarifying what’s confirmed versus what’s my opinion. If something is just my read of the situation, I’ll say so.
Do I think Trump wants to rule like a strongman? Based on his words, allies, and actions, yes—I think he’s pushing in that direction. Am I doom-and-gloom about America being finished? No. I’m concerned, not panicked. The point isn’t to catastrophize; the point is to stay awake and speak up. Democracy requires participation—naming what’s happening while it’s happening.
When people tell me, “Vicki, he can’t do X because the Constitution won’t allow it,” I hear you. But law isn’t magic—it’s institutions, people, and power. If a president aligns Congress, the courts, and the executive branch, he can try to bulldoze guardrails. That’s not hopelessness; that’s realism. My goal with posts like this is to educate myself and others about the plans on the table and the levers they pull.
What Is Project 2025?
Project 2025 is a Heritage Foundation–led coalition blueprint for a conservative administration. Its four pillars are:
1) a policy book (the 900-plus-page Mandate for Leadership),
2) a personnel database of loyalists,
3) a Presidential Administration Academy to train them, and
4) a first-180-days playbook to execute on Day One.
What It Seeks to Do (Plain English)
• Concentrate executive power by expanding direct presidential control over agencies and weakening civil-service independence (reviving Schedule-F-style purges).
• Install loyal personnel fast via pre-vetted lists and movement-run training.
• Roll back rights and protections (reproductive health, LGBTQ+ protections, DEI).
• Impose a hardline immigration regime (narrower asylum, wider enforcement).
• Dismantle parts of the regulatory state (climate, consumer, workplace safeguards).
• Recast education and culture policy toward their ideology, including shrinking federal roles they dislike.
As a Christian, Why This Offends My Faith
For the record: I’m a Christian. And I am deeply appalled that people who claim the name of Christ would champion a government blueprint like Project 2025. Jesus never told us to coerce people into holiness or legislate belief. He told us to love our neighbors, serve the least, and reject domineering power (“not so among you,” Matthew 20:25–28). The early church spread by witness, not force (John 18:36). So when a political movement wraps itself in Christian language while pushing policies that centralize power, curtail rights, and punish out-groups, I’m going to say plainly: that’s not the way of Jesus.
Clarity matters here: the Heritage Foundation itself is a conservative policy shop, not a church. But many groups in the Project 2025 coalition are explicitly Christian-right organizations (think Family Research Council, First Liberty Institute, Concerned Women for America, Alliance Defending Freedom). When faith is used to sell authoritarian policy, Christians should be the first to push back.
Scripture
Matthew 20:25–28 (KJV)
But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.
John 18:36 (KJV)
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Why They Believe This
Project 2025’s architects argue that “the bureaucracy” is captured by liberal elites and must be purged so a strong executive can “restore order.” In practice, that means:
• treating career agencies as an enemy to be replaced with loyalists;
• using state power to enforce a narrow moral agenda;
• shrinking or neutralizing agencies that produce outcomes they dislike (civil rights, climate, public health, education).
Some leaders cast this in civilizational—even religious—terms (“a second American revolution”). That’s why the rhetoric reads like culture war with a theological gloss.
Authoritarianism, Plainly
A democracy makes room for disagreement and alternation in power. Authoritarian rule concentrates power in one leader or faction and seeks to sideline or punish opponents. So yes—calls to “purge” perceived liberals from the civil service and stack agencies with loyalists read as authoritarian, not democratic. That’s not keeping government neutral; that’s trying to make it one-party.
Trump and Project 2025—The Reality Check
Trump publicly claimed he had “nothing to do with” Project 2025 during the campaign. Since then, his orbit has embraced its authors and aims—most notably Russell Vought—while advancing actions that mirror the blueprint. Whatever label he prefers, the alignment is obvious.
Where the Public Stands
Polling throughout 2024 found Project 2025 unpopular once people learn what’s in it. Multiple surveys showed broad opposition across independents and moderates. The mandate here isn’t popular.
Not Doom—but Duty
I’m not here to catastrophize. I’m here to be clear-eyed. If this isn’t the government you want, then:
• Speak up—publicly and directly with your representatives.
• Vote in every election, big and small.
• Support watchdog and civil-liberties groups doing the legal work.
• Push back—graciously, firmly—when friends share misinformation.
Hope isn’t naïve optimism; it’s action. Whatever you think of Trump personally, Project 2025 is the governing path on offer from his circle. We don’t have to accept it in silence.
Notes from the edge of the system 