It is the question that basically defined the 2024 election cycle and honestly hasn't slowed down much since. If you’ve spent any time on social media or watching the news over the last year, you’ve seen the name Project 2025 tossed around like a political hand grenade. Some say it's a secret manual for a dictatorship. Others claim it's just a routine policy book from a think tank. But the real kicker—the thing that keeps everyone arguing at Thanksgiving—is whether Donald Trump actually supports it.
The answer is... complicated. It's a "yes and no" situation that requires looking past the 30-second soundbites.
On one hand, you've got Trump on Truth Social claiming he has "no idea who is behind it" and calling some of its ideas "ridiculous." On the other hand, you have a 900-page manifesto written largely by the people who ran his first administration and are currently running his second. It's a weird dance. We're now well into 2026, and the data on what’s actually happening on the ground tells a much clearer story than the campaign trail denials ever did.
The Great Disavowal: Why Trump Said No
During the heat of the 2024 campaign, Project 2025 became a massive liability. Democrats were using it as a central pillar of their messaging, pointing to some of the more "extreme" proposals—like eliminating the Department of Education or using the Comstock Act to effectively ban abortion pills—as proof of a radical agenda.
Trump, ever the populist, saw the polling. He knew the brand was becoming toxic.
"I know nothing about Project 2025," he posted in July 2024. He followed that up by saying, "I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." It was a classic distancing move. He even went so far as to tell his team to have nothing to do with them "officially."
But here’s the thing: you can't really "not know" the people who worked in your own Oval Office.
The Personnel Problem
The math just doesn't add up on the "I don't know them" claim. CNN and other outlets tracked at least 140 people who worked in the first Trump administration who also had a hand in Project 2025.
- Russ Vought: Trump's former OMB Director. He wrote the chapter on the Executive Office of the President. He’s now back in the 2026 administration.
- Stephen Miller: The architect of Trump's immigration policies. His group, America First Legal, was a key partner.
- Tom Homan: The "Border Czar." He’s a contributor.
- Brendan Carr: The current FCC Chairman. He literally wrote the Project 2025 chapter on the FCC.
Basically, if Trump didn't know the people behind Project 2025, he wouldn't know half of his own current cabinet. It's more accurate to say he supported the people and the vibe, but didn't want the political baggage of the 900-page book itself.
Project 2025 vs. Agenda 47: Spot the Difference
If you want to understand the "does he or doesn't he" debate, you have to look at Agenda 47. This was Trump's official campaign platform. If Project 2025 was the "indie" record produced by his friends, Agenda 47 was the "studio album" released by the campaign.
The overlap is staggering.
Both plans called for the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. Both plans aimed to gut the "deep state" by reintroducing Schedule F, which would turn tens of thousands of career civil servants into at-will employees who can be fired by the President. Both talked about "patriotic education" and cutting federal funding for schools teaching "gender ideology."
💡 You might also like: Gun Control: What Most People Get Wrong About the Pros and Cons
Where they differed was often just a matter of degree or specific focus. Project 2025 was a deep-dive policy manual for nerds and bureaucrats; Agenda 47 was a list of punchy campaign promises. But now that we’re in 2026, the distinction has mostly vanished. The people who wrote the "nerdy manual" are the ones currently signing the executive orders.
What’s Actually Happening in 2026?
Real-world results matter more than campaign quotes. Now that the second term is in full swing, researchers are tracking how much of the "Mandate for Leadership" (the formal name for Project 2025) is actually being implemented.
Public Lands and Energy
The Center for Western Priorities recently released a report showing that the administration has already moved on over 80% of the recommendations regarding public lands. This includes fast-tracking oil and gas leases and rescinding Biden-era climate rules. This wasn't just a coincidence; the executive orders often mirror the exact language found in the Project 2025 blueprints.
Reproductive Health
This was the biggest point of contention. Trump repeatedly said he wouldn't sign a federal abortion ban, but Project 2025 suggested using the Department of Justice to enforce the Comstock Act. In 2025, we saw the administration take a "neutral" stance in court cases that allowed local jurisdictions to restrict the mailing of abortion pills—a move straight out of the Heritage Foundation playbook.
The Military and DEI
One of the most immediate actions taken in January 2025 was the executive order ending all diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs within the Pentagon. Project 2025 called for this explicitly. It also called for the discharge of transgender service members, which the administration began implementing via new "medical readiness" standards early in the term.
The Reality of "Support"
So, does Trump support Project 2025?
If you mean "did he sit down and read all 922 pages and give a thumbs up to every sentence," the answer is almost certainly no. Trump has always been a "big picture" guy who relies on his "generals" and loyalists to handle the details.
✨ Don't miss: Las Vegas Shooter Stephen Paddock: Why the Motive Still Evades Everyone
But if you mean "is he using the document as a framework for his second term," the evidence is overwhelming. He has hired the authors. He has signed the orders they drafted. He has pursued the goals they outlined.
The Heritage Foundation's president, Kevin Roberts, famously said the goal was "institutionalizing Trumpism." They built a machine, and when Trump won, he simply turned the key.
Nuance and Disagreements
It’s also fair to say he genuinely dislikes some parts. Trump is a populist who likes to be liked. He famously pushed back on some of the more restrictive social policies in the document because he thought they were "losers" at the ballot box. He’s more interested in the power aspects of the plan—the ability to fire bureaucrats and control the DOJ—than he is in some of the niche theological or economic theories buried in the middle chapters.
Actionable Insights: What This Means for You
Whether you're a supporter or a critic, the "Project 2025" era is no longer a hypothetical. It is the current governing philosophy of the United States. Here is what you should be watching:
- Watch the Federal Workforce: If you or someone you know is a federal employee, the implementation of Schedule F is the single most important thing to track. It changes the nature of government employment from "non-partisan professional" to "political appointee."
- Monitor the Courts: The administration isn't just passing laws; it's choosing which cases to defend and which to let fail. Watch the Solicitor General’s office for shifts in how the Comstock Act is interpreted.
- State-Level Response: Much of the Project 2025 agenda involves "returning power to the states." This means your local elections for Governor and State Legislature are now more important than ever for things like education standards and healthcare access.
- Energy and Costs: The "Energy Dominance" agenda is designed to lower fuel prices by gutting regulations. Keep an eye on your utility bills and local land-use permits to see if these macro-policies are hitting your wallet.
The debate over whether Trump "supports" the project is mostly a semantic game at this point. The people are the policy, and the people from Project 2025 are the ones in charge.
Stay informed by checking official White House executive order summaries and comparing them against the original "Mandate for Leadership" text. The transparency is there if you know where to look. Understanding the blueprint helps you predict the next move before it happens.