I was listening to a podcast in which the person being interviewed said that while the right talk a lot about “TDS” or Trump Derangement Syndrome, the thing they cautioned against even more was “Trump Depression Syndrome,” or a feeling of hopelessness in the face of Trump’s lawless actions, the murder of American citizens by masked ICE agents, pardoning insurrectionists, still refusing to work toward any sort of justice for Epstein’s victims, and an economy that has people feeling like they don’t have a lot of options. I’m probably feeling more hopeless than anything else, particularly in the wake of Renee Good’s murder. An administration that lies constantly to defend what should be obvious overreach and needless brutality should concern everyone, but it doesn’t.

I read a substack article in which William Kristol made a prediction for 2026 that could go one of five ways. Here are his predictions and probabilities:

  • 1 We turn the corner. He characterizes this as Trump’s administration becoming more chaotic (taking Greenland? cancelling midterm elections?), and Congress and SCOTUS finally step up to reign things in and act as the check on his administration that they are supposed to be. Europe steps in to help Ukraine, exposing Putin’s weaknesses. November mid-terms result in a blue wave that further checks Trump’s power, making him a true lame duck. The author pegs this at a 20% possibility. I would say less than 10%. Trump is nothing if not adaptive. He can slither out of checks and balances like nobody’s business.
  • 2 Light at the end of the tunnel. This is more of a “time marches on, but things remain about the same” scenario. Trump’s term ends in 2028, so we get closer to that date, and even if he does try for a third term, he cannot live forever. Kristol says 20% for this one as well. I would go higher, like 30%. Basically, like the Mormon church if/when there’s a bad leader, we all wait for the grim reaper to bail us out, just more or less ignoring the worst things because when the person is no longer the leader, we go back to normal.
  • 3 The status quo holds. In this scenario, 2026 goes about how 2025 did. Democracy holds, but just barely. Democrats narrowly win the house, but not the Senate, and SCOTUS continues to enable presidential overreach and immunity. Because Kristol sees this scenario as untenable with an increasing precarity to the balance of power, he thinks it’s more likely that things will break rather than remain as they are. Still, he gives it a 15% chance of going this way. I agree that this is likely how the mid-terms turn out (provided Trump doesn’t cancel them as he’s now saying he wants to do). I’ll say I’m at 10%.
  • 4 The slide continues. Public support for Trump actually ticks up. ICE continues to grow (due to budget increases and very lucrative pay to the worst humans on the planet–they are literally targeting avowed incels and arming them to the teeth, telling them they have full immunity to kill anyone who gets in their way). Hegseth continues to reshape the military. People don’t care enough, and gobble up whatever crumbs Trump throws them, believing that they are getting something worth having and not just empty promises and gutted healthcare. Kristol places this at 25% likelihood. I would go higher, like 40%.
  • 5 The lights begin to go out. The authoritarian momentum of Trump’s first year builds. All power ministries are completely taken over and compromised in terms of their mission. Trump invokes the insurrection act and uses it to terrorize voters, kill protestors, etc. Trump’s ambitions make it clear that there will be no peaceful or democratic transfer of power in 2028. Ukraine is forced into a bad deal or annexed into Russia, emboldening Putin against other Eastern European nations. Congress does nothing while SCOTUS continues to enable and protect their president. Kristol calls this a 20% likely scenario. I’m probably at 10%.

Now that’s just one author’s opinion, his predictions for 2026. He wrote that OP before Trump took over Venezuela, which probably shifts these percentages a little bit. And of course, unlike a handful of our readers and quite a few church members, Kristol is not a fan of Trump or the things he’s doing.

Conversely, I listened to an Ezra Klein podcast in which the Yuval Levin, a conservative thinker, talked about how nearly everything Trump has done comes with an expiration date. We think he’s done a lot, but he has not done it through legislation, so while it might be difficult to undo it (to change staff, reallocate funding, open new departments, etc.), it’s certainly not prevented by anything in law. As a demagogue, Trump’s ideosyncratic ideas and actions will mostly end with him. A JD Vance or Marco Rubio isn’t going to go around putting Trump’s name on buildings when he’s no longer in power, for example. They will follow their own agendas. That’s Levin’s perspective anyway, although the caveat is that norms have shifted. It’s acceptable to use the R slur again, for example. Congrats, conservatives. Your legacy is secure.

This conversation is interesting to me on many levels, but it also goes to the heart of something else we’ve discussed in other posts: the concept of organization change, leadership, and legacy. Legacy isn’t always what we hoped it would be. Sometimes we want to be remembered for one thing, but we are really remembered for something else. For example, I would say Nelson’s presidency will be remembered for two main things: 1) the two hour block, and 2) the temporary avoidance of the name “Mormon,” which will probably over time become a relic of the past. Yes, it impacts the church’s official materials, but literally no one cares like he did about this. Not even Oaks. It was pedantic and dumb. People aren’t likely to say that out loud, at least not yet, but casual use of the term Mormon will probably creep back in until it is in common parlance. We live in polite society, and eventually people will grow up and quit being offended by something so petty.

What I think Nelson would like to have been known for is all the temple announcements (which is giving Trump renaming the Kennedy Center vibes, IMO). Why do I think that will not be his legacy? Because the absolute majority of those temples will never be built. You can announce stuff all you want, but without a building permit and patrons to attend, the actual plans are up to your successors who might just decide that those announcements were impractical and premature.

As I think about other church leaders in my lifetime, I can do a similar exercise of what they wanted their legacy to be vs. what their legacy was. Here’s my take on a few:

  • Monson: 1) Dementia, 2) Prop 8, 3) Widows, 4) Ear-wiggling, 5) Picking Uchtdorf. What he probably wanted it to be was the widows.
  • Benson: 1) Book of Mormon focus, 2) “To the mothers in Zion” talk, 3) also dementia. What he probably wanted it to be was a hard turn to the right politically.
  • Hinckley: 1) “I’m a Mormon” campaign, 2) Larry King interview, and 3) smaller temples. What he wanted it to be? Probably something along the lines of more mainstream acceptance, but with a universalist bent. Those were the days.

Because of the way Mormon succession works, though, the real check on power for LDS leaders is memento mori. Whatever their pet peeves are get a brief day in the sun, but then are often quickly discarded, downplayed or undone by their successors. The King is dead. Long live the King.

  • How would you place the odds on Kristol’s five 2026 predictions for the US? Do you envision other scenarios that he did not cover?
  • Which Mormon leaders do you think had a different legacy than they wanted?
  • Which “legacies” have you seen discarded by successors in LDS leadership?

Discuss.