Media and Democrat Fearmongering about Project 2025 Has Led to the Unraveling of Left-Leaning Women

Media and political elites have driven a wave of hysteria over Project 2025, leaving women on the left in a state of public panic.

We are just about a week out from Trump's historic win as the 47th president of the United States. While many of us, myself included, are celebrating and feeling optimistic about what the future may bring, there’s also a torrent of fear and anxiety across our social media feeds.

A significant portion of this anxiety is displayed publicly on social media by women, such as mothers who have projected their anxiety onto their children and women who have shaved their heads to "fight the patriarchy," symbolizing their joining to the 4B movement, a feminist movement originated in South Korea. They have made pacts to wear blue bracelets as a signal to one another that they’re not one of the “bad” women who voted for Trump. In a viral video, a young woman laid out a sort of feminist prep list, urging people to stock up on Plan B, delete their menstrual tracking apps, avoid marriage, and steer clear of having children.

The core of their fears is rooted in the lies perpetuated by the Democrats and the Media regarding Project 2025 and how it is a supposed blueprint for Trump’s plan to subjugate women.

It’s clear that much of the public remains misinformed about what Project 2025 truly entails—and where Trump himself really stands on it.

This article aims to clarify the purpose of Project 2025, debunk the most sensational claims surrounding it, and provide a reality check on Trump’s actual plans, which are transparently laid out in Agenda 47.

What is Project 2025? Dispelling the Myths

First things first: Project 2025 is not Trump’s manifesto. This document, drafted by the Heritage Foundation, is a thousand-page compilation of policy proposals aimed at advancing a conservative vision for America. It includes 700 policy ideas on a range of issues, from immigration reform to government restructuring. But here’s the kicker—Trump had no hand in writing, approving, or even reading it. He’s on record multiple times, saying he has no interest in the document and purposely hasn’t read it to maintain his independence.

Some of the more insane claims about Project 2025 have become rallying cries among left-leaning women. For instance, it’s been falsely circulated that Project 2025 includes policies to track women’s menstrual cycles to monitor for possible abortions—an idea so absurd it originated in satire. Claims of a "period passport" have been debunked by multiple fact-checkers, but the narrative persists. These rumors, stoked by media outlets and amplified by Democratic talking heads, have led many to panic unnecessarily.

Additionally, there are baseless fears that Trump plans to ban IVF, though he has publicly supported IVF and even floated the idea of requiring insurance companies to cover it. Then there’s the persistent rumor that Trump will enforce a national abortion ban. Trump has been clear on this: the Supreme Court sent the issue back to the states, and he’s not planning to change that. Yet, the Democrats have crafted a version of Project 2025 that plays to these fears, completely misrepresents the policy proposals of Project 2025, and falsely assigns the document’s recommendations directly to Trump’s agenda.

In fact, Project 2025 was a primary talking point during the DNC convention, which was a feature in many speakers' speeches, and for some, it was a literal prop. Mallory McMorrow, a 37-year-old state senator from Michigan, brought out a giant copy warning about the "dangers" of Project 2025 (she also went viral for her lizard lip licking, but let’s not get distracted) and assigning ownership directly to Trump.

In reality, Project 2025 is a conservative think-tank’s exercise in policy—not the script for a Trump-led regime.

Project 2025 was never crafted exclusively for the Trump administration or even with the 2024 election in mind. Its roots trace back to the 1980s when the Heritage Foundation first published its "Mandate for Leadership," a collection of policy recommendations intended to guide conservative governance. This mandate has been updated periodically since then, with Project 2025 representing the latest iteration, refreshed with policies reflecting current challenges.

This isn’t the sinister, premeditated scheme that Democrats and the media would have us believe; it’s simply a longstanding practice for conservative think tanks.

The Left has its own versions of this, with organizations like the Center for American Progress and Third Way developing policy proposals and talent pipelines for Democratic administrations. Third Way’s "Moderate Power Project," for example, aims to build a database of progressive professionals ready to staff Democratic offices, much like Heritage’s personnel network. Far from being unusual, these practices are a normal part of political strategy across the spectrum, not some shadowy scheme to undermine democracy.

Misinformation: The Media’s Role in Crafting Narratives

If Project 2025 is merely a policy proposal from a think tank, how did it become the latest bogeyman in the anti-Trump arsenal? The answer lies in the media’s longstanding antagonism toward Trump and the public’s seemingly endless appetite for scandal. The mainstream media has, time and again, crafted narratives that conflate speculation with fact, adding fuel to the public’s mistrust.

---

---

Consider the ongoing saga of Trump’s alleged ''dictatorship" plans. Back in 2023, Sean Hannity asked Trump in a Fox News town hall whether he would avoid "abusing power" if re-elected. Trump, in typical cheeky fashion, quipped, "Except for day one," referring to his intention to swiftly address the border crisis and energy production. A joke? Obviously. But within hours, the media published headlines twisting his words to imply he was announcing a dictatorial takeover.

The public isn’t given context, only sensationalized soundbites. A nuanced response from Trump—one that even included a laugh and clarification—becomes "proof" of a "Day One Dictatorship." What’s more telling is that the Biden campaign immediately capitalized on this narrative, sending out emails warning of "Donald Trump: Day One Dictator." Never mind context; the message was clear: fear sells, and this latest story was worth its weight in gold.

Trump’s Real Plan: Agenda 47

While the media spins conspiracies around Project 2025, Trump’s actual agenda, Agenda 47, has been publicly available for months on his website. Here, Trump outlines his priorities on the economy, border security, and government reform in clear terms, offering detailed policies rather than ambiguous plans. Unlike Project 2025, Agenda 47 is specific to Trump, crafted directly by his team, and includes explicit goals and timelines.

One might wonder why Trump’s actual plan doesn’t get more attention. The answer is simple: it’s hard to stoke fear when you’re dealing with tangible, transparent policy goals that millions of Americans actually support.

The "Guilt by Association" Fallacy

Even as Trump disavows Project 2025, critics point to his association with people who may support the document as "proof" that he’ll adopt its more extreme proposals.

Many of these associations that Democrats point to are simply a by-product of running in Republican and Conservative circles. It is not surprising that individuals who are active in Republican politics have had some relationship with the Heritage Foundation.

Yet, guilt by association is hardly a fair assessment of anyone’s plans. Many individuals in Trump’s orbit have zero connection to Project 2025, including prominent allies like Vivek Ramaswamy, Elon Musk, RFK Jr., and Tulsi Gabbard. They may share a general conservative vision, but their alignment with Trump on specific policies is diverse.

It’s a ridiculous classic media tactic to suggest that merely knowing someone who likes a policy means endorsing that policy. If we’re going to apply that logic, it’s worth considering how often politicians on the Left are rarely held accountable for the extreme views of their allies. The double standard is striking.

Addressing the Truths: Reproductive Health Policies and Project 2025

In the realm of reproductive health, Project 2025 does recommend significant changes. It advocates for a redefined mission at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to prioritize "the health and well-being of all Americans from conception to natural death." This stance aligns with the belief that life begins at conception. Additionally, Project 2025 suggests the FDA reevaluate abortion medications and urges the CDC to promote fertility awareness methods, which involve educating women on how to track their ovulation cycles.

These are not mandates for Trump’s second term or part of his Agenda 47. They represent ideas from a broader conservative "wishlist"—not a script for a Trump-led government. Trump’s actual agenda is focused on economic revitalization, border security, and reducing federal overreach, not on implementing reproductive health mandates.

The Issues of Overlap: When Project 2025 and Agenda 47 Align—and When They Don’t

Some policies in Project 2025 do align with Trump’s Agenda 47, but these shared views shouldn’t be surprising. The conservative movement has long held certain positions, like dismantling the Department of Education or curbing foreign military intervention, which Trump and the Heritage Foundation both support. The Department of Education, for instance, has increasingly come under scrutiny for its bloated budget and failing test scores. In Project 2025, as in Agenda 47, dismantling it is viewed as a way to decentralize education and empower states.

Yet, on other issues, Trump diverges sharply from Project 2025. While the document adopts a more hawkish stance on foreign policy, Trump has continually advocated for reducing military intervention and prioritizing an America-first approach. He has repeatedly argued for a restrained, more isolationist stance on the military—a position that doesn’t always align with the broader conservative establishment.

Weaponizing Fear: The Political Expediency of Project 2025

Democrats, unsurprisingly, have been quick to weaponize Project 2025. It’s an easy target in a culture conditioned to accept sensationalized narratives without question. Kamala Harris and other Democrats now warned that Project 2025 represents a "fascist" future under Trump, recycling talking points that paint him as a dictator in waiting. This fearmongering serves a political purpose, but it also does a disservice to the American people, who deserve honest discourse rather than scare tactics.

The irony, of course, is that this is the same party that once labeled Mitt Romney, arguably one of the most moderate Republicans in recent memory, as sexist for saying he had "binders full of women" when hiring female staff. With Project 2025, they’re using the same tired tactics—this time with the volume turned up to eleven, hoping the fear sticks.

Conclusion: A Call for Accountability—and Individual Responsibility

The hysteria surrounding Project 2025 serves as yet another reminder of the dangerous cycle of media bias and political fearmongering. The resulting panic, particularly evident among left-leaning women, has reached the point of what can only be described as public mental breakdowns. These women are not reacting to reality but to the media and Democratic leaders who have sown literal misinformation to the point of borderline mental abuse. The constant drumbeat of fear has driven them to stockpile medications, delete health apps, swear off growing a family, and even shave their heads in symbolic resistance to an imagined threat.

Let’s be clear: this isn’t about protecting women’s rights. It’s about maintaining power through fear. The media and political class know that an uninformed public is easier to manipulate, and they’ve used Project 2025 to keep Americans in a state of constant anxiety. Yet, while these institutions bear a heavy responsibility, it’s also up to each of us as individuals to step outside our echo chambers and seek out the truth. Relying solely on narratives tailored to stoke our deepest fears only ensures that we remain misled, divided, and ultimately disempowered.

In a time when context is too often sacrificed for clicks, it’s on each of us to educate ourselves. Women, especially, should look beyond the fear-based narratives designed to manipulate their emotions. When we’re informed, we’re empowered. So, the next time you hear about Project 2025 or Trump’s supposed “war on women,” consider the source, question the context, and remember: sometimes, the real story is the one they don’t want you to hear.