The battle over Donald Trump’s second presidency may not end when voters cast their ballots in November.

According to one former congressional adviser, some of the most consequential changes now unfolding in Washington could remain embedded in the American government and political system for years — potentially decades — even if Democrats score major victories in the upcoming midterm elections.

K. Ward Cummings, a former senior congressional adviser, issued that stark warning in a recent Newsweek opinion essay, arguing that opponents of Trump may be dramatically underestimating how difficult it would be to reverse the president’s second-term agenda.

His central argument is unsettlingly simple: winning one election may no longer be enough.

Cummings contends that many of Trump’s actions have been structured in ways that could make them politically, legally or financially difficult to unwind once they are fully implemented.

The implications stretch from the federal workforce to presidential power, from the physical transformation of Washington to the machinery of government itself.

And some of those changes are already becoming visible.

Perhaps the most literal example is construction at the White House.

Trump has aggressively pursued a massive new ballroom complex on the White House grounds, part of a broader effort to reshape the physical appearance of the presidency. In late August, the Supreme Court allowed construction on the roughly $400 million project to continue while legal challenges proceed. Critics argue the project bypassed Congress, while Trump has defended his renovations as necessary improvements to an aging presidential complex.

Trump himself has spoken openly about the permanence of some of his building projects.

During an August tour of White House renovations, he emphasized that some of the changes were designed to last far beyond his presidency.

That permanence is precisely what worries his critics.

A future administration may strongly oppose Trump’s decisions, but reversing completed construction, rebuilding eliminated institutions or recreating a dismantled bureaucracy is far more difficult than simply signing a new executive order.

The federal workforce may be the most consequential example.

The Trump administration has dramatically reduced government employment during his second term. Reuters reported in August that the federal workforce had fallen roughly 12% between 2024 and 2026 as the administration pursued layoffs, restructuring and changes to civil-service protections. Unions have challenged some of those measures in federal court, arguing they undermine the merit-based career system.

At the Department of Agriculture alone, more than 15,000 employees departed under administration initiatives, according to litigation surrounding a broader restructuring of the agency.

Cummings argues that rebuilding such capacity would present an enormous challenge.

Even if a future Congress wanted to restore eliminated jobs, offices and regulatory functions, lawmakers would face questions about cost, recruitment and political support. Institutional expertise that disappears today cannot always be recreated quickly tomorrow.

That is why Cummings believes Democrats would need far more than a narrow House majority to fundamentally change course.

A Democratic-controlled House could launch investigations, subpoena officials and scrutinize administration decisions. But without control of the Senate — and ultimately the presidency — its ability to reverse major policies would remain limited.

The political arithmetic becomes even more daunting when considering the 2028 election.

Cummings argues that Democrats may need victories not only in both chambers during the 2026 midterms but again two years later, alongside winning the White House, to mount a sustained reversal of Trump’s agenda.

That makes November 2026 something larger than an ordinary midterm election in his telling.

It becomes the first stage of a much longer political battle.

His argument comes as Trump remains deeply polarizing nationally. In August, Reuters/Ipsos polling placed the president’s approval rating at 33%, matching one of the lowest points of his presidency.

Yet Cummings warns that opposition alone will not necessarily produce the coalition Democrats need.

He identifies Black turnout, disaffected Latino voters and independents as crucial constituencies — but argues Democrats will also need a compelling message extending beyond resistance to Trump.

That message, he says, must ultimately be about something Americans have increasingly struggled to find in modern politics:

Hope.

Not merely promises about prices, government programs or political investigations, but confidence that working hard can still produce a better life — and that the country’s future can be better than its present.

For Cummings, that may be the deepest damage of all.

Buildings can eventually be renovated.

Government agencies can eventually be rebuilt.

Policies can eventually be rewritten.

But rebuilding faith in institutions — and persuading Americans that the future still belongs to them — could prove far harder.

And if his warning is correct, November will not mark the end of the fight over Trump’s legacy.

It may only be the beginning.