Looking Forward to 2026

Here's to the new year and all our hopes for it

December always makes me think of the Zora Neale Hurston quote “There are years that ask questions and years that answer.” I guess that whether this year asked or answered depends on your perspective. My sincere hope is that 2026 will contain better questions and more visionary answers.

In this episode, Sarah and I make a few predictions based on what we’ve seen so far this year. We walk through what we know the global calendar will bring, and we try to stay humble about what we don’t know. We wrap up by sharing the words that we’re using to set intentions for next year, a practice that always helps me refine my questions and shape my answers.

Thank you for sticking with us. We’re looking forward to another year of asking and answering alongside you. -Beth

Topics Discussed

• Predictions and Expectations for 2026

• Good Things to Look Forward to in 2026

• Outside of Politics: 2026 Words of the Year

Want more Pantsuit Politics? Subscribe to ensure you never miss an episode and get access to our premium shows and community.

Episode Resources

• Vanity Fair Goes to the White House: Trump 2.0 Edition (Vanity Fair)

• Feeling Old: 44 Is the First Big Aging Cliff for Millennials (The Cut)

Episode Transcript

Sarah [00:00:07] This is Sarah Stewart Holland.

Beth [00:00:09] This is Beth Silvers.

Sarah [00:00:11] You’re listening to Pantsuit Politics, and it is our last regular show of the year. And as is our tradition, we’re going to look ahead into the new year. We’ll share some of our predictions, hopes, fears, and end by sharing our words of the Year for 2026.

Beth [00:00:28] So we will be off for the next two weeks, along with our team, but don’t worry, we have some very special episodes for you. For 2025, we slow read the book Habits of the Heart, which we loved. And we talked about the book on our premium channels. We’re going to share all four of those episodes that we recorded in the main feed over the break so that if you didn’t join us there on Substack, you still get the benefit of the wisdom embodied in this book. And it is so relevant to what we’re living right now and a great book to set you up for thinking about what kind of life you want to live in 2026. So we hope you’ll join us for those episodes over the next two weeks. And then we’ll see you back here on our regular schedule in January.

Sarah [00:01:23] Next up, let’s talk about 2026. Beth, I thought it would be helpful to review some of the big events we know are coming in 2026. Obviously, there will be lots of unexpected happenings, but at least let’s orient ourselves around what we know is coming. I thought we could start globally. I think that Gaza and Ukraine will continue to be hot spots in the globe, and in Israel in particular. If they do not pass a budget by March, then they could have an election in Israel, either in June or otherwise in October. And Netanyahu is still on trial. So we don’t really know what that will look like. He has tried to get Trump involved, but it’s going to be a big year, no matter what, I think for Israel and deciding what the future in that country will look.

Beth [00:02:20] So many questions here. Can this ceasefire hold? It’s been bumpy. What will the future look like in Gaza? Who will step up? Who will invest? What will the security situation look like? And then I think what statement does Israel make to the world about the direction that it wants to take as a nation is really important because I am so concerned that what we’ve seen in Australia at Bondi Beach and the growing anti-Semitism around the world connected to Gaza is only going to get worse. I do not think that the view of Israel on the world stage right now, that sort of flattened social media view, is indicative of where the Israeli people are. So I’m glad that elections are coming at one point or another this year. And I hope that they have really good choices and a really robust national conversation about where the government is going there.

Sarah [00:03:17] Well, and we’re having a similar conversation in Ukraine. I am hoping in 2026 we see a ceasefire there as well. But I do think no matter what, we might see an end of Zelensky’s leadership. He has been not completely swept up in this corruption investigation, but his number two has been, he is now saying he will hold elections in the next 90 days if allies can guarantee the security of the election. But I just think that the difficulty of this moment and the frustration of the Ukrainian people and what I can only assume will be increased frustration in the face of inevitable sacrifices over the course of the ceasefire negotiation mean that you could see a shift. I don’t want him run out of town on a rail. And I’m not even mad at him. I just think that the difficulty of this particular leadership position means that it’s going to run its course. He’s not going to be in that position forever. And it seems like the Ukrainian people are frustrated. It seems like he is frustrated, allies are frustrated. It’s just an incredibly difficult position that Ukraine is in going into 2026.

Beth [00:04:45] I hope for him that he holds elections, that they go smoothly, that Russia doesn’t make those elections meaningless by interfering in profound ways. And I hope that he’s able to step aside graciously. I think he has done an incredible job. There is not going to be a perfect job done in a position like this or any leadership position, but what he has given to his country is tremendous. And also this was been grueling and awful and someone else should claim the mantle and try to figure out how to get some movement going forward here.

Sarah [00:05:23] I guess he could win because it’s not out of the realm of possibility that he could win if he decides to stand in any elections they have. But I just think that it seems that over the course of the war, sacrifices have had to be made. You’re not going to come out of a situation like this popular with everyone unscathed. And, look, I think broadly, I have concerns about Europe generally in 2026. I don’t know what the hell France is going to do. They’ve got to figure it out. They cannot keep rotating. I was reading and thinking about how Italy and France have changed positions. That Milani has stayed in power. I’m endlessly fascinated by her. I’m probably not even secretly a fan, just openly a fan. Because Italy has always been a tough not to crack, but she seems to have cracked it. She’s got their deficit under control. She’s staying in leadership. Meanwhile, France the like steady position in Europe is the one that’s crumbling. I think labor is struggling in UK. There’s going to be a big election in Hungary. Also, they’re under constant attack from Donald Trump and this administration. So I just think Europe is also in like a real tough spot going into 2026

Beth [00:06:38] Yeah, if I were Zelensky, I would not run again. I just think I would say to the people, listen, I’ve taken this as far as I can take it. There are a couple of paths forward, but we need to put candidates forward who represent those different paths and let the people decide here. That’s what this has been about, our sovereignty. And we need a real conversation about what our sovereignty requires of us. And I agree with you. France, to me, has that feeling of being comparable to the United States in a number of important ways, but with a system that allows all of our fickleness and our frustrations to be on display more often. Their system is so much more responsive to public frustration. And the conversation about the relationship between wages and prices in France is the conversation we’re having here. They just have a lot of vehicles for it to be much more disruptive. And so I’m going to be watching that really carefully.

Sarah [00:07:37] And, of course, we have China. I think that China might invade Taiwan in 2026. Well, that’s my hot take. That’s my prediction. I don’t know if it will be a traditional invasion. There’s a lot of talk in the security community of like a gray zone warfare where they’ll just continue to heighten cyber attacks and economic coercion and military drills, but they’re clearly building up their commercial fleet and lots of other areas to increase the pressure to the point of breaking, which I think could be in 2026.

Beth [00:08:13] That’s interesting. I would really like to talk with Jane Perlez about that. I know that she was more optimistic about Taiwan the last time that we talked to her. Taiwan is so different from Hong Kong, but man, when you look at where Hong Kong is today versus where it was when we started the podcast and even just a few years ago, it’s really depressing how fully and really smoothly Chinese control has come into fruition there. I wish almost that I could be a fly on the wall in a CCP meeting to hear like did Hong Kong go about according to plan? Was it easier than you thought? Was there more resistance than you though there would be? I think Taiwan is really different in a lot of important ways, but I agree with you, the pressure is mounting and the objective feels very clear. So what the next steps are, I don’t know, but I’m interested in talking to experts about that.

Sarah [00:09:07] And I think it’ll just be interesting to see if China continues to surge with regards to renewables and with regards to artificial intelligence, especially as they gain access to some of the chips so many have tried to prevent them gaining access to. I don’t think that our trade war with them has fundamentally hobbled China’s economy or even the Communist Party in any real way. So it will continue to be an area of the world that is of massive importance going into 2026.

Beth [00:09:38] The Trump foreign policy doctrine this year has coalesced so clearly around enrichment for the president personally, and enrichment for the top echelons of our socioeconomic sphere that I think we’ve really backed off on all this Chinese hawkishness. And I think that could open a lot of doors for China to change its position on the world stage and to build up new capabilities. I’m not saying it’s all bad, because I think as we discussed with Jane, the last time we talked with her, the Cold War state with China has never really made sense. But I am concerned that we are going to take our eye off the balls that pose real threats to the United States because we are so interested in economic prosperity defined in a very particular way by this administration.

Sarah [00:10:41] Well, and that is the Venn diagram of domestic and global issues, which is the prosperity as defined by artificial intelligence and the arms race taking place among American companies, but also globally with China. It just seems like we have put all our chips. We have decided to put all our chips on artificial intelligence. That’s not slowing down in any way, shape or form moving into 2026, even with the heightened conversation of an AI bubble. There’s still just this doubling down among the administration and among these companies with this technology, with the focus of our entire economy. And I don’t see that changing at all in 2026.

Beth [00:11:27] I’m interested to watch the conversation around AI next year because it feels to me as we’re coming out of this year like there are some cracks in the inevitability narrative around AI, and there are people pushing for reasonable regulation. There is a fight about whether the states have the power to regulate AI or whether it should all be done at the federal level. I think intuitively people don’t like the idea that it would all be done at the federal level even as we don’t have a ton of patience as Americans for talking about state legislation. So I’m just curious to see where that goes.

Sarah [00:12:08] What is going to be so interesting as we move into next year with regards to artificial intelligence is the temptation in our language and our analysis is to compartmentalize it and to silo it. And we’re talking about these very specific companies and we’re taking about the race for artificial general intelligence. But its tentacles are just lengthening into so many areas. I think it’s really reordering the internet and changing the way we use the internet and particularly changing social media. I don’t know if it will further people’s turn away from social media by inundating it with such slop. I do think the AI ads are reporting that Facebook knows that these Chinese ads are fraudulent. Like I told on the slop episode, I follow a woman who’s like, “I knew this was fake and I ordered it anyway just to see what would show up.” That sort of side of things and people’s attention to that side of thing is growing. So I don’t know if people will just be like, forget it, I don’t want to be here. I think it’s so interesting to think about the ways that artificial intelligence could change like websites. If the idea is we’re just interacting with the AI and the AI is searching the website, well, you don’t need to spend a lot of money on a beautiful website design because you’re not engaging a human brain, you’re engaging artificial intelligence to gather the information that you want customers or clients to receive. I think it’s really interesting to think about it like that, and I think it’s absolutely going to tighten and increase the tension around bioethics. I think that we’re about to start facing some really difficult questions as far as medical technology and what we are able to do and what should or should not be able to do. And I think as AI increases and it’s influence on so many areas of our lives increase, we’re not going to be able to keep it in a box and talk about “AI” because it’s going to start and already is affecting everything.

Beth [00:14:16] Yeah, and they’re kind of dual tracks when you start talking about it in particularity. So those bioethical questions emerging at the same time that health care and health insurance is becoming completely unaffordable, I watched the president’s address on Wednesday night to the nation and heard him saying that he’s rolling out plans that are going to make our health insurance fantastic. We’re going to get better plans at cheaper prices. And I looked at my husband and I said, “Send me a link, President Trump. I’d be happy to click that link and sign up for whatever this magical plan is.” But I’m not seeing that in my life. You know what I’m seeing in my live is that my health insurance increased by the price of a car payment from November to December. A full car payment. I was thinking about buying a new car this year.

Sarah [00:15:01] Which is inconvenient because you’re going to have to buy a car for another member of your family soon.

Beth [00:15:06] Well, and my car is 12 years old, coming up on 13 years old. It was time for me to buy new car. But when your health insurance increases by the cost of a car payment, it reorders some things in your life. And so how do we handle the unbelievable potential of medicine that seems to be upon us with all those thorny ethical questions that really cut too. Like, what do you believe a life is? And what do believe a good life is? While at the same time you’re kind of questioning like do I go to the doctor? Do I feel bad enough to spend $130 to get an antibiotic? I’m not sure. It’s wild. And when you think about all of the capacity it creates on the internet, at the same time in your mind you’re like, hmm, maybe I should start like mailing a newsletter again so that people know that it’s real and feel it and can touch it and have some sense of like energy around it. I think we’re going to see some incredible creativity as people try to demonstrate their personhood in what they’re making. And I think we’re going to see a lot of mess, that frustration that we’re all feeling with the slop right now. I can’t decide if that is a real turn, as you said, pulling us away from all of this technology, or if it’s going to be more like a software update that gets rolled out at a company where everybody for two months just bitches and moans about it. I hate this. Why can’t my window be back where it was? Why can the shortcut I used before be the one that’s still here? But then you get used to it and it’s just the new normal.

Sarah [00:16:42] Yeah, I don’t know. I do think that there are some interesting conversations about how it’s going to change industries. And is it creating jobs? Is it taking jobs away? I’ve noticed that we’ve switched from talking about universal basic income to universal basic capital, which my ears are perking up around that conversation. I’m kind of fascinated by that. I hope that conversation expands into 2026. Maybe we can talk about it some more. But I do you think it’s just going to continue to affect everything. Now, another Venn diagram overlap between the global situation and our domestic one is the conflict with Venezuela. You think we’re going to go to war with Venezuela in 2026? Seems increasingly likely.

Beth [00:17:28] I think we are escalating towards something. My instinct is that somehow this gets de-escalated through transactionalism, through a United States stake in a big oil company, that there will be some deal worked out here. Because ultimately, I do think this is financial for the president. I think it’s not financial for Marco Rubio. And I’m trying to pay attention to the fact that there are lots of Americans who have no problem with what the president is doing, either because of the way they feel about drugs flowing into the United States, or because they have experience with how awful the Maduro regime has been for the people of Venezuela. And so I do think that the Madura regime will not last through 2026. And the fact that opposition leaders in Venezuela, like Maria Machado, keep talking about economic prosperity as the key to the path forward, I think there will be some kind of deal struck. And I think it’ll be a deal that, again, edges our government away from capitalism and more into the business of picking winners and losers in the economy and cronyism and corruption. But I think that that’s probably how we avoid armed land conflict here.

Sarah [00:18:55] I think what I want to get better at in 2026, and it’s hard because Donald Trump is the president and is such a big attention absorbing presence in American politics, is to focus or to at least remember that we are coming to an end to the Trump era and that they are fighting hard for the future of this movement and who’s going to be in charge of it. We’ve seen some of that breakdown, in particular the last few months since Charlie Kirk’s assassination, and I think that’s just going to continue. And I think that’s what makes these moments like with Venezuela so difficult. You’re trying to find the motivation when the reality is that there are probably multiple motivations because Pete Hegseth is on the scene and because of the way Donald Trump leads, he’s definitely not a micromanager and he demands loyalty, but there is a lot of space to pursue your own priorities or political motivations. And so thinking about Marco Rubio, thinking about JD Vance, thinking about Tucker Carlson and the movement-- I don’t know if movement’s probably too strong of a word, but the particular slice of the far right that is vehemently opposed to foreign wars or interventions or anything like that, and the America First that Marjorie Taylor Greene seems to be trying to clearly articulate. And trying to hold all that, especially when I’m not native to that land, man. Those are not my people. It’s hard. But I think particularly as we get closer and closer to the midterms, we’re just going to have to train ourselves to interpret as best we can and translate as best as we can this intro party fight.

Beth [00:21:01] The succession battle Sarah Longwell talks a lot about this at the Bulwark as MAGA versus America First, that that’s the dynamic that’s emerging. And I have never found America First to be very helpful framework for analyzing foreign affairs because what does that mean? In Venezuela, what does America First mean? Does that mean if we can go take another country’s oil and it benefits the American economy, we do that? That doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. But I can see someone making that argument that if Trump comes out of this without an invasion of Venezuela or without any kind of like George H.W. Bush style desert storm, if he manages to get out of that without that, even though he created it in a million ways, is that America First that we took an interest in the oil and reaped the proceeds and didn’t sacrifice any lives? Or is the fact that we are dealing in this at all contrary to that America First vision? And I just don’t understand the contours of these movements yet. And I think they’re not well-developed enough yet. I mean, we’re just learning what does it look like for anyone to have some opposition to this president that is real and substantive and ongoing. And she seems to be up for it. Marjorie Taylor Greene seems to be up for sustained ongoing opposition even though she’s leaving Congress. Thomas Massey seems to up for it. I do think that the Rubio- J.D. Vance alliance is not long for this world and something will erupt there sooner rather than later. And what does that look like? And I just don’t know.

Sarah [00:22:45] Well, and I thought, well, Congress will probably continue to falter over 2026, but I don’t know, it seems to be waking up a little bit. I think the closer we get to the midterms, the more people are finding their inner bravery for cynical reasons or not. But all these discharge petitions, all the frustration, the retirements, that’s not going to get any better for Mike Johnson in 2026 the closer people get to their name showing up on a ballot. And we’ll start getting some really interesting feedback in 2026 from some of these primaries where people are encountering challengers as well.

Beth [00:23:23] I wonder if we’ll see a leadership change in both parties in the House of Representatives, because I think with Johnson and Jeffries, the best that you can say is that they have tried to like the cat in the hat, stand with one foot on a ball and one tray over here and a fish tank on their heads and just muddling through. And you can’t muddle through an election year. There’s too much at stake for both parties to muddle through an election year. So I’m really interested in who emerges as a clearer voice for the parties. And I think that once we see personnel changes in Congress, we will see personnel change everywhere in Congress.

Sarah [00:24:06] I don’t know. I definitely think the Democrats will take the House. I don’t know if this is a hope or prediction that the Democrats also take the Senate. I think Schumer is more likely to lose his leadership position than Jeffries because for Jeffries to lose this position, someone else has to want it and it’s a shit job. So I think that’ll be interesting. I don’t think Mike Johnson is long for this world as far as leadership.

Beth [00:24:29] But that’s another one, like who’s going to do it? That’s an even worse job.

Sarah [00:24:32] Yeah, I don’t know. And I think that the one positive that I hope continues into 2026 is there seems to be in the fallout of Congress abdicating so much of its leadership and responsibility in 2025, a real conversation about leadership and the power that leadership has and people’s frustration with that amount of power. And a real re-evaluation of some of the processes in both parties that concentrate so much power in the leadership itself.

Beth [00:25:12] And think about this, all that power concentrated around people who are basically leading by default. Exactly what you said, these people have these positions because who else wants them? Because they’re sucky positions. That’s what I keep thinking about with the Susie Wiles profile and Vanity Fair that everyone’s talking about this week. What you heard is that she is going to sit in this chair, one of the most powerful chairs in the world, because who could do it? When you have that level of authority because who else could do it, that’s a recipe for disaster. The frustration will mount. If I were a political opponent of Suzy Wiles, like within the Trump camp, I would have read that Vanity Fair piece and not thought she’s going to get fired because she said some things that probably in retrospect she wishes she hadn’t. But I would think, oh, there’s a move here to be made because she’s admitted to a lot of weakness in this role. We have a lot of places where you can see an incredible amount of weakness on display. There are so many vacuums to be filled. That’s what the discharge positions represent to me. A fundamental weakness and people saying, well, then I’m going to exploit it and I’m going to carry my flag as far as I can go down the field and see what happens.

Sarah [00:26:25] Well, and we’re going to definitely see that continue to play out in democratic politics with the people pursuing a 2028 run. They’re already they’re all gunning for Gavin because he is the clear front runner. J.D Vance is the career front runner on the right, according to polling. We’re still many years out, but you’re just going to get a lot of feedback through the course of these primaries and the midterms about what people are thinking and what they’re prioritizing. Assume affordability will continue to be an issue. Although I got to say, domestically with the economy, the shrinking inflation numbers, the optimism from some of the business community, I don’t think it’s an easy call or prediction to say what the economy is going to look like next year.

Beth [00:27:09] Well, and I think every conversation you have about what the economy looks like and is going to look like has to include the question for whom? Because the vision of optimism that the president has I think applies to a real but small segment of society. I don’t know a lot about drugs. The drugs I understand are sugar and caffeine. And I understand that there’s a vision of the stock market and the economy and the world that Trump has where you just keep it running. You keep the sugar and caffeine flowing and it stays up. And as long as you keep it up until you’re not responsible for it anymore, mission accomplished. We’re not working toward long-term health here. Whether you can keep it up afloat and high like that for everyone, I think we’re seeing is just not happening. And I’m happy and supportive of bonuses for our troops. But when the best the president has, when he comes out to do this proof of life and success speech and the best he’s got is 1776 checks for military members paid for by the tariffs, which are paid for buy American businesses. That is redistribution of the economy. I don’t know what the vision is for where we’re going here.

Sarah [00:28:41] Well, there’s no vision. I mean, there never has been. I don’t think that’s like a shocking take. But I just think in an election year, you need to have more of one. And I don’t know if his trip across the country-- the first one didn’t go so well, where he’s really trying to get in front of people and share this. I also think to the health of it all, he’s just getting older and it’s showing. And he doesn’t have quite the energy or the charisma that he used to. He’s no Joe Biden, but he’s not Donald Trump of 2016 either.

Beth [00:29:13] Well, and it’s old. It is reheated nachos to use one of the phrases of the year. Like he did 18 minutes last night. You or I or anyone listening could have stepped into the podium and finished his sentences. He did some of the exact same language about people coming into this country that he did in his campaign announcement in 2015. It’s old. It is not keeping pace with all these other trends that we just talked about in the world and in technology and in the economy. And how that’s going to help? If I were on the ballot, would I want him coming and doing they’re sending criminals and they’re standing people from mental asylum? I don’t think so. I don’t think that that is going to continue to carry the day.

Sarah [00:29:58] Yeah. I do think, unfortunately, their approach to immigration will continue. They’re already talking about denaturalizing people.

Beth [00:30:06] Who’s asking for that?

Sarah [00:30:08] Stephen Miller is asking for that. They still want their numbers up. Despite all indication that this is not what the American people asked for in the polling around this issue, I’m happy for them to drive some of the populations that they were persuading directly back into the arms of the Democratic Party. But they don’t seem to be slowing down. I don’t think that they are learning any lessons about this ICE enforcement and the way it’s playing out in people’s lives, much less on social media and the horror that people feel when they watch it. I don’t even hear defensive in my own life of people who were like, well, they’re criminals. That’s even quieted down because you’re talking about daycare workers and pregnant women. Like who’s even arguing that anymore? I thought of the moment in the Senate hearing with Kristi Noem when the senator from Rhode Island was like, “Hi, here’s a military member you deported. Are they going to get their check in Korea for 1776?” Like, what is this bullshit? And I think it’ll just continue to add up and continue to add up because they don’t seem to be taking any feedback and slowing down at all when it comes to ICE enforcement. Also to the health of it all, I do anticipate some sort of pretty bad situation with the FDA or the CDC under the leadership of RFK, either a dangerous foodborne illness outbreak, a viral outbreak. I just think that the way he has decimated those agencies is going to manifest in some terrible public health disaster. If not this year, then next year.

Beth [00:31:59] You said on the Good News Brief this week that we often don’t know what’s been prevented and can’t celebrate that as good news. And I am worried that we’re going to have greater awareness of that next year in a whole bunch of sectors. I’m worried about the FBI and the way that so many of our security resources have been diverted to immigration and away from myriad other areas that require attention, cyber security, terrorist threats, public health. I am concerned that the ramifications of just the first few months of this year, let alone the entire year, are going to start to become a lot more obvious next year. I don’t want to wish for trouble or borrow it, but I’m concerned.

Sarah [00:32:48] I do think this could ultimately manifest in a breakup in RFK. Losing political capital with Trump, being pushed out. I don’t know. I don’t think that’s off the table either depending on how bad the situation gets. I think his alliance with Donald Trump as every alliance is, is tenuous and sensitive to shifts in his ego and the wind. So I think that could play out in 2026 as well. How do you feel about the Supreme Court decisions coming our way in the summer of 2026? We’ll get the voting rights case, trans women participation in sports, campaign finance. I got a lot on the docket.

Beth [00:33:28] The Supreme Court is not going to make anything better next year. That’s my overall prediction.

Sarah [00:33:33] No, it’s not.

Beth [00:33:34] I think the Supreme Court could make things so much worse and so much more obviously off the rails that it is electorally helpful for Democrats. I think you could see the Supreme court just lifting pretty much all campaign finance limits. And I think that the public on a bipartisan basis does not want that. I think you could see Supreme Court continuing to allow state legislatures to draw their maps however they want. A toddler scribbling in the car would have more geographic integrity than what we’re seeing from state legislators. And the Supreme Court has said extremely clearly, “We don’t care.” You can be as partisan as you want. And I understand the legal reasoning behind that, but that is not what the public wants. So the Supreme court is going to keep opening the gates. And we are going to have to be electorally responsive to that.

Sarah [00:34:37] I think you’re right. I think it could definitely empower a lot of constituencies going into the midterm. And I hope that if the Democratic Party gains power congressionally in the mid-term and hopefully presidentially in 2028, we make some big changes to the Supreme Court. [Inaudible] in my personal opinion. Not saying we’ll see that in 2026, but maybe we’ll see a more clarified, motivated movement to put those procedural changes in place.

Beth [00:35:01] And look, if you’re new to Pantsuit politics and you’re like, ugh, liberal court packing, that’s not what we’re talking about. We’ve had a lot of conversations over many years with Supreme courts of different compositions about how this body is not set up for the reality of the country today. And I’m sure we’ll continue to have those discussions. I think that you and I both have a perspective that whatever the outcome in the short term, there are just fundamental process changes that have got to be enacted for Americans to feel like this government is capable of working for everybody. And those might very far in a direction that we’re uncomfortable with for a while. You’ve seen data lately that more people voting in 2024 would have meant a bigger Trump victory. But still I think more people need to vote and we need to make voting more accessible for more people. So this is not about power grabs and shortcuts. It’s about the long-term health of the body policy.

Sarah [00:36:11] Well, I think the long-term health of the body politic is increasingly a topic of focus and conversation, if only among what I will call the intelligentsia. Because it’s manifesting in everyday Americans’ lives too. I think people are tired of the cruelty and the fighting and the partisanship and polarization. I really feel in my just everyday existence, certainly from our audience, but broader than that that people are exhausted by the hate and the violence and the cruelty and that there is a real yearning for what it means to be a good American, to be good citizen, to be a good person and to have purpose and to have this focus on civic virtue, which is something I hope we can talk about a lot more in 2026. Like not just letting market forces be it through all the way on one end of the spectrum with the corruption in the Trump administration, or all the way on the other end of spectrum where everybody’s just voting based on the economy. I think that people are just ready to, hopefully in 2026, build movements, build organizations, start conversations in their local community, run for office and just say we have to have a focus on purpose and meaning and virtue. And what does it mean? What are we doing here together? Are we just going to fight? Is that it? It does seem like 2025 was the cresting of the like civil war orientation. And are we coming for a fall apart? And more of, okay, if we don’t want to do this forever and we’re going to split up, what comes next?

Beth [00:38:24] I guess I had Dr. Seuss on the brain today because I keep thinking about the president’s address last night. It’s like here I am just a who down in Whoville getting ready for Christmas. And here he comes from the tower to yell at me for 20 minutes about how ungrateful I am for his leadership and how everything bad is not as bad as we think, but if it is really bad, it’s somebody else’s fault. I mean, that was the message. That was his Christmas message to the nation. The tone was so angry old man. I asked Chad what he thought about it. He watched with me and he said, “This is the psychology of an 80-year-old man who’s angry at the world.” And I don’t know anybody who’s looking for that energy. I think what you said is right. People are willing to make some sacrifices for something. You heard a lot of this post-election and as the tariffs started to roll out, the people we’ve spent a whole year talking about, the Joe Rogan listener, the Theo Von listener, the economically disenfranchised saying, hey, I’m open. If the tariffs bring back some good jobs to the United States, I’m willing to pay some higher prices to get there. You have to sacrifice. I think fundamentally people know things are hard. They have a cost. There are trade-offs. The problem is, I’m not sure the president knows that.

Sarah [00:39:55] No, he doesn’t.

Beth [00:39:56] And I certainly don’t think the president has the stomach to wait a little bit and work on something for the long-term, like you said, with a vision for where he’s going. And so I’m so hopeful that candidates from both parties, new parties, no parties, all over the place, that some candidates step forward next year who can say, here’s my vision. This is what I think we could do and it will take some sacrifice. Here are the downsides of it, but here’s where we’re going. And I think, we’re all ready to go somewhere together.

Sarah [00:40:32] Well, and there are lots of things to look forward to in 2026. I mean, the semi-quincentennial, America’s 250th anniversary. I’m very excited about it. I’ve already mentioned that repeatedly. That’s an excellent opportunity to have this conversation. Are we going to have leadership through the presidency at this important moment in our history? We are not, unfortunately. But that doesn’t need to stop us. We can have this conversion in lots of different ways in our decentralized big messy country. About what this means to celebrate our 250th anniversary and what we want the next 250 years of America to look like because I want there to be another 250 years of America. I think this is a really exciting moment in 2026.

Beth [00:41:17] There’s also been so much conversation for the last couple of years about civic literacy. And I hope that we can support our schools as they step into some bravery and reinvigorate our civic curriculums. Like, what a fantastic invitation to do that from the calendar. And I would love to see schools really engage with the community. I would love to be part of efforts to really reinvigorate that civic curriculum with this opportunity.

Sarah [00:41:43] And we’ll be hosting the world here with the FIFA World Cup in 2026. So that’s really exciting. Another big event to look forward to in 2026.

Beth [00:41:52] Well, and can I say that that is like a real counterweight to this tone about denaturalizing citizens and what heritage citizens are. Like the entire conversation about narrowing what it means to be an American in a year when we’re hosting the World Cup, I just don’t think that’s going to work.

Sarah [00:42:14] No. Of course, Beth, the thing we most have to look forward to in 2026 is our very own American royal wedding between Taylor Swift and Travis Kelcey. Do you think they’ll broadcast it?

Beth [00:42:31] I hope that they don’t.

Sarah [00:42:32] I kind of want them to.

Beth [00:42:34] I know. And of course it would be fun. And I would love to be there myself and see the pictures at the same time. The security concerns that she has had to navigate this year have been awful. He seems heartbroken coming out of this football season. And I guess I hope for both of them, what she says in the song, Wishlist, I hope they can tell the world to leave them the fuck alone and it will. And I hope that they do this. I listened to every single album, which is very Taylor Swift focused. And the host of that show said that the way this is like rolling out across the wedding industry, nobody knows anything. Which means that there are very, very few people who could be involved in the planning here. And their hypothesis, which I think is the best case scenario for these two humans as humans, is that they will go do this extremely quietly and we’ll get some pictures on the other side. And I think that that would be ideal.

Sarah [00:43:36] Yeah, I don’t know if they’ll get married quietly and then have a big party. I just want to be involved. I want to celebrate. I feel like I’ve been a part of this from the beginning. I mean, to have watched this love story unfold the way it has, I’m just so excited for them to get married. And I guess I will take photos on the other end. But I’m saying, if she wanted to have a royal wedding, if she want to do it like full on Princess Kate, Diana style, like she could. It’s available to her.

Beth [00:44:13] She could. It would just cost a lot. And after the past couple of years, I just don’t know why she would choose that. I think the consolation prize is the Disney Plus docu-series. We’re going to get a lot of Travis in the next couple of episodes and I think that might be a here, yes, be part of our love story. And also leave us alone.

Sarah [00:44:34] I’m not leaving them alone. Sorry, Taylor. I wouldn’t feel this way if I-- I’m very fame adverse. I think it’s toxic. I just think she does such a good job. I’m not worried about her. I’m not really worried about her and the fame. I think she’s really got a tight handle on it, especially the two of them together. So I’m just saying, if she wanted to give us all a royal wedding.

Beth [00:44:58] You wouldn’t be mad.

Sarah [00:44:58] I wouldn’t be mad. There’s all kinds of other fun like pop culture things happening in 2026. There’s going to be the Avengers movie. Did you know this?

Beth [00:45:06] Yeah.

Sarah [00:45:07] I’m very excited about Emeril Fennel’s Wuthering Heights. Word on the street is we might finally get that Rihanna album. I’m not holding my breath, but lots of good..

Beth [00:45:17] Harry Styles also may have a new album next year.

Sarah [00:45:20] Very fun. There are lots of things to look forward to in 2026, and we are so excited that you will be joining us.

Beth [00:45:28] Winter Olympics.

Sarah [00:45:29] Yeah, going to be fun. It’s going to be a fun year. Beth, usually on that last regular show of the year, we check in on our words of the year, the previous, and declare our new word. Yes, I’m excited to hear yours. So what was your word of 2025?

Beth [00:45:56] My 2025 word was calibrate. I really tried to just turn the dials this year, not make any enormous changes, but turn the volume and intensity up and down in relationships as needed, in my reactions to things politically in the way that I worked. And I felt like it was a very pragmatic, successful word for me this year. I felt like it offered something when I ask it questions, which I think is what a good word of the year does. So I really liked it. What about you?

Sarah [00:46:34] I think my word was prayer. I don’t even remember. That’s bad, isn’t it? I don’t know if it really worked great. I’ve kind of lost my way on the word of the year. I don’t feel like it offers a lot to me like it used to. I feel kind of like I just do it out of obligation. Sometimes I check in with it. I follow Susanna Conway and she does like a word of the year journal. Maybe I should do that.

Beth [00:47:09] So are you going to do one for 2026 or are you off the practice?

Sarah [00:47:14] Yeah. Right now my word, I think, is going to be analog. It just really appeals to me. I’m finding myself drawn to areas in which I can remove technology in any way, shape, or form and go back to an analog way of being. And it definitely feels like that is the trend for 2026. So there’s a real focus and hunger or for an analog way of being in the world. So I’m trying to think about what that would look like beyond just like a tech Shabbat or walking away from my phone. I read a lot of print books anyway. I’m thinking about maybe more analog way of being with my family and entertainment. I don’t know. I’m up for ideas. I would love to hear people’s analog ways of being in the world. What about you? What’s your word?

Beth [00:48:11] My word for 2026 is going to be swim. I have experienced a lot of what I would describe as like currents this year. And I think that’s probably going to continue to be true. I read this article that I wish had been written a long time ago about how 44 is an age cliff.

Sarah [00:48:30] I read that. I saw that, yeah.

Beth [00:48:32] That both men and women experience a lot a physical change at 44. That was valuable to me. That was good information to have. And I definitely feel that. And Jane is swimming for her high school team. So I’m thinking about swimming a lot. And what I love about the word is the way that it captures that there are individual things that you can do and there is an environment around you. And you are always in this dance of what you are individually working on and powering through and developing in yourself with what’s happening in the environment. And that if you divorce one of those from the other too strongly, that’s a problem that doesn’t work. And so I’m just trying to really think about how do I hold hands with what is in my body and in my life and in the people around me and also continue to develop my technique and stamina and skill. So that’s the word I’m going to ask questions of next year.

Sarah [00:49:36] I like it. Well, I’m excited to hear people’s words. There’s process for finding the words. Maybe I’ll receive some more inspiration. I do want to hear peoples’ analog ideas for 2026. And I’m just excited to join our audience in another year. Our 11th here at Pantsuit Politics. We’ll be celebrating our 11th birthday in November of 2026, that’s exciting. We have some live events and gatherings planned. It’s going to be a good year. I think it’ll be a good year because we’ll be here together and that’s all we have anyway.

Beth [00:50:09] I’m ready for it. Let’s go.

Sarah [00:50:09] Thank you for joining us for 2025. That was a tough one. And we appreciate every comment, every email, every listen, download, like, subscribe, all of it. Especially when you showed up in person over the 2025 year in Cincinnati or Switzerland, Concord, England, just it was really a beautiful year to spend a lot of time in person, in connection with this community. And we’re very grateful for all the support you offer our show. And we love all you guys and we hope you have the happiest holiday season available to you.

Beth [00:50:45] And I hope what’s available is really good. You deserve it.

Show Credits

Pantsuit Politics is hosted by Sarah Stewart Holland and Beth Silvers. The show is produced by Studio D Podcast Production. Alise Napp is our Managing Director and Maggie Penton is our Director of Community Engagement.

Our theme music was composed by Xander Singh with inspiration from original work by Dante Lima.

Our show is listener-supported. The community of paid subscribers here on Substack makes everything we do possible. Special thanks to our Executive Producers, some of whose names you hear at the end of each show. To join our community of supporters, become a paid subscriber here on Substack.

To search past episodes of the main show or our premium content, check out our content archive.

This podcast and every episode of it are wholly owned by Pantsuit Politics LLC and are protected by US and international copyright, trademark, and other intellectual property laws. We hope you'll listen to it, love it, and share it with other people, but not with large language models or machines and not for commercial purposes. Thanks for keeping it nuanced with us.