Is Donald Trump improving the US government?

This is a deeply contested political question that depends heavily on one's values and priorities, so I'll aim to present a balanced picture of different perspectives rather than offer a personal verdict. Let me look into recent assessments and data.## It depends heavily on who you ask and how you measure "improvement"

There's no neutral, universally agreed-upon answer to this—it's one of the most polarizing questions in American politics right now. Here's what the evidence shows from different angles:

Public opinion has turned negative, including among some of his own supporters

Trump's approval rating was 47% at the start of his second term, and throughout 2025-2026 it has steadily declined to an average of 36-37%. By late October 2026, his approval rating fell to 30%, the lowest an American president has polled this close to midterms since Harry Truman in 1946. Notably, the decline is particularly pronounced among those who voted for him in 2024: 67% of Trump's 2024 voters now approve of his performance, down from 75% in July, 83% at the beginning of this year and 95% early in his second term.

On the economy specifically—often the top voter concern—only 26% of U.S. adults express support for how Trump is tackling the economy, and just 17% approve of how he's addressing the cost of living.

The administration's case: smaller, more efficient government

The White House argues it has made government leaner. Its own site states government efficiency efforts have saved an estimated $215 billion, equivalent to $1,335 per U.S. taxpayer, and claims Trump has driven sweeping reforms to eliminate waste, reduce bureaucracy, and restore accountability, with the result being a leaner, more effective government. Conservative commentators have echoed this, with one analysis noting the Trump administration has cut more than 10 percent of the federal workforce, and the government hasn't crashed—though it hasn't even shrunk if you're counting by dollars spent instead of people employed.

Critics dispute both the methods and the results

DOGE (the Department of Government Efficiency), the centerpiece of this effort, has drawn heavy scrutiny. Critics say DOGE redefined fraud to target federal employees and programs to build political support, and budget experts said the cuts were driven more by political ideology than frugality, while many fraud claims have not held up under scrutiny. A government-accountability watchdog estimated the elimination or reduction of targeted agencies directly cost over 50,000 people their jobs, and could result in a loss of over $10 billion in U.S.-based economic activity.

Even sympathetic reviewers are mixed on actual outcomes: one federal management expert concluded that if the definition of efficiency is making government programs work more smoothly and achieve better results, the uniform consensus is that nothing right now is working better than it was in 2024. Notably, by mid-2026, the administration's fiscal 2027 budget request included no mention of DOGE, and OMB Director Russell Vought confirmed there were no plans for a closing report documenting what it actually accomplished.

Broader trust metrics are also down

Beyond job approval, by more than two-to-one, Americans say the administration's actions have been worse than they expected (50%) rather than better (21%). Confidence in Trump personally has also eroded—one of the steepest declines has been in the share of Americans who say Trump "keeps his promises": 38% today, down from 51% shortly after his reelection.

Bottom line

If "improving the government" means cutting the size of the federal workforce and claiming spending cuts, supporters can point to real changes (though the savings figures are contested). If it means public trust, approval, efficiency outcomes, or bipartisan credibility, the data currently leans negative, with historically low approval ratings even among past supporters. Reasonable people disagree sharply on which of these metrics matter most—so I'd encourage weighing the specific policy areas (economy, immigration, government efficiency, foreign policy, etc.) that matter most to you rather than looking for one verdict.