17 Days

without partisan b.s. there is nothing

Independent here.

Not a HRC fan, but certainly amazed the nation hired a morally and ethically bankrupt individual who is temperamentally unfit for the role.

All that said, he's in and he's a "disrupter" which is what is often required to drive change of any magnitude. Change is hard even when there's some level of knowledge knowing that it's required. Some will always be more comfortable with it than others.

17 days in, the cabal of 45, Miller and Bannon are certainly relishing going hard on this. Clearly their inexperience and zeal has gotten the best of them (e.g. they probably could have pulled off a immigration deal with much less scrutiny with better planning, writing of the EO and of course execution). The inauguration speech also was too over the top in terms of depicting the nation as if it was Europe in the throes of the bubonic plague. His detractors, of which, make up the majority of the nation (HRC voters + 3rd party voters) really didn't need any more fodder, but for some reason they've given it to them. The real key is how his sheeples are digesting all of this. At some point, one has to reasonably think that they will awaken to the fact that he's not Main Street vs. Wall Street, that the ACA was indeed the same thing as Obamacare, that he will not be pushing Big Pharma for better Rx pricing, that he is actually enriching himself in this role. How long will that take?

On the Foreign Policy and trade stuff, some of that will actually fall on how the world reacts. I can tell you that my previous career had me working with a host of global people from Canada, Mexico, Europe, China, Middle East and Australia. My contacts have all indicated that they were shocked and continue to be following 45's antics. Italy was the country who elected a porn star (not that there's anything wrong with that), America would never elect a TV reality star who is running the world's greatest con. So, we've officially lost our position from the moral high ground on the worlds stage. In the trade agreement game, I'm not sure if countries will resist or fold like cheap suits. Either way, that is all such a bigger game than most of us (self included) can fathom from a consequence perspective.

Personally, I remain petrified. I don't think he's well. I don't trust a guy like Bannon and clearly the GOP has decided that it's best for them to keep "looking away" while they work to jam through their agenda before the shit hits the fan. Once that happens, we all get gridlock which will hurt them short and long term. 

So much talk about Repub defections following Dump's comments Sunday vis a vis Putin. 

Gotta love the SB commercials trolling the hell outta him.

Without the partisan BS? That's fucking hillarious! It's ALL partisan BS at this point. 

Well, he is doing pretty much everything he said he would do.  Not too many politicians can say that.

Have led large change management events and have watched others do the same. I had success based on a pragmatic approach vs. the classic damn the torpedos, full speed ahead style. I've seen others fail because they became so concerned about "checking the boxes" of the basic steps, but clearly not feeling it and being tone deaf along the way. In example, on day one, appear nice and be out in front of people. On day two, be so concerned about checking off other boxes that you forget about your day one efforts and never connect with the people again. Respect and trust have to be earned.

Even people who want or beg for change, at the end of the day, too much, too soon and too fast freaks them out.

Have to remember that 45 never expected to win and if we are to believe multiple reports, never really wanted to. From that base, you have to surmise that he really spent no time thinking about actually implementing anything. Now, he has to and given noted insecurities, having multiple puppeteers prodding him and his own penchant for rash action and comments, he's fixated on checking off the boxes of his promises where he can and squeaking out of the ones he can't. The whirlwind we are seeing is that rush to check off boxes and as the old saying goes, haste makes waste. Much of the furor (no pun intended) over his actions are entirely self inflicted. Again, in the "ban" alone, with a measured approach that essentially just ramped up the vetting (ala Obama's Iraq deal), he could have checked the box and possibly even won over some folks. Wasted opportunity. Suspect there will be more to come.

Maybe that was the plan? Then he can claim the system is rigged again.

Good thread Briank

It's the old blitzkrieg shock and awe strategy. 

Is anyone beside the swamp dwellers  cheering Donald's announcement of repealing  Dodd-Frank?

The real key is how his sheeples are digesting all of this. At some point, one has to reasonably think that they will awaken to the fact that he's not Main Street vs. Wall Street, that the ACA was indeed the same thing as Obamacare, that he will not be pushing Big Pharma for better Rx pricing, that he is actually enriching himself in this role. How long will that take?<<<

When did investors who placed their trust with Bernie Madoff finally "awaken"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

To a large extent, i make my living off of Dodd-frank, so this particular legislation has benefited me greatly. Do i believe it's been successful at protecting investors and consumers from abusive practices, i'd say mostly no. The regulators in charge of enforcing most of this legislation are woefully underfunded and  largely ineffective.

On an unrelated note, i thought Trump's response to O'Reilly's "Killer Putin: comment was refreshing. When's the last time you heard a president speak that candidly about matters of US aggression and war?

Dodd-Frank

From a CNBC piece: Legislation became massive, 850 pages, 17 different sections and nearly 400 separate sets of rules and regulations as both parties pushed crap into it. However, as of July, six years after it was enacted, some 30% of the proposed rules had not yet even been finalized. Another 20% of them had not even been formally proposed. So, in reality, only half of the Dodd Frank provisions are actually in place. The article goes on to debunk the claim that it is reducing banks ability to lend to companies and states that since it took effect in July 2010, bank lending to both consumers and businesses has continued to hit new highs.

It appears that the claims are meant to disguise the real issue banks have with it which would fall under the Volcker rule which was designed to encourage banks to devote more capital to lending and less to trading investments. Since banks make more money on trading investments than lending, they obviously want that changed.

O'Reilly - Putin

Agree about candor. There are many here among us who either are unaware or unwilling to believe some of the things that the US government has done over our history. However, the key point is about the treatment of political opponents and dissidents, etc. Nixon did not have the Watergate reporters detained, imprisoned or killed. Bill Clinton did not have the special investigator mysteriously disappear. 45 has not yet had anyone killed who disagreed with him.

Well, he is doing pretty much everything he said he would do.  Not too many politicians can say that<---

see I think hes all talk . He doesn't expect to DO or accomplish anything, he just wants to look like he tried. He can then blame the opposition (pick your choice) and come out looking like he was sincere. Its an old political ruse. Just like "gonna clean up D.C.! Im no politician".  So much bluster on his part. time will tell I suppose. I ain't counting on a wall.