Trump’s Mega MAGA. Month transforms America

[BPPLEE]

https://www.axios.com/2025/02/20/trump-maga-month-transforms-america

Trump's mega-MAGA month transforms America​

President Trump's first month in office has exceeded the wildest dreams of his most loyal supporters, and the darkest nightmares of his fiercest detractors.
Why it matters: Both groups can agree: The America that Joe Biden left behind on Jan. 20 is no longer recognizable, erased in four frenetic weeks by an empowered, implacable and historically popular MAGA presidency.

• Like Trump 1.0, the firehose of news and norm-busting behavior is — and will continue to be — the defining feature of this administration.
• Unlike Trump 1.0, the chaos is calculated — and explicitly designed to institutionalize MAGA, paralyze the president's enemies and permanently break the Washington establishment.

Zoom in: Above all else, Trump's first month has been dominated by his war on the federal bureaucracy — and his various efforts to prod, probe and blow through the limits of presidential power.

• The White House's early attempt to freeze federal funding has set the stage for a massive legal fight over Congress's "power of the purse," which is laid out in Article 1 of the Constitution.
• Elon Musk and his DOGE allies are slashing and burning their way through government agencies — cheered on by the MAGA faithful as they fire thousands of federal workers, sometimes with reckless abandon.
• The rapid dismantling of USAID and the government-wide assault on DEI have sent clear signals that any programs misaligned with Trump's MAGA will be on the chopping block. The Department of Education could be next.
• At the Justice Department — which haunted both Trump's first term and his next four years as a private citizen — the purging of career prosecutors and FBI agents has punctured any veneer of independence from the White House.

Between the lines: Trump and Musk's shock treatment of the U.S. government has overshadowed the two main issues that dominated the 2024 campaign: immigration and inflation.

1. On immigration, Trump has moved with lightning speed to enforce his promise of a sealed border.

• Arrests from border crossings plummeted to 21,593 in January — down from 47,316 in December, and an all-time high of 250,000 in December 2023 — after a blizzard of Day One immigration-related executive orders.
• Trump's goal of deporting millions of undocumented immigrants has proven more difficult, with the pace of operations stalling because of a lack of funds, detention space, officers and infrastructure.

2. "Inflation is back," Trump acknowledged in an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity this week. "I had nothing to do with it," he then argued, pinning the blame on Biden's spending policies.

• Despite promising to "end inflation" starting on Day One, Trump is right that the effects of his new policies won't immediately show up in consumer prices.
• The danger: Trump's sweeping use of tariffs is injecting deep uncertainty into global markets, and could turn inflation into a long-term feature of the U.S. economy.

 

[durangodawood]

Will "move fast, break things" work better than "move slow, fix things"?

Perhaps in some cases. But I'm wary of that approach from govt. The responsibilities and required accountabilities of govt are quite different from private industry. Citizens are not investors voluntary signing into a risk/reward scheme. Citizens rely on govt to ensure reliable background conditions for living out their lives.

This is why I hate hearing that notion: our govt is a business - or should be run like one.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Will "move fast, break things" work better than "move slow, fix things"?

Time will tell...

The issue with the "move slow" approach is that if often never does "fix things" in a political environment...

Perhaps in some cases. But I'm wary of that approach from govt. The responsibilities and required accountabilities of govt are quite different from private industry. Citizens are not investors voluntary signing into a risk/reward scheme. Citizens rely on govt to ensure reliable background conditions for living out their lives.

This is why I hate hearing that notion: our govt is a business - or should be run like one.

I agree with your over-arching point which is that "government is not a business, therefore people shouldn't try and run it like one"

...but perhaps for a slightly different reason. (and it'll tie in with my questioning of the "move slow" approach above)


In terms of the financial aspect of the government (evaluating "here's how much money is coming in, here's how much is going out", "are we over-staffed", "are we wasting money on certain things", "is the head of department XYZ incompetent", "do we have a project plan in place")...I'd argue that one could very much approach those aspects of government with a business-like mentality.

Where it differs very much from a regular private company is the "inside, 2-faction power struggle with sometimes polar opposite goals"

For instance, at my company, we don't have a "Write more in-house software, license less from vendors" vs. a faction who wants to do the polar opposite... actively trying to undermine and usurp the other...the goal of everyone (despite the minutia-type difference over the finer points) is to be able to sell more of our services.


And perhaps the best way to describe the concerns with moving too slow would be to look at it from the opposite direction, what if someone tried to run a business like the government?

Hypothetical:

Pam who's pro "let's just by this 3rd party software from this vendor" is at odds with Doug, who's pro "let's write this ourselves in-house".

In that hostile environment:
If Doug attempts the "slow, cautious approach", the longer he takes, the longer Pam has to find ways to undermine him, badmouth his ideas to the potential clients, nitpick every potential flaw, critique him up and down in the company newsletter, make deals with other departments to get them on her side in exchange for future favors, etc... In that type of situation, Doug's best move would be to get something semi/mostly functional out there quickly for a beta test, and work out the bugs later. (so that people could at least see the potential in his idea)


Same is true with the DOGE situation. A "slow cautious approach" = "all of the people who are against it have ample time to figure out ways to undermine the underlying idea and manipulate public opinion"

 

[essentialsaltes]

Trump's mega-MAGA month transforms America​

Like Trump 1.0, the firehose of news and norm-busting behavior

Still to be determined is how much it is law-breaking behavior

• Arrests from border crossings plummeted to 21,593 in January

• after a blizzard of Day One immigration-related executive orders.

on Jan 20

 

[essentialsaltes]

Zoom in: Above all else, Trump's first month has been dominated by his war on the federal bureaucracy — and his various efforts to prod, probe and blow through the limits of presidential power.

Glad we all agree that his early actions demonstrate that he's the danger to the republic that many warned about. Presidential power is limited by the Constitution for good reason.

 

[BPPLEE]

Still to be determined is how much it is law-breaking behavior



View attachment 361294



on Jan 20

It only took Biden 3 and 1/2 years to take action on the border after claiming he couldn't do anything without Congress.
The news that Trump was president probably contributed to the decline in numbers too

 

[BPPLEE]

Glad we all agree that his early actions demonstrate that he's the danger to the republic that many warned about. Presidential power is limited by the Constitution for good reason.

Hey, not even the Supreme Court could stop Biden

 

[Pommer]

Will "move fast, break things" work better than "move slow, fix things"?

Perhaps in some cases. But I'm wary of that approach from govt. The responsibilities and required accountabilities of govt are quite different from private industry. Citizens are not investors voluntary signing into a risk/reward scheme. Citizens rely on govt to ensure reliable background conditions for living out their lives.

This is why I hate hearing that notion: our govt is a business - or should be run like one.

We haven’t had a shakedown cruise for a while now.
It sure would be nice to know where all the loose bolts are in our Government.

 

[Pommer]

Hey, not even the Supreme Court could stop Biden

Hahahahaha, this again, (or still)?

 

[ozso]

It only took Biden 3 and 1/2 years to take action on the border after claiming he couldn't do anything without Congress.
The news that Trump was president probably contributed to the decline in numbers too

He was trying to repair his reputation at the last minute. Or more likely whoever was really in charge at that point implemented damage control.

 

[wing2000]

• Elon Musk and his DOGE allies are slashing and burning their way through government agencies — cheered on by the MAGA faithful as they fire thousands of federal workers, sometimes with reckless abandon.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered senior leaders at the Pentagon and throughout the U.S. military to develop plans for cutting 8 percent from the defense budget in each of the next five years, according to a memo obtained by The Washington Post and officials familiar with the matter — a striking proposal certain to face internal resistance and strident bipartisan opposition in Congress.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/02/19/trump-pentagon-budget-cuts/

If senior leaders at the Pentagon are given discretion on where to make budget cuts, why were the leaders at US AID, NPS, Agriculture etc given the same opportunity? Or will DoD employees be subject to the Musk dragnet?

 

[Vambram]

Glad we all agree that his early actions demonstrate that he's the danger to the republic that many warned about. Presidential power is limited by the Constitution for good reason.

President Trump is not a danger to the republic or to our nation at all. No matter how many times liberal politicians and liberals in the media say that, the reality demonstrates otherwise.

 

[essentialsaltes]

President Trump is not a danger to the republic or to our nation at all. No matter how many times liberal politicians and liberals in the media say that, the reality demonstrates otherwise.

The reality is that judges are stopping his over-reaches of presidential power.

 

[Vambram]

The reality is that judges are stopping his over-reaches of presidential power.

The reality is that unelected judges are engaged in judicial activism.

 

[Perpetual Student]

The reality is that unelected judges are engaged in judicial activism.

Do you mean Trump-nominated judges? Because these aren't elected, but nominated.

 

[Vambram]

Do you mean Trump-nominated judges? Because these aren't elected, but nominated.

I'm including all unelected judges whom engage in judicial activism.

 

[wing2000]

The reality is that unelected judges are engaged in judicial activism.

Any judge that does not rule in favor of Trump's wishes is engaging in judicial activism.

Am I right?

 

[FenderTL5]

..the chaos is calculated — and explicitly designed to institutionalize MAGA, paralyze the president's enemies

Agree, but the playbook for the chaos was there all the time, even though campaign Donnie denied it. He's running the Project 2025 Playbook as designed for him.

2. "Inflation is back.. Trump's sweeping use of tariffs is injecting deep uncertainty into global markets, and could turn inflation into a long-term feature of the U.S. economy.

agree, and again, this was communicated in advance but was dismissed by many, particulary among the red hat crowd.

 

[Pommer]

I'm including all unelected judges whom engage in judicial activism.

You’re going to have to define ”judicial activism”, now.
Otherwise it might look like rank partisan bickering.

 

[Vambram]

You’re going to have to define ”judicial activism”, now.
Otherwise it might look like rank partisan bickering.

I like the following definition:

judicial activism​

Judicial activism refers to the practice of judges making rulings based on their policy views rather than their honest interpretation of the current law . Judicial activism is usually contrasted with the concept of judicial restraint, which is characterized by a focus on stare decisis and a reluctance to reinterpret the law.

Judicial activism is often maligned by judges and political pundits. On both ends of the political spectrum, accusations of judicial activism are commonplace. Critics argue that, regardless of whether their chosen policy was advisable, judicial activism exceeds the proper exercise of judicial authority .

Common critiques of judicial activism include arguments that:

• A judge cannot be a neutral arbiter of disputes if they intend to rewrite the law at the outset of a case .
• It is unjust to hold parties to a novel interpretation of the law.
• Judicial activism risks upsetting the balance between the three branches of government.
• As judges are unelected, judge-made policies are less likely to receive wide acceptance from the general public.
• Judges are often ill-equipped to make sound public policy decisions.

Despite these critiques judicial activism is not always seen as a negative. Judicial activism is inherently anti-majoritarian, and proponents of judicial activism view it as a necessary check on legislative overreach.

judicial activism

www.law.cornell.edu