The article critiques the narrative that Americans are receiving what they desired from the Trump administration following the elections. It argues that despite claims of an overwhelming mandate, Trump's campaign did not explicitly promise drastic cuts to federal spending or an aggressive downsizing of the government. Instead, the platform contained pledges for tax cuts without clarity on funding. Furthermore, the text highlights the irony in Trump's portrayal of a government crackdown on certain groups while focusing solely on supporting his base, casting doubt on the overall governance priorities of the administration.
Trump's campaign promised various initiatives, but did not reveal intentions for drastic federal cuts and austerity measures that his administration is now pursuing.
While Trump promised large tax cuts for workers, he simultaneously pushed high-end corporate tax cuts without addressing how to finance them.
The notion that Americans got what they wanted in the November elections is misleading, as Trump's actual campaign platform did not include extreme budget reductions.
The campaign claimed to address government 'weaponization' against its supporters, highlighting that its focus may not align with broader government accountability.
Collection
[
|
...
]