It would take an honest Trump supporter (a being perhaps as rare as unicorns) to finally admit that Trump is nothing but a neophyte, flip flopper.
That Trump is a governance apprentice is not really a problem, in and of itself. That Trump is slow to transform himself into a governance master while also holding the highest elected office in the land is a huge problem.
what does Trump do to "resolve" DACA??? He punts it to Congress
To whom did Trump effectively "punt" when last he was "in over his head?" His father.
- Pre-1990s -- Fred Trump's political connections and loan guarantees (co-signing Donald's loans) make possible the immense debt that Donald assumed in order to buy the stuff he did.
- 1984 -- Harrah's casino -- Trump saddled the casino with $300M in junk bond debt. Why did he do that? To buy his business partner out of their interest in the business. Why did he do that? Because he refused to collaborate with his partner on the execution of the casino's construction -- Trump's company was performing the construction and his partner was paying the construction costs. The two disagreed on the approach Trump was using and the only solution they could arrive at was for Trump to buy them out of their position and fund the construction himself.
- 1985 -- Trump buys an abou-ready-to-open casino from Hilton, but the place didn't have a gambling license, thus delaying the start of revenue generation (ROI) and thereby destroying the value proposition used to justify the purchase. Trump financed the purchase using another $300M in junk bonds.
- A few other dubious/high risk examples I'm not going to bother summarizing:
- 1988 - Plaza Hotel
- 1988 - Taj
- 1988 - Eastern Airlines' "NE Corridor" routes and equipment and calls it "Trump Shuttle."
- 1990 -- When he's about 45 years old, Trump's foolhardiness form the prior decade catches up to him.
- Two months after the Taj opened, Trump said he couldn’t make a $43 million interest payment on the Trump Castle’s debt. There had been rumors for months that Trump was in trouble, but this was the first time he publicly acknowledged his massive debt crisis.
The missed payment sent Trump’s creditors scrambling into round-the-clock negotiations to forge a debt-restructuring plan. Banker Robert McSween told the Wall Street Journal that Trump was “so down he was almost crying” one night as he prepared to call a bank that didn’t want to help bail the mogul out. Trump eventually got another $65 million loan to cover his short-term payments, and the banks gave him more time to deal with his debts. But they also put him on a $450,000-a-month allowance and demanded that he install new managers and financial controls for his businesses and sell off many of his assets.
When the Casino Control Commission examined Trump’s businesses, it revealed how badly Trump was in trouble. His casinos alone were $1.3 billion in debt. Trump was $3.4 billion in the hole overall, and he had personally guaranteed $833 million of that debt. Accountants who pored over his finances on behalf of his creditors found he was worth as little as minus $295 million and would probably run out of cash sometime that year. Trump seemingly acknowledged as much on a day in 1990 when he and his then-girlfriend, Marla Maples, passed a beggar on Fifth Avenue. “You see that man?” he wrote in his 1997 book, The Art of the Comeback. “Right now he’s worth $900 million more than me.”
- 1990 -- Fred Trump to the rescue.
- Despite getting debt relief in the summer, Donald was about to miss another debt payment on the Trump Castle just a few months later. So his father, Fred Trump, sent one of his lawyers down to Atlantic City to buy $3.5 million in chips from the Trump Castle, with no intention of cashing them out. That amounted to an illegal loan to the casino, and Donald used the money the very next day to make his debt payment. The Casino Control Commission investigated the move the next year and fined the Trump Castle $65,000 -- but allowed it to keep the illegally obtained cash.
That may not have been the only time Trump turned to his family to fund him during his debt crisis. The New York Times reported that Trump asked to borrow $10 million from his siblings’ portions of the Trump family trust in 1993, then requested another $20 million the next year. Trump denied borrowing from his siblings.
Fred Trump is now deceased, and Donald has found someone new to whom he can "punt" the burden of resolving problems that are rightly his to lead the way to overcoming.
Saying "here, fix this," is not what a collaborative senior executive does. What s/he does is to their team of key lieutenants -- members of Congress, especially the Speaker, Majority and Minority Leaders, Whips, and committee chairs and ranking members, are among those lieutenants -- say:
"To overcome 'Problem X,' we are gong to do A, B, C, D, etc. 'Thus-and-such' is the business case for doing those things."
After that, s/he assigns roles to the respective lieutenants, presents a timeline for getting the work done, designates someone as the central point of contact for status reporting and intra-team conflict resolution administration, and then lets his champions do their assigned jobs.
The POTUS must necessarily be a master at collaborative leadership. Why? Because the U.S. is neither an absolute monarchy nor a parliamentary democracy. It is a presidential democratic republic in which the greatest amount of power is held by the federal legislature. As such, though a POTUS has some authority to issue legally binding fiats, s/he can do so only for that which 2/3rs the legislature deems s/he can and for nothing that 2/3rd of the legislature will not countenance.
Quite simply, the best argument for why Donald Trump should not, out of hand, be perceived to have personally colluded with Putin and/or his functionaries is that Trump is anything but collaborative. The man is wanna-be tyrant and Putin is a tyrant. What is the dynamic of relationships among people like that? They collude and collaborate until one of them differs with the other. Surely every reader of this post has enough life experience to know matter how well one gets along with another individual, disagreements will yet occur. To wit, the first 2500 years of the story of Western Civilization is the story of people and their closest relatives and friends initially seeing eye-to-eye on things and later disagreeing about one or more of those things. The human condition is no different now than it was then.