After the shock at the ballot box, could voters be suffering 'Trumpgret'?

It is fascinating, albeit in a sad way, to see politicians and candidates making promises that they won't or can't keep.

A prime example of this was one of the Vote Leave campaign's main promises in the run-up to the Brexit referendum, to hand the £350 million ($434.6 million) per week sent to the European Union and spend it on the National Health Service instead. This promise, of course, was scrapped from their website the day after the Brexit vote.

Last week's election win by Donald Trump has me thinking that the American people might now be heading down the road to "Trumpgret". Ian Bremmer, president of Eurasia Group, put out a note where he said by electing Donald Trump as president of the U.S., "the world is heading into a profound (and longer term) geopolitical recession."

Anti-Trump protesters gather outside City Hall to protest the president-elect Donald Trump by chanting, 'Not my president, not my president,' in Los Angeles, Calif., on Nov. 9, 2016.
Marcus Yam | Los Angeles Times | Getty Images
Anti-Trump protesters gather outside City Hall to protest the president-elect Donald Trump by chanting, 'Not my president, not my president,' in Los Angeles, Calif., on Nov. 9, 2016.

Let's start with taxes and social security.

Trump has promised to lower taxes and to keep social security completely untouched.

According to The Center for Poverty Research, around 15 percent of Americans live in poverty in the U.S., equating to about 48 million Americans.

Add on the middle to lower middle class (who aren't officially in poverty but still need to budget for the month), and you have a lot of people. Of those people, many of them voted for Trump because he will "Make 'Merica Great Again."

Now, here comes the painful part.

Under Trump's tax proposals, according to Politifact, "the top 0.1 percent would get more tax relief than the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers combined."

Now, if the rich are giving less money to the government, this means the federal deficit is projected to balloon by at least $10 trillion over the next decade, according to Politifact. So if the government is a lot poorer, guess who suffers. Answer: The people who aren't rich.

Also, sure, they get a tax break too. But just re-read that statistic. The tax break isn't going to be that big for you unless you're super rich. So, we now have a government who has a lot less money. How then can social security remain untouched? So often this is the area that is the first place governments look to cut when dealing with deficits.

Also, Trump supporters have been very supportive of regulation to safeguard their ways of life. They want to do away with Dodd-Frank? Hang on *scratches head* this is the act that was put in place in 2010 to regulate big banks, so we wouldn't face another financial crisis remember?

I could have sworn we just went through years of everyone yelling (especially those not working in banking) that we need to regulate banks, and that giving bankers too much control was bad. OK, so now we want bankers to have more control. Sorry, my mistake.

One more thing though on this regulation topic I still don't really get it. I could have sworn many were "outraged" by pharmaceutical companies hiking drug prices (EpiPen, cancer drugs, dermatology drugs and insulin to mention a few areas). So now, a few months later, people think high medicine prices and not regulating the pharmaceutical companies is good? Sorry, again, my bad.

And just one more thing on this boring regulation topic, let me just mention oil and gas. A real revolution happened in U.S. shale oil and gas production during the Obama years. Unfortunately for those looking to make easy money off of this, they kept having to deal with people wanting to ensure the environment could handle all the involved fracking. It's a real pain for oil and gas people to have to deal with environmental regulations.

Lucky for them, Trump has said climate change is a hoax and he has promised to cancel the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Water Rule.

Now I don't know about you, but I prefer my water as clean as possible. But maybe here I'm also missing the point. Of course there will be checks and balances, right? Well, kind of. Turns out Trump is considering making Harold Hamm, CEO of oil producer Continental Resources, his energy secretary. This would be the first energy secretary taken directly from the oil and gas industry since the job was first created in 1977.

No need to overreact. Granted, it emerged via The Wall Street Journal that "Trump aides were described as unaware that the entire presidential staff working in the West Wing had to be replaced at the end of Mr. Obama's term."

One might be forgiven for hoping that once someone sits down and properly explains how complicated things actually are, the world's most powerful man-to-be will end up doing a lot of things the Obama administration did … Just with a slightly angrier spin.

Louisa Bojesen is the anchor of CNBC's 'European Street Signs'. You can follow her on Twitter @louisabojesen and on Facebook.

Follow CNBC International on Twitter and Facebook.