I understand your skepticism, @briantrice. I’ve been there a few months ago. I was certainly hesitant about people talking about fulcro when an om.next question was being asked. On a whim I just tried it, and liked it. The most honest description I can give is that if om.next is opinionated, fulcro is even more so. It makes more assumptions, and can therefore do some things out of the box that would otherwise require bootstrapping. There are times that it feels limiting, but I've yet to be truly blocked. I’m not too fond of the defsc syntax and the use of macros for mutations, but the convenience they bring is too great for me to forego. (tbh I was a fan of reify from om classic) I encourage you to give it a spin if you have the time. Edit: someone else mentioned untangled, so removed it to be more concise.

I don’t have time, and I’m under a lot of pressure. Nothing is casual right now. That’s the problem.

I have to defend the use of Clojure to management, on top of that. Not strongly, but it’s there.

Ah, I understand. Perhaps reagent+reframe will be a better fit, then, provided you are familiar with it.