OK, I just read the first few paragraphs, and I have to say I'm impressed. Paul Ryan as Trump's foil could work out in all sorts of ways, most of them good.

OK, I'll finish your comment now, just wanted to report up front you've put a bee in my bonnet... I mean, I was kind of hoping for such a thing in an offhand way, but you've put some meat on the bones, that's for sure... if only....

:-)

Damn -- OK, now you're scaring me with that "second term" comment...

LizM [4] -

Yeah! What she said!!!

:-)

LizM [5] -

He answers this later in the week, and then we all congratulate him...

:-)

neilm [6] -

OK, now I'm even more scared. You're making too much sense.

[Since we're doing a throwback to the 80's (I never thought Reagan would get a second term, myself...), thought I'd throw in a Talking Heads reference...]

My guess is the following line is going to be rediscovered by a WHOLE bunch of people, next year: "Our president's crazy, did you hear what he said?"

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/talkingheads/makingflippyfloppy.html

neilm [12] -

I think you have hit the nail right on the head. Couldn't have put it better myself. I'll miss Joe Biden for the same reasons:

Because when he is funny, he is really funny. Not many politicians are, or are brave enough to be.

When he talks from the heart, he is sincere. Not many politicians are, and when they try they seem phony.

Again, you nailed it.

altohone [13] -

I think he's setting up "The Apprentice -- Cabinet Edition," personally. I think this is a show that could continue for his entire term. He'll play them off against each other, and keep all of them guessing what he really thinks about them. And, you're right, he'll fire any of them he thinks aren't sufficiently supportive.

Gonna be a wild ride, folks. Buckle up...

Interlude

Just saw Bob Dyan actually croon for Tony Bennett (my wife's watching the birthday bash in the other room).

OK, let's just check in on where we are on the "countdown to the apocalypse" clock... Chicago Cubs win the World Series... check... Donald Trump wins the presidency... check... and, this just in, Bob Dylan croons an entire song -- after being too busy to pick up his freakin' Nobel Prize -- and, the most astonishing thing -- you could understand every word!!!

I mean, really, this year's certainly been one for the record books, folks...

End intermission

Balthasar [14] -

Hey, look on the birght side. BriWi isn't doing the nightly news, and David Gregory's gone as Meet The Press host. Things could be worse at NBC, that's for sure...

Heh.

neilm [15] -

This isn't a partisan thing, as can be seen be the people who are raising questions in the senate.

Have you ever seen such whiplash among Repubilcan senators? "Russia bad" to "Russia friend" happened at breakneck speed!

Heh.

Except for McCain and Lindsey Graham, of course...

dsws [16] -

OK, now that's really scary -- especially your final paragraph.

[17] -

OK, now you're just trying to give me nightmares...

:-(

[18] -

OK, that was pretty funny, gotta admit...

Balthasar [20] -

I'm keeping my eye on the other GOP senators that expressed doubts about Trump... didn't Flake come out against him? And that guy in (?) Nebraska who said he'd rather take his kids to a dumpster fire than see Trump nominated? There's more than just McCain and Graham out there, and here's hoping they find their public voice soon...

neilm [23] -

I think political spin can indeed trump (no pun intended) math, at times. Sad to say, but it's true....

dsws [27] -

yep. Unfortunately...

michale [28] -

That's an interesting "since..."

How do you rate Bubba's time in office? Don't know that I've ever had occasion to ask you that question before...

And one followup question: were you an active member of the military during Bill's term?

Inquiring minds want to know...

altohone [29] -

Sad to say, I can't really argue with many of the points you make...

dsws [30] -

Good points, but a "cut" (whether in taxes or in benefits) is only a "cut" when the politicians convince everybody that it is a cut.

That's a pretty universal truth in DC -- the term "cuts" is ALWAYS a political term...

OK, that's it for now, folks!

-CW

It should be noted that "cut" in this context means having the nominal amounts of Social Security payments increase with inflation, instead of with a slightly-obsolete measure that tends to slightly overstate the amount of inflation. This can somewhat reasonably be called a cut, because the payments would be less under the proposed law than under current law that includes the old measure of inflation.

Such a change wouldn't be called a "cut" if we were talking about NASA or the NIH (and wouldn't be contemplated in the first place if we were talking about the military). But it's called a "cut" in this context, and nothing I say will change that.

And Democrats near-unanimously screamed bloody murder, although (as should be evident from how I describe the proposed "cut") this Democrat was an exception.

If that were the kind of "cut" that were under consideration now, I wouldn't be worried about it now either. What's likely now is drown-it-in-a-bathtub cuts.

Nobody on Wall Street was prosecuted for the biggest financial fraud in history that the naïve call a "crisis"

The fraud in question did cause a crisis. And very many Democrats were displeased that no one was prosecuted.

However, the worst of the fraud wasn't illegal.

Naïve would be not noticing that the interests who will do well under Trump did very well under Obama, and would have done just as well under Hillary.

The reality is that it isn't party before country... it's the wealthy before party or country in our rigged duopoly.

Democrats have been in denial about it for eight years.

Obama was perfectly willing to cut Social Security.
Nobody on Wall Street was prosecuted for the biggest financial fraud in history that the naïve call a "crisis".
America became a net exporter of fossil fuels.
Inequality grew.

Republicans are already in denial about what will be with Trump.

Repubs outraged by Obama will cheer when Trump does the same thing.
Dems are now suddenly outraged by what they've been cheering under Obama.

A

Or Trump might be the best President this country's seen since Bill Clinton... :D

302

People will notice, but they won't blame Trump. "Only Trump can save Social Security from decades of Democratic mismanagement." If the checks are decreased drastically amid lots of noise about how it's Obama's fault, and then increased slightly amid lots of noise about how Republicans did it, most of the public will believe it.

Are you suggesting that the COLA increases will be limited or manipulated

I wasn't being specific, but I was assuming something worse than that. It might let current retirees continue getting their checks, but phase it out for people who retire later.

Very nicely put. :)

Are people putting party ahead of country? I'm not ready to paint the whole of the Republican leadership with that brush yet, as I'd have to do pretty much the same for the Democratic leadership to avoid being completely naive.

Isn't it crystal clear that the Republican leadership have put party ahead of country throughout the Obama presidency, from the get-go?

I mean, I will NEVER forget their dangerous and destructive behavior during the early days of the Obama/Biden/Geithner administration during the height and aftermath of the financial crisis.

I will always wonder how much better things might have been if the Republican leadership had put country first during this period and beyond.

This is where the really scary part is for me. Are people putting party ahead of country?

I'm not ready to paint the whole of the Republican leadership with that brush yet, as I'd have to do pretty much the same for the Democratic leadership to avoid being completely naive.

I think the Republican leadership want Trump safe in the White House, then they can ramp up their investigations into Russia. They have to know that if there is some clear cut and explosive evidence that comes to light showing Russia aimed to hack and leak to help Trump, they might be seen as part of the conspiracy.

If you think that isn't likely, look at the goons Russia sent to Turkey to execute former Chechen fighters - they left behind a trail of clues including a USB drive with pictures. They asked to get a rental car without GPS, but they didn't notice it had a unit and was switch on the whole time allowing the Turkish police to reconstruct all their movements and then look up pertinent security cameras, etc.

Don't think that the trail left behind by hackers is as hidden from the NSA etc as it would be from the FBI or other agencies that don't constantly monitor net traffic.

Wow, you have less confidence in the general public than I do. How will Trump et al reduce SS checks without anybody noticing?

Are you suggesting that the COLA increases will be limited or manipulated - I've noticed that people don't take inflation into account at the moment because it is only about 2%. I try to explain that 2.1% over 10 years is almost 25% - so $2.50/G gas today is the same as $2.00/G in 2006.

It is even worse with house prices - my friends were happy that their home prices were back to 2006 levels until I told them they needed to add about 25%.

I'm not always the most popular person at the table when my math OCD kicks in.

In four years, Trump will be re-elected. The day after he dies, he'll be put on the currency. If they wait that long. Egghead historians will say his presidency was awful for the country, but no one will listen (aside from other egghead historians).

I'm sure the media will step up and inform the public of the facts.

Oh, wait....right. Never mind.

It's so simple, and so inane, it makes one want to cry.

I never thought I'd feel as warmly towards John McCain and Lindsay Graham as I do now, but they seem to be the only folks on their side of the aisle with a healthy amount of skepticism about all this.

http://media.gettyimages.com/videos/road-sign-pointing-to-hell-along-snowy-country-road-chelsea-michigan-video-id86091566?s=640x640

Before I read CW's answer, here's my take:

No, partly because no.

They won't do it, partly because it wouldn't work. But even more because they don't want it. What good would it do them to have him parrot their talking points? They just want to pass whatever bills they feel like, so they can show those bills to the people who grease the revolving door. (And he can't stop them, even if he wanted to.) He just wants to sign the bills and take the credit. (And they can't stop him, even if they wanted to).

In a few months, Social Security will have been gutted, and at least 60% of the electorate will agree with Trump that it's a wonderful thing, and that only Trump could have saved Social Security from decades of Democratic mismanagement.

I know of no reason to doubt that Tillerson will put America before Exxon, but other countries might not be so confident. Will a more friendly approach to Russia be seen by the Middle East as a threat to their oil interests? What if Russia squeezes Europe again by threatening their energy supplies?

For the very reason that Tillerson is an important player in basically the only major industry Russia has would raise questions - and I want to repeat I'm not questioning the man, I'm questioning the intersection of his oil background and Russia's dependence on oil to their country.

It was quite a swing from Romney, who targeted Russia as a danger in 2012, to Tillerson who is winning best friend awards from Putin. This isn't a partisan thing, as can be seen be the people who are raising questions in the senate.

Trump's decision to continue as producer of "the Apprentice" is a conflict of interest not only for the Pres-elect, but also a gaping conflict of interest for the network, raising all sorts of questions for their news division, which includes the (supposedly) liberal-leaning MSNBC.

I suspect that Trump is well aware that his followers are easily duped, so I wouldn't put too much stock in any of his campaign promises.

He could easily package his sales pitch to gut SS as "saving Social Security" and the lemmings will follow him off the cliff.

His main foil will continue to be the media.
He doesn't need Ryan to play the bad guy role.

My prediction about potential friendly fire targets would be one or more of his appointees.
Trump has chosen a whole bunch of people who think very highly of themselves but who don't play well with others, and most of them didn't earn their positions through wisdom, hard work or merit. I think Trump is currently oblivious to that reality.

One of them is likely to cross Trump before too long or he will just need a disposable scapegoat for something that goes wrong.

A

Because when he is funny, he is really funny. Not many politicians are, or are brave enough to be.

When he talks from the heart, he is sincere. Not many politicians are, and when they try they seem phony.

I think we are going to be seeing a lot less of him after January 20th.

This seems like a custom piece for 4 or 5 of his multi-post lectures....

Rather unlike him for this time of year.

Just caught up with Colbert - the Joe Biden episode.

I'm really going to miss him.

Finally, someone who Putin can deal with.

I thought Bush 2 could not possibly win a second term after the Iraq fiasco with no weapons of mass destruction. I thought Brexit was so stupid nobody would shoot themselves in the foot that badly and I thought Leicester City had no chance of winning the EPL (5000-1 odds against them at the start of the season).

I though Trump was almost certain to lose (although towards the end I gave him a 1/3 chance because I thought Nate Silver was shouting out some realities that nobody wanted to hear).

So yes, I'm not ruling out a second term.

Paul Ryan fits the bill. Running mate of elitist par excellence Mitt Romney. Bit of a nerdy smart ass. On record as wanting to touch the third rails of Social Security and Medicare. I think you spotted the right target CW.

Trump is shrewd and knows that he will get a lot of bipartisan support if he is seen as the defender of pensions and healthcare from the evil clutches of Ryan and the elites who have huge pensions and first class healthcare for life guaranteed and paid for by the rest of us.

This could be the road he takes to a second term - always fighting against the elites for the common man. There are plenty of people that believe this is what he is already doing (you know my take, conman and crook, but I promised Michale to give Trump a chance so I will).

The problem with the picture above is the cast of characters Trump has chosen to surround himself with. Can you imagine if Trump had brought Bernie into the cabinet as Labor Secretary, for example, instead of Puzder. Or Robert Reich. Even the attempt (I'm sure Bernie and Reich would have refused) would have been revolutionary. There are too many billionaires (and some relatively poverty stricken multi-millionaires) on the inside, and even the Generals don't water them down enough.

The other problem is that Trump is playing the Russia card wrongly. He needs to get out in front of this before it becomes "Trump defends Russia and Putin". If some really damning hard evidence comes out, and it isn't ridiculous that there might be a "leak" from the CIA, NSA, etc. Trump will be forced to either admit he was wrong (not his strong suit) or be tarnished with one of the most difficult labels to escape - a label I'll avoid from using in mere speculation.

Can a leopard change its spots?

Trump is and always will be a bully and that is how he will govern, assuming he takes the presidential oath of office ...

Bully for Trump.