Is it really that bad. Probably, since that position is the mean of those other extremes.
Our unidentified guru (to protect him from future fallout) puts it this way: " The main reason to believe we shouldn't expect a "good" scenario - or a particularly "ugly" scenario either - is that Trump is simply too chaotic. The president's main job is to referee between competing staffers, each representing competing visions and stakeholders (or stakeholder coalitions)." Quote from George Orwell's Animal Farm.

That text went with this decade's old Searle cartoon. Rod added the Trump icon, which may suggest a tri-partide personality. did not initially shown the level of sustained attention required to create a working right-wing team. "Say of him what you will, but at least George W. Bush was 'The Decider.' And 'No Drama Obama' liked to engage in academic jibber-jabber. Republicans have reportedly already started to pretty much ignore Trump because of the chaotic nature of his interventions in public debate."

"In this scenario, the Trump administration, such as it is, would mostly be taken up by bureaucratic knife-fights between various clans: Trumpists (presumably under Steve Bannon), traditional conservatives (presumably under Mike Pence), and various cadres of opportunists."

WeeD may have been less of a facilitator than he thought, but this kind of feed-back was greviously annoying and in the end he cut that association.

Under the bad category, this writer predicted that "ObamaCare would get 'repealed' under reconciliation rules, but at the same time, Congressional Republicans would postpone getting behind an actual reform, meaning that ObamaCare would limp along in all but name. Some form of tax cut would probably get passed, but without any meaningful tax reform." That prediction did not gel.

"On the foreign policy front, America's position in the world would keep slowly eroding as it has under Obama, but without any catastrophe. Russia's influence in Eastern Europe and the Middle East would grow. Trade deals would fail to materialize. The Democrats would win the 2018 midterm elections, further cementing Washington gridlock, and Cory Booker would get elected president in 2020.

Illustration and text by Searle. Names change but the games the same?  Everybody is into prophecy: "NATO finally collapses. Ukraine is small-ball. What Putin really wants is all of Eastern Europe. The Baltic States are defended by NATO, which really is only as good as America's word. And Trump has already said that America's word with regard to its allies might be up for grabs. Of course, Putin is never going to straight-up invade. However, 'insurgencies' might cause "pro-Russian" governments to sprout up in those countries. In the face of American inaction, more and more countries leave NATO and go under the Russian umbrella."

That Yellow Peril racist nonsense is embedded in the American psyche and could lead to trouble. "China strikes preemptively. Trump has certainly made it clear that he wants to take a confrontational stance towards China, and that - unprecedentedly - he wants to put the United States' acquiescence to Beijing's 'One China' policy on the table to get concessions on trade. Trump calculates that this will cause China to compromise. "

"But China's leadership might draw an opposite conclusion: that with the United States set for confrontation anyway, it might be worth striking preemptively; especially if the United States has shown a lack of appetite for defending its international commitments. China could easily pull off a fait accompli and invade Taiwan. What happens then? Well, either World War III or the collapse of America as a superpower and the collapse of the post-War, post-Cold War international order (probably followed by World War III anyway).

"Creeping authoritarianism." As well as overflowing egotism. In the end all rivers empty into the ocean.

We live in the realm of three felonies a day. That makes the attorney general of the United States perhaps the most powerful man in the country. What will press coverage look like when owners of the press are, each in turn, threatened with invasive prosecution and discovery? If President Trump starts passing executive orders that go even beyond Obama's turn towards Caesarism, is a Republican Congress really going to stand athwart history yelling stop, when it has thus far shown practically zero appetite for curbing executive branch authoritarianism?

"Again, it is probably Trump's own incompetence that most likely stands between us and creeping fascism. In one way it is a formidable obstacle; in another, it is a remarkably flimsy one."One can hope without great expectations.

"Inflamed racial conflict. Black lives matter! No, blue lives matter! Wait, since when are those in conflict? The problem with viewing social conflicts as racial conflicts is that these prophecies have a way to become self-fulfilling. Too many white cops might feel that the election of Trump amounts to a blank check to do whatever they want in minority neighborhoods — and given the importance of prosecutorial discretion, and given the priorities of some in the Trump orbit, they may end up proven right."

  "Meanwhile, while protests against racially biased police conduct have been mostly peaceful, it's inarguable that this movement also has a violent fringe. Violence begets violence, and it's not hard to imagine a scenario where another Ferguson-like incident leads to a much fiercer backlash, which leads to a much more violent crackdown, and on and on, in an already polarized environment."

Any what about the Indians? In the past there has been some doublespeak on this issue. As the Grump would say, "sad."

"Bad" is a word Donniker applies to this critics and enemies in ad infinitum. Although the New York Times has not been a fan, he allows himself to be interviewed by them and is a reader. In 2008, Paul Krugman was the sole recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on international trade theory. He joined the Times in 19991 as  a columnist concerned with macroeconomics, trade, health care, social policy and politics. On April 7, his Opinion Pages were headlined, "The Bad, the Worse and the Ugly." Referring to his newspaper's interview earlier that week, he described the revelations as "horrifying, yet curiously unsurprising."

Tim O'Brien, a Trump biographer, unsuccessfully sued for understating Donald's wealth, made this unfounded prediction. Krugman was much less flattering describing him as "lazy, ignorant, dishonest and vindictive."

As you may have heard Fox News' star TV reporter, Bill O’Reilly, is accused of sexual predation and abuse of power.

Asked about him, Trump told the Times, "He's a good person." Krugman argued that this statement coupled with peripatetic moved between New York, Washington and Florida, "tells us more about both the man from Mar-a-Lago and the motivations of his base than his ramblings about infrastructure and trade."

Krugman does not accept the "fact" that "Everything is running like a fine tuned machine." "The Trump administration is, by all accounts, a mess. The vast majority of key presidential appointments requiring Senate confirmation are unfilled; whatever people are in place are preoccupied with factional infighting. Decision-making sounds more like palace intrigues in a sultan’s seraglio than policy formulation in a republic. And then there are those tweets."

This hot-shot is a learn by doing kind of guy, a player not a planner.  Krugman said that the failure of the effort to kill Obamacare was not essentially an effect of  executive dysfunction, but a reflection of the fact that Republicans had lied for eight years about having created an alternate plan. "Tax reform looks like a bust, not because the Trump administration has no idea what it’s doing (although it doesn’t), but because nobody in the G.O.P. ever put in the hard work of figuring out what should change and how to sell those changes."

Here is what his biographers hoped for, although O"Brien admitted he saw little evidence to suggest that Trump might shape up. Trump has promised bigly things for infrastrstructure but Krugman reported that,"what we heard in the interview - basically incoherent word salad mixed with random remarks about transportation in Queens (his home district in New York) - it’s clear that the administration has no actual infrastructure plan, and probably never will." That is both sad and bad for America.

How much longer will American citizens have to wait?  Krugman has noted that Trump's terrrificist triumph thus far has been crippling environmental policy. "But that’s what any Republican would have done; climate change denialism and the belief that our air and water are too clean are mainstream positions in the modern G.O.P."

The brash one got knocked off his branch in April. "By now there’s a whole genre of media portraits of working-class Trump supporters. You know what I mean: interviews with down-on-their-luck rural whites who are troubled to learn that all those liberals who warned them that they would be hurt by Trump policies were right, but still support Mr. Trump, because they believe that liberal elites look down on them and think they’re stupid. Hmm.."

"Anyway, one thing the interviewees often say is that Mr. Trump is honest, that he tells it like is, which may seem odd given how much he lies about almost everything, policy and personal. But what they probably mean is that Mr. Trump gives outright, unapologetic voice to racism, sexism, contempt for “losers” and so on — feelings that have always been an important source of conservative support, but have long been things you weren’t supposed to talk about openly."

The Duck Dynasty TV characters are not pure disadvantaged working class stiffs, but they have served as avatars for what a lot of folk would like to be. The disenfranchised are not so dumb that they think that their hero is traditionally honest or a stand-up guy, but would probably ask, "Who is?"

What they probably do mean is that he is not hypocritical or apologetic when it comes to his darkest beliefs, desires and motivations. They think that other politicians, including some Republicans, have similar hidden agendas which they disguise under glib talk. Who wouldn't want to be a billionaire?

Clearly liberal cartoonists outnumber those in the conservative camp, especially when it comes to the deep right. Technically Ben Garrison is probably the best Trump admiring technician. Above should read "crazy right-winger."

The right projects its venom on the left: Krugman says that Fox News is a similar outlet, providing a "safe space for people who want an affirmation that their uglier impulses are, in fact, justified and perfectly O.K. And one way to think about the Trump White House is that it’s attempting to expand that safe space to include the nation as a whole."

The left projects its venom on the right. In both cases these are legitimate caricatures, but perhaps too unsubtle to change opinions on either side.
Like Garrison, Trump is an angry old donniker. Surprisingly he took questions about  Mr. O'Reilly's possible immorality as an indirect attack on his character; hence his affinity for that poor TV personality's public humiliation. Sad? Bad?

"And the big question about Trumpism - bigger, arguably, than the legislative agenda - is whether unapologetic ugliness is a winning political strategy.

How did WeeD manage his takeover of the Republican party and the American psyche?  1.He kept his messaging simple, very simple. He maintained his one slogan, “Make America Great Again” throughout his campaign. 2. He correctly identified his target audience. "The disenfranchised manufacturing mid-West rustbelt was arguably the region that won Trump the presidency." 3. He maintained presence and media control. He distanced himself from opponents at every stage in the process and was not shy about contrasting his personality with that of the "losers." "

He out maneuvered both parties in the use of social media. Although not web savvy he bought the web domain and redirected inquiries there to his own website during the primaries! He was a regular donniker but did not mind the odours that prevailed because of his actions.


"Have the Republicans lost control of Donald Trump?" Before the election was decided, long time critic Jonathan Simonoff, guessed that,"I don't think they ever had control over him, and they appear to have none now." Since then a lot of srupidity has passed under the bridge, and little will was shown in the direction of stopping rule by presidential command. Trumpenstein slammed the door on Syrian refugees and then used the plight of Syrian children to justify the bombing of the Syrians he guessed to be responsible for a chemical weapons attack on Syrian civilians. It has been pointed out that it is up to his party to rein in this missile strike which did not have the authorization of Congress. And with members enjoying a two week holiday...

Van Trummpe is not at the professional level of Van Damme, but he does have a lust for something outside the norm.  He has been accused of losing focus, but that's old age? 

What does this mean? To think that,  suggests not just a lack of focus but a lack of understanding of the flow of language. Searle's cartoons could be enigmatic.

Paul Copcuff has suggested that the wee one had "a tendency to feel he needed to make the answer fill the time alloted or have the response sound more impressive."

Is that impressive? It is repetitive, and as Rod's grade 1 teacher, Miss Wry, repeatedly said, "Repetition is essential to learning." Hence, the "times tables?" And then there is double entendre,  a word or phrase open to two interpretations, one of which is usually risqué or indecent. Synonyms: ambiguity, double meaning, innuendo, a play on words.

"The Babel fish is small, yellow, leech-like." By jove Higgins, I think they've got it! As you can see content and veracity is beside the point; perhaps outside it entirely?

"Up and down" is a concept even a punch drunk boxer comprehends.

George Orwell called this peculiar language Newspeak in his novel 1984.

Too fantastic; too fabulous; too, too... Perhaps not. What a great, great, great propaganda tool?

And WeeD has declared himself the Hemingway of tweets.

One critic dared to suggest that Das Boss made pronouncements which suggested a lack of preparation. "Only in the latter parts of the campaign did he sometimes resort to using an autocue. He liked to make off the cuff remarks in order to appear sharp on his feet. Some of the above quotes are his and some issued from the mouth of Big Bobby Clobber, a Canadian radio/TV personality who took too many hits to the head before he was persuaded to wear a helmet.

This attitude toward prep time makes it possible to be outrageous without offending the NRA. As Calvin says, "The human population had doubled in just two generations to almost six billion, so some tinning of the herds was necessary yo prevent starvation." It's true, true, true!

Say it fast and loud lends veracity to statements.

Following the election, WeeD made some personal appearances which did not always go as he might have wished.

Trump likes to be in charge which is why he has come to prefer organized rallies of support as opposed to media scrums.  He has a limited speaking style and that may have caused him to delegate his ideas to mouthpieces.

Who the hell is Michelle Bachmann? Believe it or not a former congresswoman. Interviewed on End Times radio she said, "We know that (Trump’s election) just wasn’t in the natural. This was in the supernatural where God sovereignly, I believe, answered the prayers of believers beseeching him and he’s given us a reprieve. But a reprieve for what? For what? What are we going to do with this? Remember, over 50 years of destruction, destroying the foundations of this country, you don’t just turn that on a dime unless God again intervenes."

Who is Kellyanne? She was a shooting star in WeeDs publicity crew.  As Paul Copcutt has noticed, "Trump is a controlling figure and either due to his learned business approach or frustration with the GOP, he tried to go it alone many times. Staff came and went if they did not "buy in' his way." Above  white-boxed quotes are pure Con way.


And who was Bannon? The white boxed quotes are his.

If you have been living under a rock, Sean Michael Spicer (a rapidly aging 47 year old) is the White House press secretary and former communications director for President Donald Trump. explains why the media attends his briefings, explain g that it is "fun dunking on Spicer's routinely
disastrous daily briefings." On the other hand, argues that "now that the White House is blocking outlets like The New York Times, BBC, and Politico from some press briefings, the ones who are still there are becoming an increasingly important part of the story," and goes on to say that not all reporters get equal access in the question period. When Spicer says: "That’s a great question!"...

It appears that Americans are not all susceptible to reason and some at the top remain willing to give stupidity a chance.


Marking Black History Month, the president made some strange observations about Douglass and Martin Luther King, but largely talked about himself. "Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is getting recognized more and more," appeared to indicate that he thought this historic figure was contemporary. Donald Trump revealed later revealed that everything he knew about Douglass had come from his Education Secretary nominee, Betsy DeVos. WeeD's dad and granddad were both Freds.

Bad, bad, bad boys.