>> alexandria, thank you for joining us from the washington post. read her article, it's funny. i'm katy tur in for steve kornacki. find me any time on facebook and twitter. meanwhile, mtp daily with chuck todd starts right now. if it's friday, it's president trump against t world. tonight prumpl defends, again, his wiretap claim. is time, on the world stage with germany's angela merck. >> as far as wiretapping, i guess by, you know, this past administration, at least we have something in common perhaps. [ laughter ] plus hold the line. as the president's supreme court nominee heads for hearings, can democrats afford to become the party of no? and the big boom theory. are the politics of the baby boom generation destroying

america? this is mtp daily and it starts right now. fweerng and welcome to mtp daily, happy friday. i'm chuck todd here in washington, it's the end of another week and there is a single thing that hangs over everything the trump white house wants to accomplish. this administration is struggling from a crisis of credibility, one mostly the president's own making. and today that crisis was displayed on the world stage, it's president trump versus the world. and no one knows when to take him at his word. dumb hours ago, president trump wrapped up a meeting with german chancellor angela merkel, event only described as tense.

>> we said nothing. all we defense quote a certain, very talented, legal mind who was the one responsible for saying that on television. i didn't make an opinion on it. that was a statement made by a very talented lawyer on fox, and so you sbhont talking to me, you should be talking to fox. >> and take another dig at his predecessor, awkwardly brought up the approval of surveillance of the german government. >> wiretapping, i guess you know, this past administration, at least we have something in common perhaps. [ laughter ] >> actually, none of it's been proven true at all. not sure who's laughing there. the president will just not let this go. and it's overshadowing everything and maybe that's the

point. capitol hill the house set a date for the vote on the obama carrey placement bill. but that bill has been politically unraveling and bleeding support from within the gop all week long. the same can be said by the way about the president's first ever budget blueprint which the white house sent to the hill this week. it's bold, brash, boisterous, and not going anywhere. this week summed up everything we know about president trump, his agenda on health care, the budget, interaction with allies, right now, it's all stuck in the mud, but boy is his foot plowed on the gas, but the wheels are spinning, but not going anywhere. and at least republicans in the world leaders visibly uneasy. time to let the wiretapping claim go perhaps, but make the white house doesn't want to. bipartisan leaders in the house and senate are now united. there's no evidence whatsoever that the president's tweet was accurate. and on monday, fbi director james comey will testify panelly for the first time before the house intelligence committee. likely to say the same thing, bear in mind that there's another big hearing on monday. the first for president trump's

supreme court justice, neil gorsuch is in jeopardy of being overshadowed to be the least. this is the first big win they are likely to get. they may not get a lot of attention. white house could of course fix this thing, turn the page, change the narrative, instead, they keep doubling down. just yesterday, white house press secretary sean spicer defended the president'sclaim, playinger havable gymnastics for 20 minutes. so what happens when a president cannot be taken at his word? here's what house speaker paul ryan told me yesterday on the show. if he's not credible on this, how is he going to be credible selling these important proposals to you? >> look, i'll say what i've said for months now, it's going to be an unconventional presidency. twitter is new. twiert and facebook and all of these things -- we as americans, as a society, haven't fully processed this new system we have. and the president's, you know -- he's going to -- >> can i ask you -- >> let me just say, it's going to be unconventional presidency.

i'm not going to justify and defend every tweet that's out there. there's 20 a day for all i know. >> president is trying to sell some major things right now, health care reform, ambitious budget proposal based on campaign promises. many of which aren't entirely conservative. he needs capital. he's leaving his own party members a bit in the lurch. joining me now is david ig nashs and associate editor for the washington post. a the love times folks can overread body language, overread certain phrases when it comes to these bilateral meetings. but there did seem to be discomfort between president trump, angela merkel, not surprise, she played diplomat, he less so. >> he really needs to have a good relationship with germany. he doesn't seem to realize that. i think many people would agree with trump that it's important that germany and other eea allies increase their defense

spendi. it's my understanding that chancellor merkel signalled if she wins reelection, if she's back and in a strong political position, he intends to raise german defense spending, instead of taking that as a fact for the future, trump seems to have decided on a much more distance posture. the u.s. needs german support for all reasons in europe. if this was not good, that's too bad. >> who's the most influential western leader in the world? >> you can argue it's chancellor merkel. >> over the american president? >> in terms of confidence among our traditional allies, i think merkel's at the top of the list. donald trump is still a question mark for many leaders around the world. they still don't understand the difference between his tweets and his policies. they're not sure where he's going. >> somebody, ryan leslie, reporter from the new yorker, i think a bit in jest but noticed about the questions about the wiretapping where the president seemed to double down of sorts

or at least not yet pull back his belief in a fox news commentator on this stuff, also seems to have insulted important allies intelligence agency. here we are, you've beaten up a little bit on the germans and the british. two of america's most important allies. >> you don't to want blow off all of your key tditional allies. one thing we have learned about donald trump is that if he's cornered in public, if he's questioned about -- >> he feels cornered. >> he feels cornered, he's going to double down and react badly. i think an interesting counterexample is china. trump came out during transition with us very provocative questioning of our traditional one china policy that the chinese said look, unless you clarify that, make clear that you support the traditional american view, we're not going to have conversations and trump told in private said, so clarify. let's get it done. >> is that donald trump the businessman all the sudden? because if you look pragmatically and you see what's more important to america's

economy, a good relationship with china or good relationship with europe, for the economy, it's probably good relationship with china come first. so does that -- maybe he is transactionally thinking? >> they both come pretty high on the list. our trade with europe is enormous. i think the zimpbs in a case with china, trump was able to do this in private. he wasn't doing it -- >> didn't feel cornered. >> he didn't feel cornered. he instructed his aids to set up a phone call in which he give president xi and got it done and open to a crucial u.s./china dialogue about north korea, but i think that's really the difference. he was able to do it quietly in private, come away not looking like he folded his hand like it was a loss, but that he was a winner. >> all right. that personality, that temperament is going to get tested now, apparently, potentially with korea, and a

north reand what's goi on there. and i know that -- first of all, very surprised that nobody asked a question today base on the what secretary tillerson said that maybe diplomacy is done. is it done or is this a rhetorical threat at the koreans? or was that a message he was sending to the chinese. >> he's sending a message to pyongyang and -- recollection tillerson, the quiet man was not so quiet today in seoul. he said, the policy of strategic patience it is what barack obama called it. toward north korea's nuclear missile programs is over. all options are on the table. this happens to be off the table. >> it is not off the table.

>> every year we have an special r especially big one going on right now. it's no thanks tillerson made a fairly provocative statement at a time when the uss unusually large military power in korea and the area, i think the crucial visit now will be tillerson's trip this weekend to beijing in which he will talk with the chinese and basically say either you help us solve this diplomatically, you put pressure on north korea or we're heading toward a confrontation the united states is ready for. >> how stable is kim jong un in north korea? i've been talking to some sort of korean criminologist to use a horrible metaphor there who seem to tnk the assassination, that's a nervous leade sitting in pooeng i can't think. >> you don't kill your half brother who as it happens has been under effective chinese protection in macau for years. chinese maintained body guards for him. double the body guard. you don't assassinate that

person unless you're nervous. north korea is a complete mystery to outsiders. so we don't know what's going on internally, but we do see signs of anxiety from the leader, these very brash, provocative statements. in a race, i have to say, a race to complete their missile testing and nuclear armorments so they can threaten the united states with a nuclear weapon. >> is it too late? is it too late -- israel famously took out a nuclear -- potential nuclear reactor before iraq could get it doing? is it too late? >> we don't know. the difference is that seoul, south korean capital lies under a threat of north korean rockets 30 miles away. it's certainly the case that will soon be too late. north korea soon will have a nuclear missile that could strike the united states. at that point, you really can't go in and just take it out. so, if you're going to think about military options, the time to do that is now, not later.

>> is angela merkel the leader of the free world? >> angela merkel i think is certainly seen in europe as the leader of the group of nations. donald trump can reclaim that position, but he has to speak to the traditional concerns of what we call the liberal international order. maintenance of that, of that world, that is existed now since the end of world war ii. donald trump has to care about it and show he cares about it to have that leadership. >> does he believe that that order should say in existence? and that's -- >> as the french say, we'll see. >> david, always a pleasure, sir, thank you. let me bring in tonight's panel. it's clear they don't see eye to eye on issues, but it is one of

america's most important alls. >> yeah. >> did the white house give at all? it seems like merkel came and tried to meet him more than halfway -- >> right. >> i don't -- i didn't see trump trying to meet her half way on anything. >> reporter: particularly when the first sort of informal read out private readout that we got from an administration official that was he went after her hard when he it came to paying their fair share when it comes to nato. that was sort of the first significant piece of reporting that we got. i think tells you something about this meeting. which is that it wasn't about being sort of necessarily a gracious host to this very important ally. it was about trying to get it done. trying for the negotiator in chief to do some negotiating with an ally that he slammed again and again on the campaign trail, chuck. >> but the biggest part of this press conference has to be this bizarre wiretapping allegation that the president continues to to want do. dan, we set it up, it encompasses which is they seem

to be allowing his credibility to be eroded when they're going to need it down the road to twist an arm or two to get health care passed, twist an arm or two on the budget. seems to be a head scratcher as to why they continue to double down on this. >> maybe they don't think that the two are that interconnected. maybe they think there's, you know, there's the issue of the wiretapping and the degree to which nobody believes that. but they can't let go of it. and their belief that the republicans are so determined to use him and have his help to get health care and other things through. that they're going to just try separate them. i don't know. i mean, there is a huge credibility issue as you say, but they don't seem to act as if they think that's the case. >> that's what sing striking to me. they don't perceive as having a problem here. >> right. >> well, if i could step back far second. this is the master of the deal who is a big negotiator. and when you say my word is my bond. when you say you know chuck, we have a deal here. can you believe him?

member was congress are saying, i'm not exactly sure. but i think donald trump and his advisors have this supreme self-confidence about themselves and maybe it's going to be true. that they don't need members of congress to negotiate. they know what they're doing. i think they think they have a huge mandate going into the first 100 days and that they don't need any type of compromise or any type of deal making. i think it's very naive, but i think that's what they think. >> hallie, do they accept at all that they have this credibility issue with many, many americans and many people on capitol hill? >> reporter: i think if i had to predict an answer, chuck, the sans no. and here's why. you heard sean spicer when he was pressed about that all week long. flipped the narrative around and tried to say, it's the media who's not credible. it's not our problem, it's your problem, you're fake news. that's been the line without addressing some of the substance of that. i'll tell you this, i spoke with kathy mcmorris rogers today about whether or not this president has a credibility problem. does she still believe he's credible? she twice responded by answering

a question that frankly i hadn't been asked about the evidence in this case. but said she does trust the president, absolutely. she says. and that echoes something you heard from house speaker paul ryan yesterday. publicly that is the answer you have to say when you're talking about the president and house of republican liep. it is significant that republicans publicly are continuing to back the president, say that they trust him, despite the developments that we've seen around this tweet. >> and after i theory. i think the rsonhy the members of congress still trust the president or take him for his word. they are scared to death to be primaried. >> they're afraid of his supporters. >> that's right. that's right. and so the real question is whether his base thinks he has a credibility issue. i think if you asked the white house, they would say absolutely not. >> right. i guess so, they say they trust him even if they don't. >> right. >> because they're scared to be primaried in 2018. >> legitimate threat. >> let's talk about the world stable, dan. we've been here, watched many apresidents, you know, merkel, you know, when it comes to the liberal democratic order, it

does seem as if merkel's the defender of it, not trump. that also is a credibility issue on the world stage with america's most important allies. >> absolutely. and xi seemed to press that case, at least gently through that joint press conference. she stood up for globalization and the eu and the kind of order that has existed for decades. that has kept the world where it is. donald trump does not articulate that in any way. he reaffirmed his support for nato. and as hallie said in the private meeting then pushed hard and spoke more at the press conference about the defense spending inadequacies of all the nato allies. he is not prepared to take the role that traditionally the united states has taken o an world stage. >> hallie, quickly, we heard the president cheerlead that he flipped the republicans from nos to yeses. was that a set-up?

or was this legit? >> reporter: why you got ask me the loaded questions, chuck. i don't know, right. what we've seen now is people come out, so for example, congressman palmer who was a no vote in the budget committee within we've got a statement federal his folks saying after some concessions were agreed to, he supports the bill now. you've got congressman meadows for example as well who is in that meeting. so i think there is some whether or not they had agreed to it and then the president said it or the president said it and you fall in line. but the bottom line, he's doing what the house republicans need him to do which is close some deals. >> they're making a political case though to these guys now. not a policy case. >> but that's -- i mean that's the case they have to make. >> that's the only one that's going to get -- >> the contents is introduced weren't making it, we don't know the alternative, but in a sense, they can't fail on this. >> now senate republican are secreting wishing the house failed. >> nobody wants it. and this is house republicans

going hey, shove this at the senate. >> please die. keep it over. >> all right gs. sticking around. coming up, neil gsuch prepares for his day on the hill. but will democrats put up a night against the supreme court nominee? can they afford to? can they afford not to? senator chris van hollen joins me for that discussion ahead. di, there's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced. our senses awake. our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say...if you love something set it free. see you around, giulia usaa gives me the and the security just like the marines did. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children. we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life.

whattwo servings of veggies? v8 or a powdered drink? ready, go. ahhhhhhhh! shake! shake! shake! shake! shake! done! you gotta shake it! i shake it! glad i had a v8. the original way to fuel your day.

the ranking democrat will join know discuss about potential ties between russia and the trump campaign and we'll also hear from republican senators susan collins who just came out against the president's new health care bill. all of that, this sunday on your local nbc station. we'll be back in 60 seconds with more mtp daily. of boxes to check. it's taking the best technologies out there and adapting them to work for you.

the ultrasound that can see inside patients, can also detect early signs of corrosion at our refineries. high-tech military cameras that see through walls, can inspect our pipelines to prevent leaks. remote-controlled aircraft, can help us identify potential problems and stop them in their tracks. at bp, safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better.

welcome back. neil gorsuch confirmation hearing is set to start monday. it's fired up the democratic party. chuck schumer is prepared to answer calls to oppose the president's pick, but is becoming the party of opposition. the party of no at all costs, a gamble democrats can afford or is that smart politics? republicans are stuck on defense, their health care effort is struggling. some would say unraveling. president trump's travel ban has been blocked in the courts. his budget hits some of his biggest supporters. his travel ban obviously it's had trouble and he's facing personal credibility issues that still lack evidence. politically republicans are caught on their back feet right now. like can their precarious position translate to momentum for democrats? keep in mind in 2018, democrats must defend a lot more senate seats, incding ten of which were carried by president and states that were carried by president trump. with a debt ceiling height looming and the gorsuch confirmation hearings ahead, are

they willing to go down as the new party of no? chris van hollen leads the charge in defending those vulnerable seats. senator, welcome. >> good to be with you, chuck. >> let me start with the gorsuch confirmation hearings. obviously, that's going to have to play out and see where it goes, but there are a lot -- he's really respected on both sides of the legal aisle. and certainly i think his personal meetings apparently have gone very well. it doesn't seem as if this is going to -- not going to change the make-up of the court. how important is it though for to your democratic base to oppose him at all costs as essentially revenge? >> well, what i think is important to the country, chuck, is that we thoroughly vet his record, that we try to understand what side he comes down in his prior decisions because we right now have a court that too often has closed five to four decisions, now of course it's 4-4 so we don't have that situation. coming down on the side of big

corporate interests against the rights of workers. against the rights of individuals and consumers. and everything we've seen to so far indicates that gorsuch would probably be in that tradition. >> two decisions, one if you can support this decision. deserves a vote to decide, right? that what's i'm asking, what is the line for you that gets him across the line of whether he deserves a vote? essentially avoiding a filibuster? >> well, in my view, chuck, we have a standard in the senate of requiring 60 votes for a supreme court justice. even after the rules were changed. it was thought that that was important enough a position that a person should have to achieve the kind of consensus that you

need by getting 60 votes. >> you can do 60 votes to decide to bring the vote to the floor. you can have people that would vote to bring the vote to the floor and still vote against him. that's what i mean. there is two votes here. >> i understand, but i think the procedure is kind of less important than the ultimate question. the ultimate question is this person should have to get 60 votes because that would reflect a consensus in the country. >> but is it philosophy that your vote should be based on or qualifications? because you can disagree with every one of his decisions, and still decide, well he's qualified, i just philosophically disagree. there's two different ways of judging. >> i understand, if you look at his philosophy, you decide that it tilts consistently in a particular direction. you don't think necessarily reflects the tradition of the american constitution. you have to vote no and remember how this came about.

to some right wing groups and said i want to list of judges who meet the tests. he wanted to judge that right wing criteria. so the president teed up this selection process very much on the side of ideology. citizen's united for many on the left, being willing to overturn that is a lit nistist. >> president obama brought it up. >> so look, i don't know the record of every president in terms of lit niss tests, what i'm saying is i think it's certainly fair for senators when they're making a lifetime appointment at the supreme court, not only to see whether this person's a good lawyer. hey, lots of good lawyers around the country. lots of them. the question is for someone who's going to be there for a very long time, is there legal thinking in line with what we think is trat digs? the constitution which has been

over time trying to make sure that we meet the promise of equal rights and equal justice and equal opportunity for individuals. >> but there is a cost if you force a filibuster in this respect is that mitch mcconnell may decide the agreed upon rule on this, on the nuclear option that sort of kept the nominees out of it that could erase it for that and that could become problematic down the road. and the ideological make-up on the court, where are you on that? >> i think at 60 vote threshold has to be met. that's trat digs we've said. you're right that republicans could decide to change the rule. but they also know that that comes with great risks as well. because, you know, when democrats retake the senate, whenever that may be, you know, they're going to face the situation. so you have lots of republican senators who do not want to change that threshold because they know they could be on the other side --

>> i guess is gorsuch worth that? is this fight worth risking that or is this a political tool to be held off on using until down the road? >> i understand your question. i think, and i think the answer though is that let's look at judge gorsuchs' record and make a determination about whether or not he's going to consistently side with corporate special interests. if you look at his opinions, that is the fear many of us have. we're going to have the hearings coming up and he'll have a chance to answer. >> i want to talk also about budget issues, but i also want to talk about the debt ceiling. we hit it today. congratulations to us. yay america, we hit the debt ceiling again. obviously there's the extreme measures that treasury secretaries use.

>> obviously it always depends on what, but in recent times, we've seen republicans try to load up the debt ceiling with what we consider some very bad policy. >> some call them poison pills. >> they try to get through by attaching someing to the debt ceiling. things they couldn't get through under the ordinary process. and we saw what happened a number of years ago when they nearly took us over the brink. and we actually saw very negative economic consequences. in terms of what happened out there to businesses. so look, i would suggest to them strongly that they not play politics with the debt ceiling. these are debts that congress and the country have already incurred. these are like bills that are already. >> reporter: are you concerned they may corner democrats and almost dare democrats who had been saying hey, you've got to put the debt ceiling over party.

>> that's going to beat you on the appropriations process as well. we invite the republicans to join us on these issues. we just were talking a little bit beforehand about the trump budget. >> yeah. >> i think we all agree that the trump budget was dead on arrival, a lot of republicans attacked it. so they're going to have to work with us because on these issues in the senate, you do need 60 votes. and so while the house can continue to jam stuff through and try and do it under the cloak of darkness and without getting the congressional budget office report, at least in the early stages, they don't have that ability in the senate. >> something you're now learning. glad to be there for that reason. >> senator chris van hollen, nice to see you. thanks for coming in. this sunday on msnbc, chief

legal correspondent ari melbourne hosting a special on the battle over neil gorsuch. supreme confrontation clash airs this sunday. still ahead, the baby boomer bust. i'll talk to the author behind a new book that says the baby boomer generation is the most powerful force in washington. that might not be a good thing. stay tuned. fire destroyed the living room. we were able to replace everything in it. liberty did what? liberty mutual paid to replace all of our property that was damaged. and we didn't have to touch our savings. yeah, our insurance won't do that. well, there goes my boat. you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance i own my own company. i had some severe fatigue, some funny rashes. finally, listening to my wife, went to a doctor. and i became diagnosed with hodgkin's lymphoma

...that diagnosis was tough. i had to put my trust in somebody. when i first met steve, we recommended chemotherapy, and then we did high dose therapy and then autologous stem cell transplant. unfortunately, he went on to have progressive disease i thought that he would be a good candidate for immune therapy. it's an intravenous medicine that is going to make his immune system evade the tumor. with chemotherapy, i felt rough, fatigue, nauseous. and with immune therapy we've had such a positive result. i'm back to working hard. i've honestly never felt this great. i believe the future of immunotherapy at ctca is very bright. the evolution of cancer care is here. learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now.

up next on mtp daily, baby boomers using their political power for their good or their

own good? interesting take on that ahead. first, the cnbc market wrap. >> thanks so much, chuck. there were gains for utilities and industrial stocks today. alongside declines in the financial and health care sectors. the dow down nearly 20 points, s&p falling by three, nasdaq inched up a quarter point. housing market is the hottest it's been in a decade. typical home is selling eight days quicker than it did last year. according to real estate firm red fin. walmart continues to expand online, announcing the purchase of mod cloth which caters to curvy women. it's walmart's fourth digital k acquisiti acquisition. first in business worldwide. ♪ everyone deserves tention, ether u've saved a lot or just a little.

at pnc investments, we believe you're more than just a number. so we provide personal financial advice for every retirement investor. i am totally blind. i lost my sight in afghanistan. if you're totally blind, you may also be struggling with non-24. calling 844-844-2424. or visit my24info.com.

welcome back. one could argue the most powerful group washington isn't big pharma, but baby boomers. 69% was born between 1940 and 1964 down in 2007. those numbers reflect a population that's been dominated by boomers for decades.

31% of the voting age population is a baby boomer. down from a peek of more than 50% in the '80s, still, a large voting block. as the 2016, that 31% number now similar to the size of the millennials. they don't turn out to the polls at the clip tt boomers do. theheer size as a voting block has had a profound impact for half a century. beginning with the constitutional amendment that lowered the voting age, essentially four boomers to 18 in 1971, pandering to them, letting them vote early. new book, generation of sociopaths of baby boomers betrayed america. bruce cannon argues that boomers use their political powers selfishly. they are unwilling to invest in programs benefitting the future like education, infrastructure, and climate change, but treat social security as a sacred cow. unable to be changed. we are joined now. all right. sociopath is a rough word. >> thanks for having me. >> extraordinarily rough word. >> sure. >> obviously it's in, you know,

it's there to get attention. got my attention. that's why you're here. so make your case that this was a sociopathic generation. >> certainly the political policies they have chose to pursue are sociopathic. sociopath sick just the unpc word for antisocial personality disorder. and but they've created an antisocial society. a society that doesn't really care about the future, especially the young and we can see this manifest in their policies or absence thereof with respect to environment, with respect to debt, with respect to old age benefits. research and development, infrastructure, all these things have been allowed to sort of rot away, and the reason why the boom verse tolerated this is because all of those investments if made today would be profitable from a social perspective in the 2030s after it's dead. it's a nonstarter for them. >> but let's look at the

essentially the adult age, you know, go from 1970 to 2000 as r as with boomers as adults, boomers helping to run and drive the economy on paper, pretty good for the american economy? quite the expansion of wealth. >> well i don't agree. and the way which i don't agree is that economic growth from the 1980s to 2000 was actually somewhat slower on a per capita basis than in the 1970s which were regarded by then a horror show which they never recovered apparently. and they were nowhere near as good as the 40s, 50s, and '60s, and how that growth was achieved was not sustainable. so all depended on credit, it was depended on asset bubbles. wasn't really driven by productivity growth, by investment in human capital and so on. and the result was, after 2000, we've been stuck in the sort of near stagnation where growth and the 2000s about .7% per capita

and now it's about 1.3, 1.4% for this decade. that's not a success. and you can't detach from the policies of the baby boomers started pursuing in the 1980s. >> is it that you just are -- that all of this has happened because too many politicians have pandered to boomers starting with getting them the right to vote three years earlier than everybody else that this is just been a constant pander? because the leaders that made decisions in the '80s, they weren't -- they were from the greatest generation. that's who was running this country, not the boom percent. >> that's right. and they did pander and that was a mistake, but it wasn't quite as aggressive as the pandering that the boomers self-created once they were in washington. so, you know, bushnd rea were entirely trust worthy on matters that were important to thbooms, and this problem was resolved by ushering in gingrich and clinton in '92 and '40i9 respectively and the

policy environment degraded there. also favorable to the boomers. there's narrative of red and blue unautomobile to agree. whenever boomer interests were at stake, somehow this dysfunctional gridlock machine was always able to, you know, grind into action, and explains a lot of the policies that we've seen starting in the 1980s. so it was reagan who lowered income tax rate twhabs seems normal and raised them on capital gains, but of course the boomers didn't own stocks or homes a that the time. so, that was something of a pander. and then clinton who was a democrat lowers taxes on capital gains, expands compensatory damages for housing and starts ramping up the estate tax exemption. that's again sort of democratic position, but entirely aligned with the life cycle of the boomers. then you have bush the second who was not sort of famously progressive enacting medicare part d in time for boomers to benefit will also launching unseemly attention just as the parents were about to die. when the system needs to work for the boomers, it does.

>> well what does this mean then -- are we going to see history repeat itself? the boomers are the largest voting block right now. millennials are the largest late block in the labor force. they will in at least two election cycles probably become the largest voting block. history repeat itself with millennials where there's such a up and downer to millennials by leaders, perhaps by jen x leaders who need votes that we create another cycle of this? >> that's possible, but the millennials a mucore ha troj nis than the boomers. their more et anically diverse. economic experiences are different. educational history is different. even if, you know, people were cynical enough to do that, it's much harder -- >> up and downer to them. >> it is harder. if you want to pander, put effort into it. and i'm not sure the present political class has figured them out yet. >> i hope you're on speaking terms with your parents. >> yeah, the book is dedicated to them. >> all of our baby boomer

parents who may be watching today are probably wondering, okay, thanks for calling me a sociopath anyway. congratulations. >> thanks for coming on, sharing your views. up ahead in the lid. are president trump's biggest supporters the ones with the most to lose under his budget agenda? stay tuned. what's going on here? our insurance company may not have a name your price tool [ shouting ] but we got disses for days! your mother is so lame, she never put any notes in your lunch bag. sandwiches o-o-only. yeah! yeah, well if you use progressive's name your price tool, maybe you could use the savings to buy a decent suit. i got this jaime. ♪ you could throw shade all day ♪ ♪ but it'll never land ♪ 'cause we got the name your price tool ♪ ♪ in the palm of our h-a-a-and ♪ mic drop. mime: ouch. what? it was a sweet burn. progressive's name your price tool. word to your wallet. why do so many businesses rely on the u.s. postal service? because when they ship with us,

their business becomes our business. ♪ that's why we make more e-commerce deliveries to homes than anyone else in the country. ♪ here, there, everywhere. united states postal service priority : you dearthere's no other way to say this. it's over. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced. our senses awake. our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say...if you love something set it free. see you around, giulia welcome back. our obsession tonight. the cardinal sin that certainly

everyone on social media can be guilty of from time to time. apparently someone at the white house sent out an article after only reading the title. not it's content. white house says a news letter that they call 1600 daily. to send out events, snippets of appearances and thing likes that. also favorable press clips. white house uses to show positive coverage of it's agenda. one such link today, this piece that ran in the washington post entitled, trump's budget makes perfect sense and will fix america and i will tell you why. sounds like good press. but a glance of the article would reveal it is satirical. a satirical piece by the washington post. it supports the trump budget cuts with lines like, environmental protection agency, we absolutely do not need this. clean rivers and breathable air are making us soft and letting the chinese and russians get the jump on us. and then this, affordable housing is a luxury, and we are going to get rid of it. donald trump does not live in a affordable housing and neither

should you. just another reason to adoptn old harper it idiom to the internet, read twice, share once. we'lbeight back. i didn't know where i was from ethnically. so we sent that sample off to ancestry. my ancestry dna results are that i am 26% nigerian. i am just trying to learn as much as i can about my culture. i put the gele on my head and i looked into the mirror and i was trying not to cry. because it's a hat, but it's like the most important hat i've ever owned. discover the story only your dna can tell. order your kit now at ancestrydna.com. or is it your allergy pills? holding you back break through your allergies. introducing flonase sensimist. more complete allergy relief in a gentle mist you may not even notice. using unique mistpro technology, new flonase sensimist delivers a gentle mist to help block six key inflammatory substances that cause your symptoms. most allergy pills only block one.

and six is greater than one. break through your allergies. new flonase sensimist. ♪ i love how usaa gives me the and the security just like the marines did. at one point, i did change to a different company with car insurance, and i was not happy with the customer service. we have switched back over and we feel like we're back home now. the process through usaa is so effortless, that you feel like you're a part of the family. i love that i can pass the membership to my children, and that they can be protected.

we're the williams family, and we're usaa members for life. call usaa today to talk about your insurance needs. time for the lid and back bringing in jennifer palmieri, communications director, scheduled to be here. thanks, d.c. traffic but that's all right and joins us now. jen, i'll give you the first crack here. this is what -- mick mulvaney when he talked about the budget and its impact on trump voters, he sort of pushed back and said this, look, we went back and pulled lines out of speeches, interviews, talked to the president and turns his word, policies into numbers so folks who voted for the president aren't getting exactly what they voted for. ironically that was a message i know during the campaign you kept trying to send which was saying, hey, take the president at his word. here's his budget director saying it. but his voters if they take a hit on the budget they don't

seem to care? >> i don't really accept that that is actually what his voters probably thought that they were voting for. yeah, it was in his speeches and it was on their websites and we pushed you all to pay attention to the policy and campaign and what he said he was going to do but i do believe that they thought they were voting for somebody who was going to -- was so committed to change that would even blow up the system to accomplish it. and was somebody who was just going to fix everything and take care of -- repeal obamacare but replace it with something better and i just don't think they actually thought they were voting for those kinds of cuts, particularly in the budget, let alone the kind of sche that the republicans come up with on health care. what we see now is conservative orthodoxy. this is paul ryan's agenda and i don't hi that's what trump veit thought they were voting for. >> dan, somebody posited this in

one of my meetings -- show meetings which was, hey, his voters don't believe that what they have been getting from the federal government that they've been getting from the federal government, that some don't believe they're getting some of the services they're getting. >> i don't think that their vote was predicated on the continuation of this program or that program or that program. they want jobs, and he will argue that there's other things he's doing to create an environment in which jobs will result. they wanted something done about the border, and he's going to build a wall and that's in that budget. they wanted him to deal with threats of terrorism and he's going to argue that there are things like that. i mean the budget priorities are quite orthodox republican in the discretionary spending but i'm interested to see whether that really does ripple through and we -- lastly, how much of this will survive the budget process? >> roberts, you're a veteran on

capitol hill and worked on the republican side of the aisle and watched as republicans tried to make a large argument only to get beaten up politically. >> big time. >> on specifics. >> yeah. >> oh, you're against school lunches and meals on wheels. forget the rest of the budget, hearing that for six straight months isn't good for the party. >> i look at hal rogers from kentucky. he said and i quote, donald trump, my district voted for donald trump 80% but i can't take this budget literally. here's why. regional airport cuts, cuts to appalachia, those are jobs in terms of national infrastructure. i agree this is not going to go anywhere. if, in fact, those $69 billion in cuts goes through i think that's when you'll see a lot of trump supporters, oh, i didn't realize this was in my backyard and my neighbor's job or perhaps my job and i think a lot of republicans are going to push back on this budget and say, dead on arrival.

>> jen, t means democrats will start making a picy argument against trump, not a character argument anymore? >> i think what you have to do is both of them. what we found in the campaign was what most concerned people actually was making a character argument but now that -- i mean i think if you look at where this week started where we thought what was supposed to happen this week the house is supposed to pass their repeal and replace bill on health care. they were supposed to have a budget well received because it's conservative orthodoxy and, you know, the end of the week and quite a mess. if they actually enact the health care bill that they say they're going to i think they're not going to be able to do it then i think you have a real policy argument to make to trump voters. some so committed to him i don't think it will matter but it'll probably -- it's going to matter to enough of them that you could beat them next time. >> very quickly to everybody, gentlemen, i start with you. is it a good strategy for democrats to just oppose gorsuch no matter what, force the

filibuster vote or should democrats focus on health care and other issues, maybe some progress on? >> i think that they -- i think that when you have so much on the line as you do with gorsuch that you have to force the vote. >> interesting. you think the filibuster -- >> i'm not sure the democratic base will allow anything other than tough. >> okay. >> hold their fire and should go to health care. >> the u.s. senate will be broken even more. dan, robert, jennifer, thank you. more after this. here's to breakfast four ways...

setting hearts a blaze... doing next to nothing for days weekenders. even when a weekend's not enough, there's a hilton for you. book your break direct with hilton.com and join the weeklong weekenders. afoot and light-hearted i take to the open road. healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. the east and the west are mine.

the north and the south are mine. all seems beautiful to me. to take advantage of this offer on a volvo s90, visit your local dealer.

i love to see businesses that just started from ground up grow into further success. it just feels good to know that i'm helping someone else. my first goal is to learn about their business, what they're currently doing in their advertising. pull some research, create a great story. trying to figure out some way of building some kind of trust in a very quick moment. you have to love to work with people. our goal, without a doubt, is that all customers are satisfied before they leave. ♪

we'll be back monday with more "mtp daily." i'll see you sunday on "meet the press." "for the record with greta" starts now. big first win for whiskey. >> i'll be watching "meet the press" sunday. anyway, it was a wild day, another wild day actually here washington. he is most certainly not backing down. president trump's first comments about the wiretapping since the senate and house intelligence committee said there was no indication that trump tower was surveilled. here he is with angela merkel today. >> mr. president, the government officials in london today rejected white house claims that the alleged wiretapping on you, on the trump tower, on trump organization or on members of your campaign was -- that british intelligence wasit