history lesson.
The only way you can make substantial inroads into our long term debt is to reform entitlements, and you cannot reform entitlements without a willing Congress, including 60 votes in the Senate. The only time major deficit reduction occurred was during the Clinton-Gingrich tie-up.
Bush went after entitlements in 2005-06 but was soundly defeated, including by Dems in Congress. Obama had 60 votes in the Senate in -08-10 but focused on Obamacare, and later wiped his ass with the Simpson-Bowles report.
Ask yourself: do you think Rand Paul, if there were 60 Republican votes in the Senate, would let Trump get away with no entitlement reform? Of course not. Trump would sign up for entitlement reform in a second. You could debate its parameters but he would do it.
The fact is that he's not pushing entitlement reform now because it would be hopeless. He does not have the votes. He would just divert attention from his agenda on trade and immigration and weaken himself in the process because entitlement reform would fail. Would be like shooting himself in the foot to prove a point.
Also, what is slightly frustrating is the way people talk about our long-term debt without analyzing the financial health and creditworthiness of the borrower.