By on March 31, 2017

Donald Trump

The Trump administration is changing its tune regarding the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Despite the president calling the pact the “worst deal” in history throughout his campaign and hinting his goal was to abandon the agreement, the White House intends to keep numerous provisions while seeking more moderate changes.

Among the more controversial arrangements Trump intends to keep are the arbitration panels that permit investors in the three nations to circumvent local courts to resolve civil claims. The administration even has a proposal that would improve these bodies’ procedures to resolve disputes.

Is this the bold trade overhaul that Trump promised on the campaign trail?

The White House is mainly seeking limited changes to NAFTA, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing an administrative draft proposal circulated in Congress by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Its new objectives would bolster Trump’s “American Made” focus, especially in regard to automotive manufacturing, by giving greater preference to U.S. companies in government procurement. However, it’s missing a lot of Trump’s bold rhetoric and the import tariffs promised for Mexico. The draft also doesn’t weigh in on labor regulations or currency manipulation — two things that Trump has previously said were mandatory to ensure a free-market.

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer posited there would likely be substantial changes in the proposal after Trump’s nominee for U.S. trade representative, Robert Lighthizer, is confirmed by the Senate. Although, for now, it’s fairly conventional.

Trump’s level of direct involvement in the draft is unclear. While the president has limited some of his harsher words on trade since taking office, the draft only takes a slight American bend with other elements — like the arbitration panels — having a free-trade bias that some have called un-American and pro-business.

The eight-page draft letter also includes numerous objectives that were established by the Obama administration in completing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, including additions to digital trade provisions, state-owned enterprises, labor and environmental obligations, and intellectual property enforcement.

Some alterations are distinctive of the current administration, though.

The biggest changes favoring the Trump agenda include an expanded ability for the U.S. government to apply tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada, but it only applies when there is a sudden influx of imports that might cause serious harm to a specific domestic industry.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

211 Comments on “Trump Administration Now Seeking More Modest Changes to NAFTA...”


  • avatar
    FreedMike

    He was full of it all along?

    Now, who would have ever seen that coming…

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      NAFTA has always been good for me. It enriched my lifestyle.

      To thwart UAW harassment, I always expressed the hope that more automakers would pick up their toys and move south of the border.

      Then Trump. Who knew Trump was a union man?

      Certainly not Richard Trump ka. He backed Hil.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Trump is whatever is most advantageous to Trump. Problem is, that changes about every 12 seconds.

        It’s All About Him, even when it’s not. Reminds me of my ex, who shares a lot of his traits. She’s tremendously ambitious financially. I always wondered what she’d be like if she actually hit it big. And now I know.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          People like Trump are the way they are because of their accomplishments and wealth.

          If I had as much money as Trump, or had been as successful as Trump in all my ventures, I probably would be the same way.

          But I would never run for president.

          Only goes to show, Allah has a sense of humor in getting Trump elected.

          Now, We, The People, have to live with that.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            I never had a problem with him being Trump the Obnoxious Rich Guy. It was his first, best destiny.

            He’s not very good at being president. He should have stuck to building glitzy skyscrapers with his name on it – he was good at that. It generated jobs.

            The more I see of him, the more I’m convinced that he’s just a patsy for the “blow up the system” political faction, which hasn’t acknowledged an undeniable fact: historically speaking, the blown-up system usually morphs into an authoritarian system.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            FreedMike, I think Trump will have major problems in office. That’s why he surrounds himself with people he trusts and who are loyal to him.

            Trump knows his enemies, and it is everyone out there in government.

            But honestly, the more he hangs in there and upsets the applecart that’s DC, the more my respect for him grows.

            I don’t care much for Republicans or ‘crats either.

            That’s why I chose to be a registered Independent so I could vote for the best qualified candidate, not a political shill.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “But honestly, the more he hangs in there and upsets the applecart that’s DC, the more my respect for him grows.”

            It looks like 36% of the populace feels the same way.

            The remaining 64% percent will say the same thing as you but replace the word “grow” with “diminishes”.

            I can not have any respect for someone who clearly does not realize that they are in way over their head.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “I can not have any respect for someone who clearly does not realize that they are in way over their head.”

            I’ve been in over my head many times over my lifetime. Not unlike millions of other individuals taking on a task greater than themselves.

            That’s when you hire-in the right people for the job, with the needed skills and qualifications.

            And I am impressed with the number of women Trump views as the most qualified for the job they were hired-in for.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            That wasn’t my point. Knowing you are in over your head is different than denying you are in over your head.

            “That’s when you hire-in the right people for the job, with the needed skills and qualifications.”

            When has he done that?

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Great, upset the applecart. No problems there.

            But what’s missing here is what things look like when the new, improved applecart comes ’round. And I don’t think Trump and Co. have any clue.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Well, it’s early yet. Only 70 some odd days into Trump’s presidency.

            I’m sure there will be many more surprises to come once Trump gets the people he wants to help him run the government.

            Starting with Neil Gorsuch. Wanna see a real fight? Wait until Trump has to replace the next Justice that vacates the SCOTUS.

            That lady who recently left Trump’s administration, the one who’s going to work for the RNC, I’m guessing that she will lead the effort to unseat recalcitrant Republicans incumbents, and unass ‘crats.

            The strategy seems very similar to what the DNC did for Maggie Hassan to unseat Kelly Ayotte.

            YO! It worked!

            All these Republicans and ‘crats giving Trump a hard time now should be afraid. They should be very afraid.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Well, HDC, I can guarantee you one outcome from burning down the barn to save it: you’ll end up with a burned down barn.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Sometimes that barn does need to get burned down, and a new one built.

            The trick is to stay clear of the burning debris and not get burned yourself.

            Maybe that’s why so many American citizens (who can) live outside of the US.

            I was amazed at the size of the American community in Ensenada, BC, Mexico.

            I expected it to be YUUUGE in Germany, Holland and England, but those were all former GIs who married local girls.

            Not so in Mexico.

            And several expats in Ensenada told me they would move back to the US if things changed to make it more advantageous for them to live in America.

            All those people who pinned their hopes and dreams for a better America and voted for Trump can’t be wrong. They were left behind by the last administration.

            And they looked to Trump to be their Savior.

            I didn’t see it. But I’m looking into it now. And the more I see, the more I like.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Steve Bannon is a self admitted Lenin admirer. Why? Because Lenin “burned down the barn.” Problem is, burning down the barn left the country in chaos, and who emerged? It was Stalin.

            One needs to tread carefully in this regard.

            If you ask me, if you want to change things in Washington, then the wisest course of action would be to simply remove the money from our political system to the extent possible. That money – not our current bureaucracy – is what’s making it ridiculously hard for the average citizen to make his voice heard. And don’t kid yourself – Trump doesn’t listen either. He just pretends to far better than most politicians.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            higherdesertcat: don’t buy the illusion. Trump is a carney. Check out the number of lawsuits and bankruptcies associated with his business ventures. That is not success. However he was smart enough to retain the New York real estate inherited from his family. And to license his name.

            As for his braintrust. Gorsuch is certainly qualified. However most of the others are not. In fact they represent the very things that he campaigned against. Wall Streeters, bankers, cronies and family members.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            “Sometimes that barn does need to get burned down, and a new one built.”

            except that’s not what’s going to happen. It’ll be like Detroit. The barn will be burned down, and its pile of charred remains will be left to sit forever. All the while a handful of people make money off of the situation while the rest of us have to live amongst burnt-up rubble.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Well, I for one, am willing to give Trump a chance.

            By that I mean, we already know what the last administration did to us, good, bad or indifferent. But Trump? Now there is a real conundrum for the DC swampers.

            No such doubt for the people who voted Trump into office though.

            From my perspective, it could not get any worse than the last administration, so I am hopeful that Trump will be able to keep all those promises he made that got him elected.

            But I doubt that he will do repeal and replace, or even tax reform. His own party is working against him, sabotaging his every objective.

            BTW, as president, Trump did not have to give up his business interests. Why do the lefties want him to give up everything he worked for?

            I am certain that there was no shortage of legal review before that decision was made not to divest.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            Tradition is for the President to divest his interests by putting them in a ‘blind trust’. Trump stated that he would be allowing his son to run them. However his son has now publicly stated that he keeps his father informed and updated. Therefore the trust would no longer be blind.

            Having a President actively engaged in business, is the definition of ‘conflict of interest’. He can pursue or advance polices that benefit his business or advance the causes of those who will assist his business.

            As President his business is the governing of the country. Not earning money for himself or his family. President Trump based on his actions and tweets appears unable to grasp this simple concept.

            The problem being that his opponent and her spouse were also viewed as being prejudiced by their business interests.

            Whatever you may think of him, Obama never had any personal scandals during his term of office.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Arthur, Trump is not a guy who adheres to tradition, and my guess is that’s why people voted for him.

            The people who voted for Trump had their fill of tradition and samo-samo and voted to upend all that.

            I suspect, We, The People, are going to behold some unorthodox departures from the political norm over the next four years. Eight, if Trump is successful in not p!ss!ng off his supporters.

            My take is, that Trump doesn’t give a rat’s @ss about what people think. Ypu know, his track record in business indicates that he played all angles against the middle.

            He’s going to do things his way in spite of the opposition from within the Republican party.

            Will Trump succeed? I don’t know.

            Just his presence in the White House evokes endless emotionalism from all political spectra: those who hate Trump, hate him more each day.

            Those that voted for Trump love him more each day as long as he is effective and does what he promised them.

            I’m impressed by Trump’s actions. This guy doesn’t jawjack like the last guy did but is more in line with Shrub (who took action), Bush The Elder (who took action), and Reagan (who altered the American economic and political landscape with his policies.)

            It’ll be an interesting four years and the lefties are walking around like zombies, talking to themselves because they are sidelined and totally irrelevant.

          • 0 avatar
            golden2husky

            …All these Republicans and ‘crats giving Trump a hard time now should be afraid. They should be very afraid….

            No, all of us should be afraid. We are seeing the very beginning of a real effort by the Russians to destabilize NATO and America. The very democratic system that has been the basis for our country is under fire from outside and inside the country. From the inside we are under attack by uber wealthy that have been given the tools to make their agenda the law of the land. Scary fact: After five years of Citizens United came to pass, a billion dollars have been pumped into SuperPACs. Of that, 600 million have been donated by 195 donors. If that doesn’t wake up America nothing will.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “It’ll be an interesting four years and the lefties are walking around like zombies, talking to themselves because they are sidelined and totally irrelevant.”

            Ha ha ha ha.

            That is funny.

            I’m thinking that those sidelined Democrats are rather enjoying the show. You wanted a 5 alarm fire, you got one. Except the Dems will pass them pails full of gas and the Repubs are too busy fighting over the front seats in the firetruck. The driver is too busy admiring himself in the mirror and playing with matches.

            Twitterpotus reached out to the Democrats and was shot down by Ryan.
            Obamacare is still standing because he could not rally the Republicans.
            I’m betting that his tax reform will also fall flat because he will not be able to corral the interests of the Republicans.
            Muslim Ban Version 1.0 and 2.0 are dead.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @golden2husky – agree 100%.

      • 0 avatar
        Yurpean

        I just came here to read you deny again and again that you didn’t vote for Trump. And then pen pseudo-thoughtful comments and musings that are supposed to show your criticism of him.

        We know you long enough to know you are a rabid right winger. You are not fooling anyone.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          “I just came here to read you deny again and again that you didn’t vote for Trump.”

          Nope, I didn’t vote for Trump.

          If you know me all that well, you should also know that I told you guys my wife informed me that I would never get laid again, if I didn’t vote for Hillary.

          So when our absentee ballots came in when we were in Germany last year, I had my wife verify who I voted for, for President, and I’ve been happily getting laid ever since, starting with that night.

          I never thought Trump stood a chance to get elected, barring a divine intervention. Well, the divine intervention happened and it goes to show Allah has a sense of humor.

          I have to add that I am impressed with what Trump has done and is doing so far. While the cackling hens of the main-stream media are still discussing his last outrage, Trumps is already committing his next outrage, completely catching the media off-guard.

          The biggest thing the media complains about is not being notified of what Trump has planned, and not being invited to Mar-A-Lago, or wherever.

          I love it!

          • 0 avatar
            Yurpean

            Yeah right. We all know you are a bigot who voted for Trump. Man, the energy you spend repeating how you didn’t vote for him and then praise every little thing he does.

            Truth is that we all know he is traitorous bastard who sold out the country for a buck. You know it too and you are already covering your ass to claim afterwards how you were always against him.

            You are insulting our intelligence and it’s pathetic.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      You never had a choice in the first place.

      My guess is they showed him the mythical unedited Zapruder film, or of course he was full of it (or some combination of the two, which I am inclined to agree).

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Well, we did have a choice, even if it was a lousy choice.

        Obviously, to me that we made the wrong choice, but time will tell. I hope I’m wrong. But I don’t think I am.

      • 0 avatar
        jkross22

        We had a choice, and once again, look at which category won (based on 200 million eligible voters):

        Trump: 62,984,825
        Clinton: 65,853,516
        Didn’t vote/voted for 3rd party: 71,161,659

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Keep telling yourself that and follow your dreams and one day they will all come true.

          • 0 avatar
            jkross22

            My dreams? Nah, the voting results are a reflection of where we are. “None of the above” won again.

          • 0 avatar
            shaker

            GERRYMANDERING

            Smug bunch, these Trumpers.

            Watch as the gold plating (14k) peels right off the plastic.

        • 0 avatar
          golden2husky

          ….Didn’t vote/voted for 3rd party: 71,161,659…

          The lack of participation is very disappointing. Even though both major candidates were disappointing in their own right, we all have an obligation to go to the polls.

    • 0 avatar
      probert

      Mexico is our third largest trading partner, and that trade is almost entirely symmetrical. What’s the beef? Or is it Canada, our largest trading partner, that you want to go after?

      As to why someone voted for Trump – well apart from the hard core racist nationalists, I think most are hoping he’d screw someone they didn’t like – cuz the problem is always “those guys”. Many are professing shock that he’s screwing them. No sympathy from me.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    No plan survives first contact with the enemy.

  • avatar
    e30gator

    Well there you go.

    Immigration ban? Kaplunk
    Obamacare repeal? Crash and burn.
    Obama Wiretaps? Down in flames.
    NAFTA? LOL

    First presidential administration in history under federal investigation for potential treason? Check.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      honestly I could see a lot of this coming prior to the election. Trump clearly likes the *idea* of being president more than he does *actually* being president. his vanity rules his life.

      • 0 avatar
        e30gator

        What’s not to like with all the free rides to the golf course and taxpayer funded security for your Manhattan skyskraper and golf resort?

        Maybe TTAC could do a mileage update on the presidential motorcade back and forth to Mar a Lago.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          e30gator, in all fairness, Trump’s life is worse after assuming the presidency than it was before he declared himself a candidate for office.

          Trump gave up a lot to be the prez. More than you and I combined ever hope to make or achieve during our lifetimes.

          • 0 avatar
            e30gator

            Do you hear that? It’s the world’s tiniest violin playing just for Trump.

            I have no doubt that his life is worse now that he is under the scrutiny of the FBI and NSA. But if you can’t take the heat….

            On the plus side, he can probably take solace in knowing that he furnished all his cronies with cush jobs within the administration, so I’m sure they owe him a favor or two.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            ” he furnished all his cronies with cush jobs within the administration”

            So how is that any different from any other presidency?

            ” But if you can’t take the heat….”

            Hah! The daily news sounds to me like Trump is turning the place upside down.

            In my seventy+ years of living on this planet I have never seen DC in as much disarray. Not even during Tricky Dick.

          • 0 avatar
            e30gator

            “The daily news sounds to me like Trump is turning the place upside down.”

            That’s exactly what happens when we elect a president who doesn’t understand or respect the rule of law.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            “So how is that different from any other presidency?”

            Most presidents at least try to ensure that their appointees have some relevant knowledge and experience. Instead, we get a conspiracy theorist surgeon at HUD, a dilettante who married into billions at Education, oil executives at State, and a guy who couldn’t remember the name of the Energy Department at… the Energy Department.

            But since Trump himself has no relevant knowledge or experience, and couldn’t even bother to gain relevant knowledge during the two years he was campaigning, I’m sure he’s OK with that.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “I’m sure he’s OK with that.”

            Don’t lose sight of the fact that it was/is also OK for the people who elected him.

            And that’s all that matters.

            All the never-Trumpers are just suffering from mind-blown collateral damage.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            Yeah, I forgot how he sold off all of his business interests to be president. Or how much they all left behind to move into the White House. Or how he’s kept his family members out of official WH business. Or how he had to disclose all of his financial details and who they’re beholden to.

            Oh wait, no he didn’t do *any of that.*

            I can’t believe how thoroughly he’s pulled the wool over your eyes.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            JimZ, I didn’t vote for the guy but he has been highly effectual in shaking up the status quo in DC, by attacking both political sides.

            And that’s something that the people who voted Trump into office wanted done.

            Unless the Republicans get on the Trump bandwagon, nothing will get done in DC. Trump is having to fight just about everybody on the Hill

            But things sure will be shaken AND stirred for the 2018 mid-term election.

            And as an Independent, I find that highly motivating to vote.

            Maybe we’ll see some new candidates running for office to replace those in the swamp. I’d vote for them, instead of the incumbent.

            I believe many other voting Americans would do the same and enforce their own term-limits on the incumbents.

            Some of those incumbents are long overdue to be replaced: way past their expiration date. Some have even gone to seed.

            We need new blood in Congress.

          • 0 avatar
            ToddAtlasF1

            “That’s exactly what happens when we elect a president who doesn’t understand or respect the rule of law.”

            Which laws did Obama do a better job of comprehending? Immigration laws? Drug laws? Recess appointments to the NLRB? Did you know that in 2014 the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Obama’s NLRB appointments were illegal. You can’t get any worse than that, unless maybe you were to carry out military interventionism in Libya without Congressional approval or to kill four US citizens without due process of law.

            Do you understand or respect the rule of law? When did you decide it was a worthy endeavor?

          • 0 avatar
            shaker

            “Trump gave up a lot to be the prez. More than you and I combined ever hope to make or achieve during our lifetimes.”

            I am a libtard, and my head is ‘sploding…

          • 0 avatar
            OldManPants

            “I am a libtard, and my head is ‘sploding…”

            Ya, me too, eh?

            I’d have thought that by the time a fat-ass, rich-kid bully reached 70 there wouldn’t be a lot of other shining vistas of ego-stroking left to miss.

        • 0 avatar
          IHateCars

          Uh-oh….watch it now e30gator. The Trumpster contingent of the B&B ain’t gonna like that fake news!

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “Hah! The daily news sounds to me like Trump is turning the place upside down.”

            If one goes into renovating a home with knowledge and a clearly thought out plan, the job gets done rather smoothly even when unforeseen situations arise.

            If one goes into renovating a home without a clue how to do it and starts knocking down load bearing structures, it turns into a chaotic sh!tshow of vandalism on an epic scale.

            I wonder which metaphor applies to USA Government at this point in time?

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            they’ll just complain about all of the “left wing libtards” here.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            HDC, I think you may be too focused on upsetting the apple cart and too unfocused on replacing it.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            FreedMike, Yes, I think you are right.

            The status quo applecart has not worked for many Americans and I would like to see it completely abolished.

            Frankly, I haven’t given any thought to what would be next to take its place, and I don’t care because whatever comes next has got to be better than what was the applecart before.

            Hence my appreciation and growing admiration for President Trump who is going where no president has gone before.

            Trump is just blowing away Republicans and ‘crats alike! Truly astonishing!

            I hope he will use that phone, that pen and write a bunch of Executive Orders that will set America back on track.

            At least for the duration of Trump’s presidency.

            A lotta American citizens rooting for Trump. I feel myself gravitating in that direction.

            Give the people what they need most: JOBS.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            I’d like to root for him too. But I’m not rooting for him until he shows me some kind of coherent plan that makes sense.

            So far all I see is blather, and a bunch of stuff I’ll never go along with.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Trump hasn’t done anything for me either, but so far, I like the direction he is taking, overturning the things that p!ssed me off from the last administration.

            People on Medicare lost a lot, like $70B a year in medical coverages and tests. We’ll never get that back but we’re hoping that at least during Trump things will not get worse for those wo worked for, and currently pay for, Medicare coverage.

            The first time Trump p!sses me off, I will be vocal about it.

            But so far, so good.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “The status quo applecart has not worked for many Americans and I would like to see it completely abolished.”

            What is to replace that apple cart?

            That is the problem.

            He has no plan, well, at least no plan that congress will let him pass.

            His son in Law and Bannon don’t see eye to eye.

            He can’t ask Russia for help anymore since he now knows that “Deep Government’ is watching.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            “The status quo applecart has not worked for many Americans and I would like to see it completely abolished.”

            it has been abolished. Unfortunately it’s been abolished in favor of a thick rod they’re ramming hard up your @$$.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            I hope the moves Trump makes will enhance our enjoyment of cars and trucks, at least as long as it lasts for the duration of Trump’s time in office.

            One way to do that is to rescind and void all those restrictive CAFE mandates.

            I’d like to see bigger engines in cars and trucks, more innovation like that marvelous all-aluminum 32-valve DOHC 5.7L V8 Tundra engine.

            You know, a real return to affordable muscle cars. There’s just something magical about a 454 big block, or a Ford V10.

            Add a little tech to that displacement, like 4 or 5 valves per cylinder, DOHCs, and VVT, and now were talking real motors.

            The heart of Rock&Roll is the Beat, and the engine is the heart and soul of any car.

          • 0 avatar
            golden2husky

            ..I hope he will use that phone, that pen and write a bunch of Executive Orders that will set America back on track. ..

            Well, so far all the executive orders are a big zero for putting America “back on track”…only good thing about executive orders is that they are easily undone…can’t wait to see 2020 when the first 100 days’ pledge of undoing every Trump EO is a campaign promise that gets done.

            How come the Keystone pipeline is exempt from any requirement to use US steel? Hmmmm.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            golden2husky, EOs are only good for the duration of the presidency.

            The lefties enjoyed eight years of EOs that had things going their way.

            Trump is issuing EOs to have things go his way. So far, I like every EO he issued.

            The next prez will probably undo all of Trump’s EOs, but what the hell? We can enjoy bigger, thirstier cars in the mean time.

            And use ALL resources of energy while the good times last.

    • 0 avatar
      TW5

      So you’ve noticed that most of DC is an enemy of the people. Congrats. Were we supposed to buy you a gift?

  • avatar
    Whatnext

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
    Don’t get fooled again.

    • 0 avatar
      Rubens

      I am sorry but none of the bosses before were half as bad as this one.

      I like the song …

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al From 'Murica

        VanBueren was as corrupt as they come. Sherman was a complete drunk and Nixon was paranoid and delusional. Kennedy darn near started WWIII playing chicken with the Soviets. I would submit that the country was polarized to a level even we today cannot imagine under Andrew Johnson’s administration with his policies still causing division over a century after he left office. Keep telling yourself Trump is a special class of bad. History would beg to differ.

  • avatar
    tylanner

    He’s never displayed the appropriate level of context with which to judge the effectiveness of these far-reaching trade deals. His vast experience with one-on-one business transactions probably does more to hinder his ability to reform global trade than provide new and insightful policy ideas.

    I think the general perception during the campaign was that he had an army of consultants in the background feeding the constructive narrative. So far it appears that his policy proposals may not stem from contemplative hands but laymen.

    • 0 avatar
      sirwired

      His proposals are coming from political operatives who are telling him what will get his base the most fired up. He simply isn’t talking to people that actually understand what’s involved, because he doesn’t actually care.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “he had an army of consultants in the background ”

      Nope. There were only three!

      Steve Bannon

      Reince Priebus

      KellyAnne Conway

      And not necessarily in that order, depending on the situation at hand.

      That pearl of wisdom from a Nov 2016 Morning Joe segment on MSNBC that I watched.

      • 0 avatar
        Dynasty

        >That pearl of wisdom from a Nov 2016 Morning Joe segment on MSNBC that I watched.

        You realize that is fake news right? Preibus? Oh, okay… He’s a brilliant strategist/s

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      I think his policy proposals are coming from whatever voice in his head happens to be shouting the loudest at any given moment.

  • avatar
    sirwired

    Gee, who could have expected that it might not be the smoothest thing in the world to simply tear up an agreement we’ve been operating under for a couple decades now… who could have seen THAT coming?

    I know! I know! The answer is: Anybody that’s actually studied what would be involved at least a little bit.

    The UK is about to spend the next two years finding out the hard way what’s involved.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Fearless prediction: once people in the UK figure out what a s**t show Brexit is going to be, they’ll blame May. She’ll be gone, and some other politician can show up to ride the crest of endless, incurable resentment going on there.

      I see this as being a kind of political and economic slow burn in the UK. But it’ll translate into something far worse in the rest of Europe. We’re already seeing the beginnings of how it’ll play out in places like France.

      I don’t see anything good coming of all this.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        Scotland has held a referendum on secession from England and most likely will hold another. They do not want to exit the EU. Brexit is affecting Ireland as well. Northern Ireland is heavily dependent on the UK whereas Southern Ireland is a member of the EU.
        Brexit will most likely turn out to be a big mistake for the UK.

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          @Lou_BC
          Not many people had projected into the future what the consequences were going to be after Brexit, It should have been obvious .
          Yes Scotland will want to leave, it just has had an independence referendum that was narrowly defeated.
          Northern Ireland , is now feeling very much alone, with Eire and now Scotland wanting to stay in the EU
          In the EU, the ” aggrieved wife”of the divorce, wants a settlement. They have the other DT ,Donald Tusk setting the conditions that have to be met, before any free trade negotiations.
          Not happy times for the ” UK”

      • 0 avatar
        Dynasty

        Maybe the UK can govern themselves like they have for centuries prior to the EU telling them what to do?

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      You guys have lost your minds. Do you really expect an agreement between totally different cultures to last in perpetuity? The EU has been a disaster for Europe. The entire idea was created after Germany had twice decimated the continent to prevent any more war from happening. Now we find Germany the leading EU state that has promoted mass migration that has made places such as Sweden more dangerous than Syria, constant rapes, murders. Free speech is stifled with the fear of jail time for speaking out against these atrocities. Paris streets are basically a war zone, once beautiful works of art and engineering are plagued with graffiti and other gang debris. Authorities in London can’t figure out the motive of a guy that literally said he was killing in the name of islam. Stupid laws on fruit in the UK. Sending money from the more healthy countries to the likes of Greece that are plagued with corrupt politicians.

      The EU will completely dissolve in our life times and it won’t be the fault of anyone who voted for Brexit. And you know what, theres probably going to be a WW3, the continent is more unstable than it’s been since WW2. Better hope your living in Poland when shtf.

      If anyone was truly concerned about Russian influence they would be working to stabilize Europe, a continent of weak nations that are all being destroyed from the inside is going to be easy pickings for Russia to claim rule over.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        “…places such as Sweden more dangerous than Syria…”

        Oh, spare me…

        And I don’t see much good coming of arguing the other “points” you made with a guy who let that piece of silliness slip his lips. Enjoy your MAGA delusion, hummer.

        • 0 avatar
          xtoyota

          Freed mike……………
          read your History
          Hummer is closer to being right

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “Freed mike……………
            read your History”

            Briebart and Fox does history?

            “Hummer is closer to being right”

            and I’m closer to being left….

            Sigh!

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          You do realize Sweden was a dump before Trump ever said anything of the sort? I and thousands of others have been saying this for months now. But now all of a sudden since Trump brings it up its blasphemy? Come on buddy, don’t go cold just because he goes hot.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            Hummer, Please please please try to find some actual statistics to support your uninformed comments

            If Sweden is so terrible than what is the USA?

            The crime rate in the USA is much higher than in Sweden which averages 100 murders per year. Robberies and assaults are also similarly higher in the USA.

            The USA averages 44 murders per day or over 16,000 per year.

            As for the rest of Europe, if we use Austria as an example the American murder rate is 10x higher, the robber rate 2x, the assault rate 6x and the sexual assault rate 3x.

            Then if you factor in infant mortality rates, poverty rates, and the like the nations of Northern Europe generally score higher than the USA.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Don’t bother, Arthur. He’s spouting pure bullcrap. He knows it.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Arthur,
            Sweden has 9,600,000 people
            United States has 319,000,000

            Is it any mystery why the crime numbers may be different?

            Sweden is a dangerous place, where as crime in the US tends to be located in low income or over populated areas, crime in Sweden is happening in cities that were extremely safe before the current crisis.

            “Malmo most dangerous city in Western Europe”

            http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.3732/malm%C3%B6-most-dangerous-city-in-western-europe.html

            Mike, you still can’t provide evidence to the contrary.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            Hummer pro rate the crime figures and you will see that the murder rate in the USA is still more than five (5) times higher than in Sweden!

            So if Sweden with its lower crime rate, lower infant mortality rates, and longer life expectancy and far less income disparity or poverty levels is a dump, then what is the USA?

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            762 murders occurred in Chicago last year, significantly worse than Sweden, that doesn’t mean we need to accept those figures and assume anything less than that is safe.

            But it sets an excellent example, how many refugees do you believe live in Northern Sweden vs how many live in the already heavily populated area?
            By allowing them to settle in the heavy populated area they’re allowing for a Chicago like crisis which from reports coming out of Sweden is becoming the new norm

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          @FreedMike
          You can go to that little bit of Paradise , South Central Los Angeles…nothing happens there

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al From 'Murica

          Have you been over there? I was just in Paris. The Army is literally deployed on darn near every corner in the tourist area (central Paris). They had 2 separate attempted attacks while I was there and daily riots in the suburbs. They act swiftly on anything in the city because they really can’t afford for people to not come because they feel unsafe. I never did however that wouldn’t be the case if I lived outside the city.

          Look, you can argue about policy but you can’t argue that the EU approach has caused some issues in European nations. France in particular is likely to be a flash point. Why? Because France is like Texas. Go to Texas and you have a state full of people who love the fact they are Texan. France is the same. The French love being French and love the culture they have built. Introduce a bunch of folks who have a minimal desire to assimilate into that culture and there are bound to be issues and that has borne out.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @Big Al From ‘Murica – there is always a tenancy to resist “assimilation” when ever you get an influx of immigration. The locals tend to be pizzed off about it and that makes it worse.

            I remember my dad and his buddies talking about European “refugees” that came to Canada due to WWI and WWII. They called them “DP’s” (Displaced People) and it was never used in a positive way.
            The same thing happened when we had a big influx of Indian/Hindu/Sikh immigrants. They stuck together and were hated on by everyone else.
            A generation later the children are well integrated.
            The thing that works better is if the local populace take a part in the resettlement. In Canada we have refugee intake through government agencies and they have allowed intake through “sponsorship”. Community groups like Christian churches sponsor refugees and take an active part in helping them get settled. They have found that the sponsored refugees have double the rate of self-sufficiency within a year of arrival.

          • 0 avatar
            Yurpean

            LOL

            You have been nowhere. I live in Brussels and ride over to Paris weekly. You are full of it.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            “Community groups like Christian churches sponsor refugees and take an active part in helping them get settled. They have found that the sponsored refugees have double the rate of self-sufficiency within a year of arrival.”

            That may be true but I have to chuckle at the prospect of Christian churches sponsoring Islamic refugees. Here in the US, such charities get a pay day from the Feds which I think is what is all about and probably in Canada too (though they are not always religious). In the late 90s all of the rage was Catholic Charities dumping displaced Bosnian into the South Hills. This of course raised taxes significantly as well as crime in some cases (I was rear ended by an elderly Bosnian with limited English skills and no license or insurance in 1999). The grand irony of course is Catholic Charities, the supposed Christian organization, imported a large number of actual Muslims (practicing or just raised in it). So in my view, CC is a terrorist organization and I would toast to an anarchist firebomb of the place. Funny those never seem to happen anymore to the organizations trying to do harm to society.

            The ultimate weapon of mass destruction is a global reserve fiat currency.

            “According to Tone Bringa, an author and anthropologist, she says of Bosnia and Bosnians:
            “Neither Bosniak, nor Croat, nor Serb identities can be fully understood with reference only to Islam or Christianity respectively but have to be considered in a specific Bosnian context that has resulted in a shared history and locality among Bosnians of Islamic as well as Christian backgrounds.”[18]
            According to Bringa, in Bosnia there is a singular, “trans-ethnic culture” that encompassed each ethnicity and makes different faiths, including Christianity and Islam, “synergistically interdependent”.[18] Still, large numbers of Bosnians are secular, a trend strengthened in the post-World War II in Bosnia and Herzegovina as they were part of the Communist political system of the Soviet Union that rejected traditional organized religion.”

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnians

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al From 'Murica

            Lol…OK Yurpean. I get over there every couple of months and actually was in Mons the week prior to going to Paris. There are armed Soldiers all over the tourist distrits. Note Dame, The Louvre, Orsay…All over. I had to take a bus to the airport because Gare du Nord was closed due to rioting (it was not immigration related it was about the police brutality ). The week I got there is when they shot the dude with a machete at the Louvre and they arrested someone at the other airport near Paris as well.

            I work with NATO so I get to that part of the world as well as Eastern Europe pretty frequently. Bit yeah, I never go anywhere.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            28-Cars-Later – there is no government money going directly to any sponsorship group. There are church groups who have fund raised and paid out of pocket for supporting refugees. The sponsor is on the hook for all associated costs.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al From 'Murica

            Wow Yurpean…You are a real $#!+head. Thanks for playing

        • 0 avatar
          Dynasty


          “…places such as Sweden more dangerous than Syria…”

          Oh, spare me…”

          The argument of a lefty. None.

      • 0 avatar
        xtoyota

        Well said Hummer

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          Over? Did you say “over”? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!”

          Germans?

          Forget it, he’s rolling.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    “posited there would likely be substantial changes in the proposal after Trump’s nominee for U.S. trade representative, Robert Lighthizer, is confirmed by the Senate. Although, for now, it’s fairly conventional.”

    So doesn’t this short clip make this entire article irrelevant?

    If an Obama holdover, or even just a general place holder passed out this sample, that means diddly squat. If Trumps nominee isn’t the one making this proposal then it’s of no real value to the American people at all. This will never see the light of day, with my limited experience working around senators I know that these kinds of ideas are passed out all the time with no real expectation of being carried. Most likely 75% of senators will never even skim over this.

    As far as his level of involvement is concerned, reading “The art of the deal” should tell you everything you need to know involving his support vs involvement. The book details every step he used to win the election and thus far he has used the same techniques through the beginning of his term.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Getting elected and coordinating an effective government are two decidedly different processes.

      His techniques don’t work on a multitude of conflicting personal and ideological interests.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Well I would bet money you didn’t expect him to be elected, yet here he is. I had no doubt once I understand what he was doing, and now he is working in the government using the same techniques. It would be nice if he could get the other side to work with him instead of having idiots like Schumer harassing old ladies for who they voted for. Point is coordinating an effective government requires him to have his resources available to him, not blocking him every step because you can.

        Manchin is the only Senator that has accepted an Olive branch. If the left truly cared about limiting his idealogical interests they would be working with him to find common ground. As is I can’t find any reason to believe he possesses ideas that are “unpopular” after 8 years of far left government.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Hummer – is the Freedom Caucus Democrat?

          I was of the impression that the Republicans held the majority.

          On the subject of olive branches, did that occur with the last President?

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Freedom Caucus isn’t a secret society.

            That’s my point, the last President rarely reached out to the other side, now all they do is moan like school children at every law and nominee that doesnt bow at the alter of Obama. Instead of moving to the center in response to the past election they have drifted further to the left, completely abandoning their constituents.

          • 0 avatar
            OldManPants

            Jeepers, Hummer, I probably disagree with you on all the usual points but I gotta salute your fine sense of humor with the new avatar!

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            You like that?
            I still think I can do better, if I can figure out how to get WordPress to accept images.

        • 0 avatar
          Dynasty

          “Well I would bet money you didn’t expect him to be elected, yet here he is.”

          It is mind numbing all the MSM, political pundits, random people on the internet who said Trump would never win the nomination, or get elected seem to think they know how the man works, or what techniques of his work.

          Delusional is closest to the meaning of the word not yet in the dictionary to describe these people.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “Delusional is closest to the meaning of the word not yet in the dictionary to describe these people.”

            The left just assumed those voting for putinsputus were delusional “deplorables”.

            You cannot understand people’s choices through logic. Emotions are what carried the votes.

            I just read an article where a reporter interviewed multiple fans. Ironically, the majority of them will be hurt by his planned spending cuts and downsizing of government agencies BUT they still support him. There has been just a 3% drop in support among his fans.
            That is emotion and ideology standing firm, logic would not have let him in.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      Hummer, I believe a great number of people simply haven’t come to grips with the fact that Trump was elected.

      Trump is going to do things his way, just like every other president before him.

      I didn’t see a Trump presidency coming because it required divine intervention.

      Only goes to show that Allah has a sense of humor, especially now, watching how our world copes with Trump during this term.

      But if Trump cannot verifiably demonstrate to the masses that he tried to keep his promises to his followers, and that the Republicans shot down all Trump’s efforts re healthcare repeal and replace, and tax reform, Trump is toast in 2020.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        In regards to healthcare,
        -Democrats still thinks the current law it’s the bees knees – therefore since they passed it, they own it when it fails
        -Paul Ryan has lost influence which is almost as good as passing a landmark bill.
        -The failed bill has a multitude of issues that can only be corrected with bi-partisan support. Not going to happen til current fails.
        :-:/ Freedom caucus repeatedly moved their goals after they successfully got each initial change to the bill. – This is weak.
        :-:/Trumps input was reportedly limited from the beginning, ie we didn’t expect it to pass. Ryan had closed sessions when the bill was made, Trump always intended that to be open to multiple groups as he usually does his work. Again seeing Ryan’s influence diminished was a sweet victory in itself.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al From 'Murica

          When the current law fails they will simply blame Republicans for stripping out the primary funding mechanisms and frankly while I’m no fan of the ACA they aren’t wrong.

          The real fix for the ACA should it be kept would be to have the penalties for failure to participate be truly punitive. Barring a narrow set of circumstances if you fail to buy insurance because you are “young and healthy” I am good with either a fine that wrecks you financially or barring you from access. Why? Because you are taking advantage of the system and passing the burdun to people like me.

          If we as a nation have decided this is what we want and it is illegal to not have health care and the system depends on those people having it and these lawbreakers are straining the system to the breaking point then punish them. Drunk drivers have their lives ruined. These selfish little pricks that by in large supported the darned bill are killing it.

          I’d say repeal the whole thing, expand programs for the poor that truly need it via medicare, really crack down on fraud harshly and if you simply decide you are young and don’t need healthcare and something happens to you, well sucks to be you. You can do PSAs like all the smokers do on TV now before you croak.

          We should all have access to health care. I should not have to subsidize people who choose not to access it and then decide they need it when they get sick.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        “I believe a great number of people simply haven’t come to grips with the fact that Trump was elected.’

        That is a persistent meme coming from the “right”.

        He was elected, he just needs to do the job that he was elected to do.

        It isn’t some left wing conspiracy keeping him from doing his job.

        Republicans had 7 years to develop a replacement for “ObamaCare”
        Trump campaigned on replacing it.

        twitterpotus said:
        “”We have come up with a solution that’s really, really I think very good,” Trump said at a meeting of the nation’s governors at the White House.

        Why wasn’t it replaced?
        why did “Art of the Deal” fail?

        “Now, I have to tell you, it’s an unbelievably complex subject,” he added. “Nobody knew health care could be so complicated.”

        I’ll repeat this:
        “Getting elected and coordinating an effective government are two decidedly different processes.
        His techniques don’t work on a multitude of conflicting personal and ideological interests.”

        “In regards to healthcare,
        -Democrats still thinks the current law it’s the bees knees – therefore since they passed it, they own it when it fails”

        ObamaCare is far from ideal because it was adjusted to appeal to as many different interests as possible.

        ” they own it when it fails”

        Does that still apply when there will be executive orders issued that undermine its integrity?

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          So your admitting that Obamacare is a failure? You require Trumps replacement? You can’t have it both ways, if your going to say this is a massive failure you have to make the point that what we have is also a massive failure. The bill that was shown was a no-go with constituents, that’s why it failed. Why do what Obama did and push through an extremely unliked bill? The art of the deal was clearly at work here, he had no input on the output and it failed. He allowed Ryan to make a fool out of himself by carrying out what was clearly a bill almost as bad as Obamacare.

          Calling it a Muslim ban doesn’t make it so. Obama marked these countries as terrorist hotspots, Trump just finished what Obama had started. So while you feel vindicated on whatever you were told, I’m sitting here laughing at the hypocrisy of the entire idea that making our country safe is racist.

          “ObamaCare is far from ideal because it was adjusted to appeal to as many different interests as possible.”

          Your correct, Congress should have to accept the same healthcare that they give to the US citizens, and certain companies that are friends with the government should NOT be given a special waiver opting them out of the system.

          Doesn’t matter if that causes it to fail 1-2 months prematurely of when it would have failed anyhow, forcing people to have insurance or pay a fee to not have insurance is wrong. You can’t force the US public to buy a product it doesn’t want.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @Hummer -where did I say it (Obama care) was a failure?
            where did i say it was a “massive” failure?

            “Calling it a Muslim ban doesn’t make it so”

            Grabsomepuzzyputus said multiple times that he would initiate a “Muslim Ban”.

            I’m just going to cut and paste from the sub-prime thread.

            “The 2nd time around the judge used putinspotus public comments about “Muslim Ban” as evidence that the motivation was religion based.

            “But in a pointed decision that repeatedly invoked Mr. Trump’s public comments, Judge Derrick K. Watson, of Federal District Court in Honolulu, wrote that a “reasonable, objective observer” would view even the new order as “issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion, in spite of its stated, religiously neutral purpose.”
            Judge Derrick K. Watson – appointed by President Barack Obama.

            The 2nd judge to block the ban: Theodore D. Chuang appointed by President Barack Obama.

            ““The history of public statements continues to provide a convincing case that the purpose of the Second Executive Order remains the realization of the long-envisioned Muslim ban,” Chuang wrote.”

            All three judges felt that the ban was unconstitutional.”

            Edit – Here is the complete ruling from the Hawaii court:

            ht tp://ww w. vox. com/2017/3/15/14940946/read-full-text-hawaii-court-order-trump-refugee-travel-ban

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            “Why do what Obama did and push through an extremely unliked bill?”

            Well, it seems to have grown on people lately, possibly since the Republicans have completely botched coming up with anything better:

            http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

            Of course, “not able to come up with anything better” is a kind assessment. An unkind assessment might be “what they came up with is a Trump Tower-sized raised middle finger to anyone who’s not a) rich or b) doesn’t have employer-purchased health insurance.”

            But I’ll just stick with being kind and say the GOP didn’t have its’ act together.

            (Of course, hummer is the guy who says that Sweden is more dangerous than Syria, so I’m sure none of this matters in the alternative mirror Spock-with-Fu-Manchu-universe he lives in…)

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Any idea what percent of of the worlds population of Muslims comes from the banned countries? Pushing the idea that it is anti-Muslim is ridiculous whether or not you think Trump said that. By saying that this is a Muslim ban and pointing to these countries as examples of muslims you seem to be making the accusation that all muslims are extremists. These countries are known terrorist hotspots. The only reason these Judges are against the ban is because Trump is president. Let’s be real. No sensible person feels we should be letting terrorists into this country, this is exactly what these judges are going for.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            I think you guys are way too much rehashing the past.

            Trump is not going to dwell on the past.

            The way forward is ahead. We may learn from the past so as to not make the same mistakes again, but the future lies ahead.

            And from what I’ve seen 10 weeks into Trump’s presidency, my guess would be that WE, THE PEOPLE, ain’t seen nuttin’ yet.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            You’re right, Hummer. Don’t let folks who go to “terrorist countries” back in our country…especially when one’s the wife of the starting centerfielder of the St. Louis Cardinals.

            http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2017/02/18/dexter-fowler-donald-trump-travel-ban-cardinals/98094154/

            I’m sure that if she goes home to visit mom and dad back in Iran, she’s nothing but a fifth columnist, albeit one who’s impeccably and expensively dressed. I’m sure her Louis Vuitton will be stuffed with nukes, anthrax and a bunch of DVDs of guys in turbans dancing around and shooting off guns while they burn American flags.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            “Trump is not going to dwell on the past.”

            To the contrary, he most certainly is…the past where he was a great deal-maker and a superstar at campaign rallies.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            FreedMike, I don’t agree with that.

            Just the EOs that Trump has signed so far, not to mention the ones he will sign in the future, point to a radical break from the past for America. A new direction, focused on jobs for American citizens first.

            Trump may rely on what tactics he used that were successful for him in the past, but for America, I think he is totally focused on a departure from America’s past.

            Of course, this is the worst thing that can happen to worshipers of the last administration because Trump is dismantling their hallmark accomplishments systematically, piece by piece, EO by EO.

            I watched Gina McCarthy on Judy Woodruff’s show the other day, and Gina was not happy.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      …this coming from the guy who says Sweden is now more dangerous than Syria.

      Thanks, I needed the afternoon laugh!

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Do you have evidence to suggest otherwise? Otherwise your full of crap, since every news agency that runs through there seems to get attacked.
        Power is being cut off to cities that are too dangerous for people to be in.

        At least in Syria you have soldiers fighting against the extremists, and you have soldiers protecting the people. That’s sh&ts not a laughing matter, unless rape and murder is something you find funny.

        Not sure where you got the idea that Trump was going to cut off socialized medicine but that’s been a campaign promise that’s attracted a lot of people that would never vote for someone on the right.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          “Do you have evidence to suggest otherwise”?

          LOL, folks…I call this Troll Technique Alpha.

          First make a ridiculously stupid statement, like “Sweden is more dangerous than Syria.” Anyone with more than 11.2 functioning brain cells knows that’s utter BS.

          Then when someone calls you out on it, ask them to disprove it. Problem is, no one can. Why? Because the first statement is utter bulls**t. And you can’t prove or disprove bulls**t…because it’s neither true nor false. It’s just…bulls**t.

          Thus, Troll claims argument victory. Enjoy the victory lap, hummer. Well earned!

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Why would I need to prove it? Do I need to prove the holocaust as well? It’s not hidden the terrorist in Sweden are given free housing, food, healthcare, and the employment rate of refugees is in the single digits. Every other day we hear about another bomb attack or person being stabbed in Europe, of course every time we hear the phrase “Allah Akbar” Being sung by the assailant. It barely even phases people anymore, it’s like living in the 3rd world is acceptable all of a sudden.

            At least in Syria the rebels are more worried about capturing territory. There aren’t as many defenseless women to be raped since they aren’t allowed out without a man. In Syria you at least have a good chance of running into a friendly.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Yeah, you’re right, you don’t need to prove that “Sweden is more dangerous than Syria,” as long as your ultimate goal is to prove that you’re completely full of s**t.

            Mission accomplished, by the way.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            Hummer those are outright lies or ‘fake news’. 44 murders per day in the USA. More than in all of Europe.

          • 0 avatar
            OldManPants

            “44 murders per day in the USA.”

            And we’re well rid of most of those 44. If only the guns had fired fore & aft both.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            “Sweden is more dangerous than Syria,”
            SYRIA
            “Syria’s national wealth, infrastructure and institutions have been “almost obliterated” by the “catastrophic impact” of nearly five years of conflict, a new report has found. Fatalities caused by war, directly and indirectly, amount to 470,000, according to the Syrian Centre for Policy Research (SCPR) – a far higher total than the figure of 250,000 used by the United Nations until it stopped collecting statistics 18 months ago.

            In all, 11.5% of the country’s population have been killed or injured since the crisis erupted in March 2011, the report estimates. The number of wounded is put at 1.9 million. Life expectancy has dropped from 70 in 2010 to 55.4 in 2015. Overall economic losses are estimated at $255bn (£175bn).”

            SWEDEN
            “In general terms, violence has decreased in Sweden in the last 20 years.”
            “Data from the Swedish Crime Survey shows that in terms of lethal violence, there has generally been a downward trend over the past 25 years. Nonetheless, the level in 2015 – when a total of 112 cases of lethal violence were reported – was higher than for many years.”

            “Studies conducted by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention show that lethal violence using firearms has increased within the context of criminal conflicts. The number of confirmed or suspected shootings was 20 per cent higher in 2014 than in 2006. The statistics also show that 17 people were killed with firearms in 2011, while the corresponding figure in 2015 was 33.
            Figures from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) show that in 2012, 0.7 murders were committed in Sweden per 100 000 inhabitants.”

            “The number of reported rapes in Sweden has risen. But the definition of rape has broadened over time, which makes it difficult to compare the figures. It is also misleading to compare the figures with other countries, as many acts that are considered rape under Swedish law are not considered rape in many other countries.”

            In recent times, simplistic and occasionally completely inaccurate information about Sweden and Swedish migration policy has been disseminated. Here, the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs looks at some of the most common claims.

            Claim: “Sweden had its first islamic terrorist attack not so long ago”

            Facts: The only known attempt at such an attack was in 2010. No one was killed but the attacker.

            Claim: “There has been a major increase in gun violence in Sweden.”

            Facts: In general terms, violence has decreased in Sweden in the last 20 years. At the same time, surveys repeatedly show that people in Sweden and in other Western countries have a perception that violence is actually increasing. Perceptions of increased violence have been linked to the number of immigrants in Sweden. Nonetheless, research shows that there is no evidence to indicate that immigration leads to increased crime. Despite the fact that the number of immigrants in Sweden has increased since the 1990s, exposure to violent crimes has declined.

            Data from the Swedish Crime Survey shows that in terms of lethal violence, there has generally been a downward trend over the past 25 years. Nonetheless, the level in 2015 – when a total of 112 cases of lethal violence were reported – was higher than for many years.

            Studies conducted by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention show that lethal violence using firearms has increased within the context of criminal conflicts. The number of confirmed or suspected shootings was 20 per cent higher in 2014 than in 2006. The statistics also show that 17 people were killed with firearms in 2011, while the corresponding figure in 2015 was 33.

            Figures from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) show that in 2012, 0.7 murders were committed in Sweden per 100 000 inhabitants.

            Source: https://www.unodc.org/gsh/en/data.html

            Claim: “There has been a major increase in the number of rapes in Sweden.”

            Facts: The number of reported rapes in Sweden has risen. But the definition of rape has broadened over time, which makes it difficult to compare the figures. It is also misleading to compare the figures with other countries, as many acts that are considered rape under Swedish law are not considered rape in many other countries.

            For example: If a woman in Sweden reports that she has been raped by her husband every night for a year, that is counted as 365 separate offences; in most other countries this would be registered as a single offence, or would not be registered as an offence at all.

            Willingness to report such offences also differs dramatically between countries. A culture in which these crimes are talked about openly, and victims are not blamed, will also have more cases reported. Sweden has made a conscious effort to encourage women to report any offence.

            Read more about the legal implications of the term ‘rape’ (in Swedish):

            http://www.notisum.se/rnp/sls/lag/19620700.htm#K6
            https://www.bra.se/download/18.37179ae158196cb172d6047/1483969937948/2017_1_Nationella_trygghetsundersokningen_2016.pdf
            Claim: “Refugees are behind the increase in crime, but the authorities are covering it up.”

            Facts: According to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention’s Swedish Crime Survey, some 13 per cent of the population were the victim of an offence against them personally in 2015. This is an increase on preceding years, although it is roughly the same level as in 2005.

            The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention has conducted two studies into the representation of people from foreign backgrounds among crime suspects, the most recent in 2005. The studies show that the majority of those suspected of crimes were born in Sweden to two Swedish-born parents. The studies also show that the vast majority of people from foreign backgrounds are not suspected of any crimes.

            “People from foreign backgrounds are suspected of crimes more often than people from a Swedish background. According to the most recent study, people from foreign backgrounds are 2.5 times more likely to be suspected of crimes than people born in Sweden to Swedish-born parents. In a later study, researchers at Stockholm University showed that the main difference in terms of criminal activity between immigrants and others in the population was due to differences in the socioeconomic conditions in which they grew up in Sweden. This means factors such as parents’ incomes, and the social circumstances in the area in which an individual grew up.”

            “Despite the high costs of immigration, Sweden recorded a public finance surplus in 2015, and the forecasts indicate that the surplus is set to grow until 2020.
            Moreover, Sweden has had one of the highest rates of growth in Europe over the last two years. Youth unemployment has declined considerably and is now at its lowest level for 13 years, and long-term unemployment (12 months or longer) is the lowest in the EU.”

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            If anyone believes Sweden is more dangerous that Syria, I’ll pay for air fare to Syria.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Certainly I don’t know what I’m talking about swedes don’t even acknowledge the constant stabbing, robbing, rape, murders at this point lest they be called racist. And your just as complicit by diminishing those crimes.

            Lou, only if your willing to go to Sweden.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Lou, I don’t recall making the claim that gun violence was increasing in Sweden. If I did that was my mistake. Stabbing is the preferred method that terrorist have been using in Europe. Comparing the rates of gun violence between America and Sweden isn’t the argument to be made. It’s comparing vehicle murders and stabbings.

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/7278532/Jews-leave-Swedish-city-after-sharp-rise-in-anti-Semitic-hate-crimes.html

            When you have governing bodies such as the above case that is complicit with the crime and turns a blind eye, it’s no real question why the crime statistics may not reflect reality.
            http://www.dailywire.com/news/12466/how-muslim-migration-made-malmo-sweden-crime-michael-qazvini

            They have jobs? Interesting

            “Of almost 163,000 people who applied for asylum in Sweden last year, less than 500 landed a job, according to a report by a Swedish public broadcaster”

            https://www.thelocal.se/20160531/fewer-than-500-of-163000-asylum-seekers-found-jobs

            ” In April, the unemployment rate among people born in Sweden was at its lowest since before the global financial crisis in 2008, falling to 4.7 percent. The equivalent among residents born abroad was 14.9 percent.”

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Hummer – I just posted statistics FROM SWEDEN.

            Does it say ANYWHERE that CRIME is WORSE due to MUSLIMS??????????????????????????????????????????

            Since I’m not Swedish, I’ll look at Canadian statistics.

            “The Government of Canada resettled more than 25,000 Syrian refugees between November 4, 2015 and February 29, 2017.”

            Crime isn’t worse.

            We have seen an increase in HATE crime against MUSLIMS.

            We had a terrorist attack recently but it was a WHITE ultra-nationalist killing MUSLIMS.

            “A total of 38,901 Muslim refugees entered the U.S. in fiscal year 2016”

            In 3 months we settled 64% of the USA total.

            ALL FROM A COUNTRY THAT PUZZYPOTUS BANNED!

            If one shifts that to a per capita basis, it would be like the USA settling 250,000 Muslims.

          • 0 avatar
            Arthur Dailey

            Hummer, You keep making false statements. The government and press in Sweden do not report murders or crime? What sources do you have to prove that? The same that reported on The Bowling Green Massacre?

            Here is an American news report on American business hiring practices stating that they prefer to hire Syrian refugees because they are more law abiding than people born in the USA.

            http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/27/us/refugees-jobs-drug-testing/

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            167,000 refugees coming into a country with a population of 9,600,000 is a lot different then 39,000 coming into a country with 320,000,000 people with a system in place that is designed to detect the terrorists much quicker than countries with less resources.
            It’s not like we’ve been free of terrorist attacks since it started either. The somalian son of refugees that stabbed people in a Minnesota mall comes to mind.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            No government anywhere would ever suppress information which may make it look untruthful or put it’s decisions in a poor light. Simply unpossible.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            @Hummer

            “Certainly I don’t know what I’m talking about ”

            glad to see you admit it.

        • 0 avatar
          shaker

          Edit: Removed derpy rubbish.

  • avatar
    jeoff

    Well, the best that we could hope for is that his successes would be watered-down/saner versions of his promises, and his failures would be failed attempts at implementing bad ideas.
    For a little perspective, remember that the signature action of Hillary while Secretary of State was *succesfully* toppling Gaddafi–“We came, we saw, he died”‘, and the Lybian people are still paying the price for her *success*.
    None of these guys are as smart as they think they are.
    Competent or not, nothing he has done so far is as bad as the worst of the previous two presidencies.
    The American people (and the world) may luck out, and the Trump presidency may be largely inconsequential–which could make it a very good presidency (grading on a curve).

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Do you think the Libyan people would be *better off* with Qaddafi in power? It’s a binary choice.

      • 0 avatar
        jeoff

        Yes, much. She killed off a 70 y/old dictator that in his waning years had worked to normalize relations with the west, reform the economy, and allowed less centralized government. Yes, it was a binary choice—she chose very poorly.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          I guess you didn’t hear – he was on his way out of power anyway. His people rose up against him and he was losing the war.

          And he died at the hands of other Libyans, not at the hands of Hillary Clinton.

          But why not bring him back into power? I mean, he clearly had the support of his people. Right?

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Mike you really live in your own bubble don’t you, can’t have facts getting in the way of your beliefs!

            If Qaddafi was still in power Trump probably wouldn’t have won, Europe wouldn’t be in shambles, Brexit would certainly have never happened, we wouldn’t be involved in yet another war. Libya was clearly a large player in stabilizing the area even if itself was weak.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            So says the guy who thinks Sweden is more unsafe than Syria.

            But go ahead and disprove what I was saying. I’ll give you the points to work on, just to make it easy for you:

            1) Qaddafi was so unpopular that his own people started a war to get rid of him. True or false?

            2) He was losing the war. True or false?

            3) His own people, not Hillary Clinton (or any other American, for that matter) captured him and killed him. True or false?

            Let me know where I got any of this wrong.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            So tell me, who was financially backing the people that killed Qaddafi, your argument fails on the whole basis of expecting Hillary Clinton to be in a high rise with a sniper rifle. News flash she’s not a bad a–.

            You can pay people to do whatever you like. If that wasn’t the case we wouldn’t have shareblue paying people to post online.

            No ones calling Qaddafi a good leader, but he was clearly instrumental in keeping the area stabalized, regardless if that conflicts with your political beliefs.

          • 0 avatar
            jeoff

            Yeah, the US bombing the poop out of Lybia had nothing to do with it .
            “We came, we saw, he died.” –Hillary Clinton.
            This was HER accomplishment (well, before it all went to Hell).
            She was better than “W” in that less Americans died because of her hubris (though that is probably not much of a comfort to 50,000 dead Lybians).
            She was worse than “W” because she did the same damn thing and should have known better.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            I see.

            So…back Qaddafi, the guy who’s so brutal that his people started a war against him. Sounds a lot like what Putin’s doing in Syria. How’s that working out for the Syrians?

            Well, at least Syria’s more peaceful than Sweden. There is that.

            And, of course, we have our own history of backing dictators who do nothing but kill their own people in the name of “being pro-western.” Remember the Shah of Iran? How’d that work out for us?

            (The middle east is a no-win, guys. Doesn’t matter what we do. The only question is how to limit the fail. And propping up dictators is a guaranteed fail.)

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Of course the middle east is an awful situation.

            If we leave it alone the countries without oil all turn into dictatorships that focus on invading Western civilizations to advance Jihad.

            If we keep doing what we’re doing we continue wasting billions.

            Qaddafi being alive in retrospect was clearly the better option, now we have more war and more terrorism.

          • 0 avatar
            jeoff

            It’s no surprise that any leader of any country in the Middle East is hated by a significant portion of its people. That is not a justification for bombing that leadership and watching the country burn. Obama making promises that he could not keep in Syria, probably did its people no favors either, and may have encouraged Putin to get involved also.
            Bush, Obama, Clinton, all tried to do something good, but the world would have been better off, if they recognized the limits on their ability to act on their good intentions.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            There was no good move for Obama vis a vis Qaddafi, jeoff. If we hadn’t helped his opponents, then the war would have just raged on, and taken a huge human toll (as is the case in Syria). If we’d backed Qaddafi, then we’d be making the same mistake we made with the Shah. Backing secular dictators in Muslim countries is a direct lead in to religious extremism, and in the best case, that leads to what we have in Iran. In the worst case, it leads to Al-Qaida or ISIS.

            In the end, I think Obama made the right bad move on Libya. But it’s definitely debatable.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Libya was just another notch on the utter disaster belt of the previous administration. The change was driven by several factors including a desire by France to wipe out Gadaffi due to blackmail on Sarkozy and Gaddaffi’s desire to introduce a gold backed Dinar.

            Didn’t Wesley Clark say in 2007 they wanted to hit seven countries from 2001 onward? Wait, I thought Bush was the warmonger president? Who hit Syria, Lebanon, Libya and Iraq with ISIS?

            There are many shades of grey.

            https://www.libertariannews.org/2011/10/25/general-wesley-clark-us-planned-invasion-of-seven-countries-back-in-2001/

            https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/01/06/new-hillary-emails-reveal-true-motive-for-libya-intervention/

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            28-Cars-Later – you have to admit that the USA has a knack for picking losers when it comes to Coups, overthrows, invasions, and foreign political manipulation.

            I’m thinking that Russia has a better track record.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I’d say more recently this may be the case. Operation Condor worked pretty well.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            28-Cars-Later – “Operation Condor worked pretty well.”

            Really?

            I guess it went well if you weren’t a priest, teacher, union member or in an opposing political party.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            @FreedMike

            “So says the guy who thinks Sweden is more unsafe than Syria.”

            one of the worst things we’ve done in this society is give people the idea that all opinions are equally valid.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Went well from the perspective of Western intelligentsia, which was my point (obviously Allende may have something to say on the impact of the operation).

            The current gaggle of f***sticks has successfully killed thousands in Iraq, Libya, and Ukraine while accomplishing little which I think was your point and I agree.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            28-Cars-Later – correct. The Friedmanites loved the results.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al From 'Murica

            Curious freedmike, did you support the Iraq War? I mean if we our going to make it a matter of policy to support the removal of a-holes from power, certainly Sadaam would have made that list.

            I mean long after his death none of my intrepreters would go near certain buildings because they all had family that Sadaam’s regime had tortured and killed in there.

            But I don’t recall the left defending his removal so fiercely. For the record, I’m not a fan of either action, I just despise the intelluctal dishonesty from both sides in supporting one action and defending the other.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Freed on the subject of the Iraqi “liberation” I am reminded of myself in the period. I was about 22 or 23 then and I was glued to the TV in the dorm after the invasion began in March of 2003. My feelings at the time were yes, I want blood for 9/11. The funny thing is, this is how *everyone* around me felt too, there were few acting level headed pointing out the error and consequences. I only can recall the foreign students having cooler heads during that time, something to which we at the time dismissed as “they just don’t understand”. Now I realize I and the rest of us were duped and Göring of all people warned about this in 1946.

            “Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

            In an interview with Gilbert in Göring’s jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)

            https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hermann_G%C3%B6ring

            I know now it was all a setup, the only question is who were the real puppetmasters.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al From 'Murica

            I agree 28. To be brutally honest I was for the war until I got over there in it anwhat we had been sold was a load.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            We all were fooled Big Al, but I am now wiser for realizing it.

            Puts what Wesley Clark said into perspective.

            youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

  • avatar
    TW5

    Does the author understand the concept BALANCE of trade?

    We’re not interested in becoming the next China. If corporate tax reform goes through, we don’t need to rip NAFTA to shreds.

  • avatar
    pecos bill

    TTAC: Just another hate-filled political blog.

  • avatar
    pecos bill

    This is supposed to be a blog about cars.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Clearly the purpose of this article is for clicks, not only is the article extremely loosely related to automobiles, but the article suggests a problem and then turns around and mentions that very issue doesn’t exist; as I originally pointed out.

      The article doesn’t even make an effort to point out any relationship to the cars; the sites purpose. All around lousy.

      Obviously I’m not above giving them the clicks, so there’s that.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      “This is supposed to be a blog about cars.”

      NAFTA has a huge impact on the North American auto industry.

      DEAL WITH IT.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        What are we dealing with exactly?

        This story points out that a person filling in at a US agency is trying to justify his temp position, and then points out that his suggestions on major issues is immaterial.

        So although NAFTA does clearly effect the auto market, this story has zero effect on anything, the entire purpose is to question if Trump has changed his position. Without ever showing evidence to support this claim.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          Look at the photo.
          He has clearly changed his position.
          I’m sure you can’t stand still for long is those Russian made plum smugglers.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Speaking of – I was trying to change my avatar to something random like Jim Croce, but I cannot remember how to get make WordPress accept google images. My last avatar was made about 5 years so I can’t remember how I got that to work.
            (The pre-downloaded Microsoft pictures work, as seen)

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            I haven’t played with the avatar settings in a while.
            OldManPants aka Kenmore might be able to help you.

            Perhaps download the image you want to your PC then transfer it to the avatar?

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Maybe he’ll snoop in.

            I’ve tried downloading and then converting to jpeg, since the current image is jpeg one would think any jpeg should work.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Yes.

            A long rant how unfettered free trade is sooo beneficial just like how it benefited his auto industry.

            I do believe that there has to be some reasonable measures in place that mitigate job fluctuation.

            All the working man wants is a chance to support his family and some stability in doing that.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            It was actually pretty impressive what automakers went through to build cars specifically for a country/continent with a population of 23M people. Interestingly they seem to attack vehicles specifically made for the NA market.

  • avatar
    Big Al From 'Murica

    What is Better Schmitt’s take?

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    “Trump Administration Now Seeking More Modest Changes to NAFTA”

    This is no surprise. Libertarian free market billionaires like the Koch brothers don’t like the idea of an import tax. They also don’t like the idea of anything that could restrict trade. They have gone as far as offering a million cash to reelection campaigns of any Repubs facing political heat.

    All of his bold populist campaign promises are going to crash upon the rocky shores of reality.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Koch brothers have spent billions against Trump, should tell you whose on the correct side.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        I read somewhere that George Soros lost over a billion bucks betting against Trump.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @Hummer – getting elected is the “short” game. I’m betting on Koch and friends on the “long” game.

        Obamacare replacement – dead
        Muslim ban 1.0 and 2.0 – dead
        Lock up Hillary – dead
        Make friends with Putin/Russia – scandal that just won’t go away. Flynn wants immunity.
        Tear up NAFTA and tax/tariff imports – dying ““Trump Administration Now Seeking More Modest Changes to NAFTA”
        Downsize government – not going too well, doncha think?
        Defeat ISIS – that first mission was a resounding success.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Apparently my response was deleted, no need for me to retype all that.

          You can clearly see that your really stretching for anything to put against Trump. Let’s be honest he’s been in office for 2-1/2 months, he’s done a significant amount of work since then but since he hasn’t cured cancer, ended poverty, and created a peace solution to every worldwide aggression he’s apparently a failure. We had 8 years of lame duck presidency and now you want Trump to fix everything in 2 months? If the man walked on water you would say he can’t swim.
          If he ends 4 years without doing anything, I’ll agree with you.

          Right now you just sound madly partisan, apparently he ran over your childhood kitten. The repeated “Worlds ending” attitude (not necessarily from you, just in general) isnt getting anyone anywhere. Don’t be the boy who cried wolf.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “Apparently my response was deleted,”

            If you type your comment in WordPad, or similar wordprocessor, you can then cut&paste it into ttac’s comment section.

            And you’ll always have a copy, if you choose to Save it for posterity.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            I do when I make large comments, but generally it’s not a big deal, just a minor annoyance.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            OK

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Hummer – I’m not partisan, I just don’t like #putinspotus.
            If I was American back in November 2008, I would have voted McCain. He is a true patriot that is bipartisan when that happens to be the best approach for his constituency. The guy has been in harms way and has suffered for his country. That is the kind of guy you need in office.

            My list are things twitterpotus campaigned to change that has not worked. He shot his mouth off without a plan. The guy is a reality star that only knows how and what to say to get the news/headlines and to play to his fan base.

            Reagan was a decent leader because as a “B” actor he knew well enough to follow the script and let the experts direct the movie.

            I have voted conservative or for conservative leaning parties in the past and would in the future. It all depends on the campaign platform and if they were already in power, what kind of job they did or if I agreed with their direction for the country.

  • avatar
    OldWingGuy

    @Hummer, @HDC, etc

    Full disclosure here – I’m Canadian, so don’t have a dog in this hunt on American politics.
    But it seems to me that:
    President Clinton left the first, and only, surplus budget in a generation
    George Bush quickly cut taxes, mostly for the top 0.1% (See Ted Talk, Robert Kiyosaki, author of Rich Dad Poor Dad)
    President Bush had 9-11 on his watch, got embroiled in not one, but two, hopeless wars, stood by while New Orleans flooded, and had the entire world financial system melt down on his watch.
    President Obama was handed an incredible mess, worst recession since 1929, two hopeless wars. During his time, approx 14M jobs created (about 3500 per day), found Osama bin Ladden, dealt with a congress sworn to oppose everything, and brought some measure of health care to millions. And relatively scandal free.
    So, for an uninformed Canuck, just why is it folks despise President Obama so much. I don’t get it.

    As to NAFTA, it was set up for cheap labour from Mexico and cheap resources from Canada, with the USA deriving most of the benefit. As a Canadian, OK with me to toss the whole thing out.

    • 0 avatar
      OldManPants

      “President Bush… stood by while New Orleans flooded.”

      Oh, all right, I’ll give him that.

      But on his own he’d still have never been more than a mean-drunk high school coach.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      OldWingGuy, every US president comes into office with his own agenda.

      But it seems to me, from what I’ve seen so far, that Trump came into office with an agenda that would help many American citizens, not just the upper 1% nor the bottom 20% minority. Trump stated he is the president for all American citizens.

      That in itself is a radical departure from ALL previous American presidents I know about. Please correct me if I’m wrong since I’ve only been around since Truman.

      And since when are Canadian resources “cheap?” There is much beneficiality to free and equal trade with a nation’s neighboring countries, like Canada and Mexico in the case of the US, but Mexico has the upper hand in the trade with the US and appears to be more equal than the US in the trading partnership.

      I do not think you are uninformed. You make some excellent points in all the comments you have made on ttac. I actually read most comments.

      So from my perspective, I hope Trump succeeds in making the lives of every day American citizens better than they were over the past eight years.

      As far as wars are concerned, I don’t know how we can avoid them. There’s always going to be some despot who is going to push the limits of the envelope. These days we have Iran, North Korea, and Putin (who is desperately trying to make Russia relevant again, like the days of the USSR.)

      The last time we appeased tyranny we got Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo. Wars are a fact of life on our planet. We’ll be in another one real soon, and Trump is just the guy to use nukes.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        “Trump came into office with an agenda that would help many American citizen”

        That replacement for Obamacare would have helped 24 million Americans. /s

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Obama wasn’t in no way scandal “lite”
      -Fast and furious (led to the Eric holder incident)
      -Obamacare has been financially devastating on American families (failed promise of keeping doctor)
      -spying on journalist and Angela Merkel (and leader of Brazil)
      -Benghazi
      -Iran nuclear deal
      -Iran ransom payment
      -EPA Colorado spill not held accountable
      -“Green” boondoggles (solyndra)
      -NSA surveillance
      (Sure I’m missing some)

      He Prosecuted more whistleblowers than all previous presidents combined
      10 times more drone strikes than Bush
      War in Libya and Syria, including destabilizing Libya which has significantly increased the Refugee problem.

      No ones calling Bush good, but comparatively, he was no where near as bad.
      Under Obama the Economy has grown less than any point since before WW2, jobs gone, illegal crisis that is financially and criminally plaguing our country. Race relations worse than at any point in my life.

      US doesn’t benefit from a deal where Billions of our money is sent to a foriegn country where our jobs are also being moved to. Paying 5% less on a product is little consolidation when you or your neighbors lost their jobs for that small price decrease.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Seth Parks, United States
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Kyree Williams, United States