By on June 18, 2015

Smug Motherfucker Donald Trump Douching It Up Like He Always Does

Republican presidential hopeful and billionaire Donald Trump wants to bring the pain via punitive tariffs to Ford for manufacturing vehicles in Mexico.

During his announcement of his 2016 campaign Tuesday, The Detroit News says Trump vowed he would levy a 35 percent tariff on Ford parts and vehicles imported from Mexico if the automaker presses forward with a $2.5 billion investment in the nation, claiming the move would “take away thousands” of jobs from American workers.

Trump then proceeded to roleplay how he would deliver the “bad news” to “the head of Ford,” CEO Mark Fields:

Let me give you the bad news: every car, every truck and every part manufactured in this plant that comes across the border, we’re going to charge you a 35 percent tax — OK? — and that tax is going to be paid simultaneously with the transaction. They are going to take away thousands of jobs.

Announced in April, the $2.5 billion investment would add 3,800 jobs to the 11,300 already employed by Ford in Mexico, and would include new engine and transmission plants aimed toward the export market in the United States and other global markets.

Trump continued on with his roleplay, stating Ford would use lobbyist power to persuade “President Trump” to drop the tax, only for him to sandbag the automaker into submission. He added he knew Fields personally, and thought Ford was a good company overall.

In response, spokeswoman Christin Baker reiterated Ford’s investments into its home market:

We are proud that we have invested $6.2 billion in our U.S. plants since 2011 and hired nearly 25,000 U.S. employees. Overall, 80 percent of our North American investment annually is in the U.S., and 97 percent of our North American engineering is conducted in the U.S.

Of course, Trump wouldn’t be legally able to punish Ford for building its plants wherever it wanted, let alone single-out Ford with his plan without also doing the same to General Motors and FCA (how he would deal with Fiat owning Chrysler would be a whole other round of metaphors and hyperbole altogether).

At least one thing is for certain in Trump’s campaigning thus far: the dead cat on his head is actually his hair.

(Photo credit:Gage Skidmore/Flickr/CC BY-SA 2.0)

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

67 Comments on “Republican Hopeful Donald Trump Threatens Ford With Tariffs Over Mexico...”


  • avatar

    If they had a contest for the most *obnoxious* candidate, Trump would certainly win. Even Republicans largely can’t stand him. Since he’s not going to win, I’m sure Ford is, at most, amused by that little threat…

    • 0 avatar
      Fred

      Yea but the media loves him cause he will always say something stupid.

    • 0 avatar
      TW5

      If you were reading a transcript of Trump’s remarks with the names redacted, you could easily mistake is anti-corporate and anti-trade remarks for a left-wing presidential darling. People suck Bernie Sander’s and Elizabeth Warren’s d**ks for this sort of nativist rhetoric; however, liberals have trained themselves to support racist policy without making racist remarks. This is basically the source of their power, since Republicans live in the quagmire of their own social gaffes.

      The Donald is not fit to be president, but he’s the only window into the growing discontentment and exasperation of the capitalist class who are forced to move commerce overseas by politicians who gut labor force participation. The US economy is a glorious mullet rocket on the open road, and we’re driving it 25mph in the slow lane. This is the primary source of discontentment in the US. Dwindling opportunity because we’re driving too slowly to get people anywhere.

      Considering Trump’s own international commercial endeavors, I doubt he is opposed to trade or cheap labor; however, he is probably trying to railroad corporations into supporting some type of labor reforms, like EITC, healthcare reform, or payroll tax cuts.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Not sure how making more stuff here is racist, but okey dokey…

        • 0 avatar

          The racist thing isn’t the tarriffs on Mexico, it’s the part of his announcement speech where he says Mexico is sending the US rapists and drug dealers.

          http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/16/donald-trump-mexico-presidential-speech-latino-hispanic

      • 0 avatar
        mr.cranky

        @TW5- I was with you until you spouted off that ignorant comment about Sanders and Warren and how liberals “train themselves to support racist policy without making racist remarks”.

        Almost as bad as Trump’s rhetoric. Come back when you can debate without injecting that nonsense into your replies.

  • avatar
    udman

    I understand why this piece is currently on TTAC, but Trump is, and forever will be a marginal player in the world of politics. The less time we have to hear from him, the quicker we can forget about him…

    • 0 avatar
      alexndr333

      Sorry, but I hope this guy makes life miserable for the GOP right up to the 2016 convention. In other words, “Long May He Weave!”

      • 0 avatar
        thornmark

        >>Sorry, but I hope this guy makes life miserable for the GOP right up to the 2016 convention. In other words, “Long May He Weave!”<<

        Trump is a de facto Dem who gives most of his political $ to Dems.
        http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/donald-trump-donations-democrats-hillary-clinton-119071.html

        • 0 avatar
          Skink

          Trump is a Trojan horse. One indicator is his willingness to have Oprah as his running mate. Because he’s (pretending to be) a serious Republican candidate, he gets national attention as he slams the serious Republican candidates, and while he lampoons what being a Republican means. All the while, he’s promoting himself. He’ll get tired of it once somebody starts pinning him down on his bluster, or whenNBC gives him an ultimatum over The Apprentice.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            I’ve espoused this theory too. His historical support of the Democratic party before his forray into politics suggests to me that he’s trying a pull a Colbert.

        • 0 avatar
          alexndr333

          If you read further down the article you cited, it states, “Beginning with the 2012 cycle, however, financial disclosures show that Trump has donated exclusively to Republican candidates and groups.” So, he takes care of his own interests: Democrats when he’s protecting his business, and Republicans when he’s protecting his own candidacy. He may be a laughingstock as a candidate, but he isn’t stupid with his money.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        I hope he makes all of their lives miserable because they are all hypocritical crooks. However I imagine his job to to hassle any real contenders, probably on both sides, until the inevitable Bush-Clinton pairing.

        • 0 avatar
          Skink

          I know, right? Like the way they get elected to Congress mouthing promises to fight for their avowed principles, but cave time and again to the administration.

          Yeah, he’ll bash Hillary some, and he’ll bash his ten GOP opponents. His bashing will be ten to one agàinst GOP. Unlike his opponents’ comments against Trump, Trump drops the ad hominem epithets right away: “They’re all losers”. etc. He’s a distraction from the real issues and from the real candidates as they try to get attention. Meanwhile, Trump chews the scenery. Heck, it actually worked for Jesse Ventura with the no-collar voter.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Indeed he is an effective distraction.

          • 0 avatar
            shaker

            Trump will be able to participate in at least 2 GOP debates before he has to officially file papers to formalize his candidacy, so even if he opts out at the last minute, we *will* be entertained.

            I’ve never watched his show, but I’d be willing to bet that there will be no Ford commercials from here on…

  • avatar
    VW16v

    Why do Republican’s care, I thought they all drove Toyota’s.

  • avatar
    Jeff Waingrow

    I can’t help myself, I have to give the guy credit for having absolutely no shame whatever. Try it sometime. It’s not so easy unless you’re a sociopath or a …

  • avatar
    brianyates

    The Chump has his cranium so far up his rectum he’s obviously not read about the free trade agreement between Mexico, Canada and America, still, it does make for second rate entertainment hearing his Rambo rants.

  • avatar
    jmo

    Ah, the serially bankrupt multi-thousandaire.

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    This is entertaining because he’s saying what labor has been saying for decades. Protectionism is what labor wants, and all the left is offering them is identity politics. Trump is moving the conversation in a direction that neither establishment Republicans nor progressive Democrats can stand, and that’s a beautiful thing. I don’t agree with him about many things, and I realize that he’s powerless to enact many of his platforms, but he’s entertaining.

    • 0 avatar
      TW5

      We’re at a weird moment in time, when labor rhetoric might be of some use because the Federal Government is actively killing off workers. Labor force participation is at a 37 year-low, and while people like to excuse our dwindling labor force by citing an aging population, our creditors don’t care when they send the bills. If we don’t get the under-24 demographic involved in the US economy, we will fail to pay just our mandatory federal spending obligation.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        OK, but the aging population is the key driver in that stat. The number of retirees is at an all time high, and will just increase as the population ages. Keep in mind this number probably spiked somewhat in the last few years because of the recession, when lots of older workers were bought out early.

        But it’s not like this is all bad news and these folks do nothing to pay their way – they often work part time, and they do pay taxes on that, and their social security, IRA distributions, dividends and interest, and pensions.

        You’re spot on about the under-24 demographic, though.

        • 0 avatar
          TW5

          @FreedMike

          We have more American seniors than any other time, but they are also retiring more slowly than any generation due to better health and much better income subsidies.

          If you look at labor force participation and the general rules of Social Security/Medicare vs. Welfare/Medicaid, you’ll quickly realize that middle aged Americans are paying taxes to help American grandparents put their grandchildren out of work. The system is backwards. Seniors are being subsidized into the economy, and the young are being retired from the economy.

          Who wouldn’t hire seniors, if they are still energetic? They have a fat income subsidy and public healthcare.

          • 0 avatar
            Fred

            @TW5 This makes no sense, if I had a fat income subsidy and healthcare, why would I want to work?

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            The point is that the government bears benefit expenses for seniors while levying benefit expenses against employers of the young.

          • 0 avatar
            Fred

            @CJinSD That my friend that is how insurance works. Those who don’t make claims pay for those who do. The real problem with SS and Medicare is that Congress is terrible at managing those plans.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            @Fred

            Insurance doesn’t put people out of work. However, payroll taxes and health insurance mandates do put unskilled and relatively uneducated workers out of the labor force. Unemployment rates continue to surge for the young when experienced grandparents receive seemingly irrevocable income subsidies and public health insurance.

            If you’re getting an income subsidy, and milking the tax-deferred retirement savings system, why wouldn’t you also work? People don’t leave money on the table. If you need verification look at the BLS stats.

            The only reason not to work is because you’d lose your government cheese. Oddly enough, young Americans will have the plug pulled on Welfare and Medicaid, but the elderly have to be shamefully affluent before the government would dare phase-out their benefits.

            The result is predictable. Plummeting employment for the under-24 demo and surging employment for the elderly. Poverty rates have also inverted. No more poor old people. Lots more poor children and young adults.

            This system is breaking down because we use the wrong system. Defined-benefit pensions encourage citizens to burn down the economy because it doesn’t matter what happens in the future, as long as the government can cover the pension. Defined-contribution, as used by socialist nations, requires the elderly to invest in their progeny the same way their predecessors invested in them. Unfortunately, the system will never get reformed, until SS checks start bouncing.

          • 0 avatar
            Fred

            @TW5 I don’t really want to discuss all your points, so I’m going to keep this brief…The system is not breaking down, we are just going thru a rough spot. I’m 63 years old and I’ve seen it before. Talk to your grandparents, and let them tell you about the depression or the World Wars. Now those were bad times.

          • 0 avatar
            TW5

            I don’t think you understand how much our system has changed. When you were a boy, 50% of the budget was government employment and R&D via the military (NASA to a lesser extent). Today 50% of the budget is SS/MED. We’ve converted economic muscle to fat, which reduces our capacity to produce, while narrowing the tax base. It’s a death spiral, and it actually reduces our ability to pay for entitlements. However, the costs are not being passed along to the elderly dependents, instead, they are focused on young Americans who never voted for these sort of shenanigans.

            The debt has never been stable for more than 2-3 years. This isn’t a temporary rough patch. It’s a 35 year old trend of bailing out the US economy, rather than modernizing.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        “If we don’t get the under-24 demographic involved in the US economy, we will fail to pay just our mandatory federal spending obligation.”

        What can’t be paid, won’t be paid.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          It’s all fun and games until the low information voters learn what debt maintenance means. There’s a reason those with power pretend we live in a time when high prices for virtually everything coexist with years absent of inflation. It won’t take much of an interest rate hike for maintenance on the debt to outstrip total tax receipts. Then it will be obvious to even people of average intellect what the end goal of Keynesian economics has been all along.

      • 0 avatar
        alexndr333

        Out here in California, the under-24 demographic is very much involved in the economy, but it’s not the industrial economy they are focused on. The whole creative / information sector is where young men and women want to be. Unfortunately, we have somehow allowed our youth to conclude that working at a machine as beneath their dignity. That’s a bad sign if we think that America can restore its industrial sector, whichever way Trump or anyone else hopes to do it.

  • avatar
    210delray

    A poser and a political loser. And for crying out loud, isn’t about time for him to ditch that absurd comb-over?

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      I’ve met him in person twice. The comb-over didn’t look as bad – then again he’s taller than me and I was kind of looking up and lighting was dim. The first time a mutual friend introduced him as we passed in a hallway. I was in a rush and had something going on and had no time to talk. The second time, we were both at a banquet. I saw him across the room, but was talking/sitting with someone far more interesting, so I didn’t bother going over to say hello.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    Very soon, both the Ford F Series and Chevy Silverado/GMC Sierra will be built of 85%+ hecho en Mexico parts, including major components.

    ‘Murican hombres will stalk the highways & byways from California to the Carolinas in them, pinch of dip between cheeks & gums, bumper stickers reading “Dey turkin’ our jerbs!”and blaring Kid Rock’s “born free.”

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Meanwhile, your kids will finally realize that with your condition, itd be best to put you someplace where youll be taken care of. Then, youll sit in your wheelchair staring out the window, drooling and mumbling things like “mmm….ATS is slower than a Metro…arrrr…everybodys wrong but me…mmmm….I need another injection…”

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      What are you talking about? The F150 typically ranks #1 in American Parts Content by various publications. It’s not that easy to measure where every part comes from, but the frame is made in Kentucky, the transmission in Livonia, and 3 of the 4 engines are made in Cleveland (the other, made in Windsor – might as well be America). Final assembly is only done in Dearborn and Kansas City.

    • 0 avatar
      NoGoYo

      I thought it was Rams that came from south of the border.

  • avatar
    carguy

    He is the anti-free trade Republican candidate no one was waiting for.

    Except comedians – they haven’t stopped celebrating.

  • avatar
    JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

    Trump is making a play for headlines, hoping people will rally behind him saying “yeah! Stick it to those bastards who are killing our country!” And then drive home in their Mexican-built GM or FCA products, stoping at Walmart to buy more made-in-China crap, of course.

    If he wants to know why the Fusion and various GM products are built in Mexico, he should ask the state of Georgia why they basically kicked them out while rolling out the muli-million dollar red carpet for Kia. They offered no financial incentive when (then financially struggling) Ford wanted to retool the Hapeville (Atlanta) plant to build Fusion, Milan and Zephyr/MKZ. They wanted Ford to basically move the entire plant further away from the airport without any incentive to do so. I would bet that if they offered half what they gave Kia, and forgot about the stupid notion of moving the plant, the plant would be cranking out Fusions right now instead of being the empty plot of land it is (the factory was demolished after Taurus production ended there in 2006).

    Aside from the fact that just about every major automaker has plants in Mexico, Ford (as mentioned) has invested quite a bit in the US recently, even moving F-650 and F-750 production to the US from Mexico after the demise of their relationship with Navistar. Ford could have easily moved production of those trucks elsewhere in Mexico (to a plant that currently builds other F-Series trucks mostly for Mexican and South American consumption) and closed Avon Lake after E-Series production ended, but they didnt. They also hired workers to supplement Fusion and MKZ production in Flat Rock after Mazda left. These are not the actions of a company that is attempting to abandon this country.

    Trump himself has made a point of globalization in all industries in the past, so that tells me that this is just a ploy to gain recognition. As mentioned, it would be impossible to single out Ford when not only GM and FCA operate plants there, but many other automakers like VW do as well. The ONLY way it would work would be to penalize ALL vehicles and components being imported to this country, no matter who the company is or where its imported from. But, that’ll never happen. It mightve worked 30 or 40 years ago, but its just not possible today.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Well said.

      The irony of Trump’s latest position is that it would hurt consumers and communities, and ultimately cost American jobs.

      I’d like to see him suggest this to all multi-national companies producing products overseas; he wouldn’t make it to the exit door.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N – good points. it is ironic that Trump is targeting the only company that did not get a direct government bailout.

  • avatar
    sirwired

    I wish the media would simply ignore Trump. He’s not serious about actually running for president; he’s just looking to score cheap publicity for himself before he drops out of the race in order to start filming for the next season of The Apprentice.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Yeah…this is right after he builds the Great Wall of America between us and Mexico…and forces Mexico to pay for it. Not sure how THAT works, but…okey dokey, Donald.

    Well, he’s entertaining, anyway.

  • avatar
    Marcus36

    He sounds like a traditional Mexican politician….Oh! look what I found…

    Why Donald Trump would make a great presidential candidate….in Mexico.

    http://fusion.net/story/153106/heres-why-donald-trump-would-make-a-great-presidential-candidate-in-mexico/

  • avatar
    craiger

    Sadly, he could win the nomination. His messages will resonate with a certain percentage of likely GOP primary voters, and it will resonate strongly. Maybe that percentage is small, let’s say it’s 20%. In a race with a few candidates, he could be safely discounted. But when the votes are split among a dozen or so candidates, he could win a few early primary states, and then he would have momentum on his side.

    Similarly, he won’t have to sing for his supper like the other candidates do. There’s only so much cash to go around. 12 candidates is a lot to finance. Of course some will drop off after the first 6 or 8 states, but again, we’re talking about Trump’s performance in those first early states.

  • avatar
    210delray

    No way is he going to come close to clinching the nomination. In the end, it’s going to be Bush, Walker, or maybe Rubio as a long shot. They will be facing Clinton.

  • avatar
    anomaly149

    Trump / Hairpiece 2016.

  • avatar
    Onus

    Mexican production is a heck a lot better than China.

    The fact is our economies are pretty well integrated due to NAFTA. More mexican workers making more money is good for the various other american buisnesses in other sectors in mexico.

  • avatar
    danio3834

    So he wants to repeal NAFTA, but on Ford alone? What a moron. Why anyone would give this guy the time of day is baffling to me.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    I’m still laughing about the guy who tried to trademark “you’re fired” claims he will be the greatest job creating president ever.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    The most recent RCP polling average of 2016 GOP candidates has Trump at 3.6%, which is better than I thought. If he can stay at or above 2%, he’ll be in the national debates. Which should be interesting.

  • avatar
    turf3

    Never mind Trump, the real question here is whether free trade is the be-all end-all godsend that conventional wisdom says, or whether the emperor has no clothes on.

    I believe one should judge policies by their results. Of course it’s impossible to prove causality, but do consider that the roughly 30 past years, during which free-trade-at-all-costs has become the policy of the US government (both parties, thank you very much) is the same time frame that has seen the reversal of a century-old trend of an expanding middle class in the US and a dramatic increase in income inequality.

    I would pose to you, furthermore, that the dramatic expansion of China’s middle class has come about because their government actively supports wealth creating activities (primarily manufacturing() whereas our government seems to be actively attempting to kill US manufacturing.

    And finally, I would propose that the health and quality of a society is not determined by how well the richest, most successful members are doing, but rather by how well the weakest and poorest are doing. By that measure I would submit that in the United States our weakest and poorest are doing worse than they were 30 years ago, that one of the reasons (among many) is the diminution of manufacturing jobs, and that this does not bode well for the long term future of the US.

    Remember, there are only three ways to create wealth: make something, grow something, or dig something out of the ground. All else is just moving the wealth around.

  • avatar
    jimbob457

    I am a 100% supporter of Donald Trump for president – now and forever. But, then again, I have to be. I am his hairdresser.

    By the way, you are correct about the comb over.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Peter Gazis: Eaststand A Hummer EV proves that American capitalism can thrive in an environmentally friendly world....
  • Peter Gazis: Eaststand A Hummer EV proves that American capitalism can thrive in an environmentally friendly world....
  • backtees: Unexpected cross state run for a move had me borrow the parents 2017 Platinum Sequoia yesterday. Nice...
  • Luke42: As an EV proponent, having 90%-95% of regular drivers running on electricity would more than solve the...
  • DenverMike: Pickups have always been the coolest thing ever, long before CAFE was hatched. Well except for custom...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States