By on January 23, 2017

Donald Trump

Ten high-profile manufacturing executives, including Ford CEO Mark Fields and Tesla Motors’ Elon Musk, visited the White House today, where they were informed by President Donald Trump today that he would dramatically reduce corporate taxation and scale down regulations by as much as seventy-five percent.

Trump promised the return of manufacturing plants and jobs within the United States during his campaign. Making it more appetizing for specific companies to do so is an essential aspect of that plan, however, the new President also issued the caveat that companies choosing to invest outside of American soil would have to pay for it. 

“We are going to be imposing a very major border tax on the product when it comes in,” Trump said. “A company that wants to fire all of its people in the United States, and build some factory someplace else, and then thinks that that product is going to just flow across the border into the United States, that’s not going to happen.”

He also said the the companies that operate within the U.S. would enjoy a corporate tax rate of 15 to 20 percent — down from the current statutory thirty-five percent, pending Congressional approval. However, the President claimed that numerous business leaders have explained to him that governmental regulations were a much larger source of concern.

“We’re going to be cutting regulation massively,” Trump told reporters from the White House’s Roosevelt Room. “When you want to expand your plant, or when Mark [Fields] wants to come in and build a big massive plant, or when Dell wants to come in and do something monstrous and special, you’re going to have your approvals really fast.”

Democrats and environmental groups have voiced concern over Trump’s plans to demolish the Obama administration green initiatives — threatening to cripple the EPA, abandon the Paris climate accords, and shy away from other regulatory pledges.

The President is also expected to sign an executive order today stating his intention to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada. Earlier today, Trump signed an executive order to withdraw the U.S. from the Trans Pacific Partnership — a trade agreement linking 12 countries in the Pacific Rim. He will immediately begin individual trade negotiations with the member countries.

Ann Arbor’s Center for Automotive Research said in a statement from earlier this month that pulling out of NAFTA could undo automotive jobs created since the end of the Great Recession. “Counter to the incoming Trump administration’s goal of creating manufacturing jobs, the withdrawal from NAFTA or the implementation of punitive tariffs could result in the loss of 31,000 U.S. jobs,” the research firm claimed.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

267 Comments on “Trump Tells Manufacturers He’ll Cut Regulations and Taxes, Renegotiate NAFTA...”


  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Today on as the Orange turns.

  • avatar
    Adam Tonge

    I wish I could sell popcorn to this thread.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Adam Tonge – peruse a few of the other threads.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Sell popcorn at the regular-everyday-democratic-voter March.

      WHEN IS the Democratic Grassroots million “person” march on Washington to protest the Democratic National Committee’s overt & lengthy sabotage of Bernie Sanders’ nomination by the likes of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Adam Schiff, Donna Brazile, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Charles Schumer, John Lewis, Debbie Dingle, et al.?

      And will that march include larger numbers of males, and “flyover state” women who are religious (maybe even pro-life), are working class (versus managerial class), and particularly, millennial voters of of all racial backgrounds whom the polls foretold were overwhelmingly in favor of Bernie Sanders, yet whose actual participation in the process of registering to vote, and casting a ballot on election day was abysmally low (as was that of African Americans and Hispanic-Americans, two core Democrat voting constituencies)?

      I don’t think it’s a stretch to state that the DNC rigged their own nomination process to actually nominate the sole candidate who was likely to lose to Donald Trump in a general election.

      I’m no fan of Trump at this point or prior, nor Establishment, old-guard, neoconservative Republicans (whose maximum destructive policies peaked during Dubya’s idiotic 8 years of incredibly expensive and irrational foreign policy – giving rise to Obama’s two terms), but I’m also no fan of an ironically named “Democratic Party”‘ that is essentially controlled, financed and administered by the managerial class and coastal elites (really; it’s true), who live in an incredibly insular bubble of their own, and attempt to sabotage the odds of nomination of particular candidates who better connect with the base of their party, in an attempt to un-democratically “annoint” and “coronate” their chosen and well-financed one (by the banks and financial sector, medical-complex, and Davos global elites, in particular).

      The irony of this election cycle could not be more ironically biting.

      How about an average Democratic-voter/person March On Washington, or would life (and financial strains caused by many hundred-dollar or thousand dollar airline tickets and $275-$500 per night hotel rooms anywhere near the Capitol) make this too prohibitive, and would Madonna, Charlize Theron, Melissa Etheridge, Lena Dunham, Jane Fonda, et al. even bother to then show up?

      • 0 avatar
        brettc

        Yeah, that part of the election *was* rigged. Hillary was the worst candidate they could have run. I think Donnie actually respects/respected Bernie. Either that or he was “nice” to him because he knew he likely have won if he was the Democrat’s nominee.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          DW, why would they throw it? Whats in it for them?

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            Because the Establishment Wings of both major parties are LITERALLY working for the same entities/interests/p and towards the same ends, in the name of globalization.

            Romney/Norquist/Kristol = HClinton/Krugman/DavidBrooks

            Globalization is the new religion and paradigm of both parties that’s just now getting pushback from the rabble. Brexit, Trump, Beppe Grillo (in Italy with 5 Star Party), and a possible Marine Le Pen National Front win in France in the upcoming election there are all signs (and there are many more) of the grass-roots getting wise to the globalists’ real, concerted, coordinated efforts – which accelerated since the 80s when Ross Perot was warning Americans about the rabbit hole of NAFTA, and when former CIA Director and future President George H.W. Bush and successor President William Clinton ensured that China was granted Most Favored Nation trade status (i.e. no tariff trade; before that time, average Chinese per capita I come averaged 560 USD per year in today’s constant dollars, and now averages approx 8,200 USD per year, for a 1400+% gain in average Chinese annual per capita income. If Americans had seen the same gains, they’d have average annual per capita incomes of $817,000 by now).

            Sanders & Trump were both outsiders, hated by the Establishment, as were Nader, Perot, Reagan (initially), and Goldwater.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @DeadWeight – I agree. Both political parties are highly dysfunctional. The political system can’t be fixed if both sides view winning at all costs (i.e. at the sacrifice of morals, ethics, “by the people for the people”, rule of law/constitution etc.) as the ultimate prize.

        • 0 avatar

          I still don’t understand with all the dysfunction why a third party always fails. I would assume it would have to work it’s way to the top but still, you would think, a liberal economics but middle right social party would dominate mid west politics. I mean in many respects that’s kind of what Donny ran on. Kill free trade pay workers more more jobs, but with out the SJW stuff that annoys flyover states.

          • 0 avatar

            The Third party is the greatest fear of the big two. Nomination and such at the local level is written in such a way that only two parties have the coverage to do so. When Ross Perot ran, the Big Two strategically decided not to mount major ballot challenges, or they’d upset the whole applecart. The problem with the Big Two is that opinions are rigidly controlled. You get Hillary, even if you’d rather not. You get Donald, because the traditional party, serving the .01% never ever thought he was a threat, but the Tea Party folks they were romancing with dog whistles jilted them. Hillary is as approachable as Ryan or McConnell for the typical TP voter…as in not at all. Trump passed the “couldja have a beer with him” test. (I know he supposedly doesn’t drink)
            I am about as anti-Trump as you can get, having watched him in Real Estate in NYC for years. The normal players in NYC won’t touch him with a ten yard pole…but he punked the Republican Party, hard. I’d be laughing but the joke is on us, those who voted for him and those who didn’t.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            mopar4wd

            It isn’t that a third party always fails.

            Look what happened this go’round. A guy who used to support liberals, ran as a conservative, and got elected as a populist.

            It doesn’t get any stranger than that.

          • 0 avatar

            True Trump and Sanders should have both been 3rd party runners. But with so much dysfunction in both parties there was an opening for an outsider to game the system. It turns out the core of the Dems was still intact enough to repel it (not for much longer I think) but the GOP was so damaged that Donny wedged his way in With some very non GOP ideas and then back tracked a little closer to conservative towards the end.
            Honestly if he wasn’t such pile of human garbage with an ego the size of NY, he would be a candidate that could pull in some of the far left to a bipartisan gov , but obviously that didn’t happen.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            mopar4wd, it was “We, The People” desperately looking for a leader in this land of the lost.

            Add to that the Debbie Wasserman-Schultz moves to keep Bernie out of the race, and there you have it.

            A recipe for disaster. Bernie voters stayed home – didn’t vote at all. Others voted against the last guy’s policies because they had been left behind.

            That made all those folks left behind by the last guy’s “redistribution of America’s wealth” policies the majority, even in some Blue States, and the rest is history.

            President Donald John Trump.

          • 0 avatar

            I don’t see it as much anti Obama as Anti Hillary. Look at the approval numbers I’m pretty sure Obama could have beat Trump.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            mopar4wd, if she had only NOT put that Server in her basement closet…. What was she thinking.

            That’s what started the swirling down the drain.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            Obama said numerous times that “make no mistake”… his agenda, priorities and legacy were on the ballot. It was Obama and Clinton who were rejected.

        • 0 avatar
          golden2husky

          …..The political system can’t be fixed if both sides view winning at all costs (i.e. at the sacrifice of morals, ethics, “by the people for the people”, rule of law/constitution etc.) as the ultimate prize…

          That is exactly what the Republican party did to Obama after he got ACA passed without their support. For the six years after that, the Republicans chose to block every thing Obama came up with – even if it would have had a reasonable level of bipartisan support under “normal” circumstances. And then the voters gave the Republicans even more control in the 2012 elections. Nobody should blame the Democrats from following the exact same blueprint. Jam everything they can, fillibuster everything, and tell T-Rump to shove it.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “That is exactly what the Republican party did to Obama after he got ACA passed without their support. ”

            Yo! and now the shoe is on the other foot.
            Can’t blame the ‘crats for obstructing, on the basis of reciprocity.

            I’m not a Trump fan, but I can see that the heartland people that mattered wanted this guy to lead them out of the mess left by the last guy.

            It wasn’t the people of the big cities or the Blue States. They did not matter. They maxed out their Electoral votes but fell far short of 270.

            The ‘crats just have to suck it up and deal with it. Elections have consequences.

            But I did not see this comin’.

            Amazing turn of events.

        • 0 avatar
          TomHend

          Both parties have been controlled by the Clintons and Bushes for the last 28 years. They are the Uniparty.

          One of Obama’s biggest mistakes was keeping the Clintons around.

          Hate on Trump all you want, the Clintons and Bushes have been cut off and dispatched and the USA is better off because of it.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            You get a cookie, sir.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “One of Obama’s biggest mistakes was keeping the Clintons around.”

            His legacy depended on Hillary getting elected. She was a shoe in.

            Until………Trump. Even Bill Clinton saw Trump as a threat because Trump is a born leader, and highly successful.

            Ob*m*’s policies were on the ballot and the people rejected his policies en masse.

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        man, you’re making me agree, DW. I feel like I’ve killed my brain to the point of not being to pontificate much of anything like this anymore.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        Bulls**t…Sanders lost because he got outvoted. Plain and simple. Was the party complicit? Maybe, maybe not. But in the end, voters often don’t elect the person the party “wants”. In 2008, Obama wasn’t “supposed” to win. But he did. Now, what’s the difference between Obama in 2008 and Sanders in 2016? The former is a centrist/leftist, the latter is an out-and-out socialist. Obama’s political ideas had appeal to a broad number of mainstream Democrats; Sanders’ didn’t. That’s why Sanders lost.

        But this conspiracy stuff is nonsense. Sorry.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Sunlight is the best disinfectant, friend.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            Agreed, and people in the Democratic party should have expected better.

            (And so should have Republicans…but they got lucky enough to get the one Democrat opponent with more baggage than King Pu**y Grab.)

            But the idea that Sanders “shoulda won but got screwed” is ludicrous. Sorry. He’s 100% correct when he talks about things like corruption, but his politics were too far left for most Democrats (and that includes me).

            I’m not going to vote for someone I have major disagreements with politically just because he’s “sticking it to the man,” you know? In the end, politics is about getting s**t done, and Bernie wasn’t going to get anything done. I mean, really…free college? Single payer? Maybe those are good ideas, maybe not…but he was going to get these enacted? With THIS Congress? The Bernie supporters were dreamin’, 28.

          • 0 avatar

            Every Dem and independant I know would have happily voted for Bernie. The polls indicate it may have gone to him as well. I’m pretty sure Bernie would have won.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            Bernie… Woulda shoulda coulda…

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Interesing points.

      • 0 avatar
        Zoom

        There was no sabotage of Bernie. The fact is, he had no mathmatical chance to win the nomination long before Wasserman-Shultz and superdelegates weighed in.

        Also, if Bernie couldn’t even beat Hillary, it isn’t logical that he could have beaten Trump.

        • 0 avatar
          GeneralMalaise

          There was sabotage, all documented in the Wikileaks emails. The DNC did all it could behind the scenes to torpedo Sanders. And no, he had a snowflake’s chance…

    • 0 avatar
      April S

      @Adam Tonge

      With all this traffic and replies I bet the Theoretical Internet Dollars are piling up.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    I have an unfortunate vision of Trump replacing Miley Cyrus on that ball.

  • avatar
    tresmonos

    LETS SEE IF ANY OF THE TRUMP SUPPORTERS THAT COMMENT HERE BUY $100 JEANS OR $75 BUTTON DOWN SHIRTS OR $15 BOXER BRIEFS BECAUSE IM SURE THEY ALL PUT THEIR MONEY WHERE THEIR GOD DAMNED MOUTH IS.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      Agreed, Good Sir.

      But turn it down a little, I can still hear you. :-)

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @tresmonos – was that supposed to be a Tweet? LOL

      Increased costs to the consumer will occur.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      You don’t get it, tres…$100 jeans don’t bother rich folks.

    • 0 avatar
      Cactuar

      In theory, if everyone bought American products, wouldn’t there be an economy of scale due to the increased demand, thus lowering prices?

      • 0 avatar
        orenwolf

        No, because the price we have *today* is artificial, made possible through cheap land and cheap labour. the “price floor” of the cost to produce goods in North America vs Asia comes from things like warehousing costs, transportation costs, and labour costs, all of which are drastically cheaper elsewhere.

        You can’t reduce those costs to where they are today, so prices will go up.

        However! Since Labour will once again become a big part of goods pricing, I’d imagine a renewed push for efficiency through things like robotics will become a big deal as well. This is essentially the point giants like Amazon find themselves at today with warehousing. I presume the next big push after that will be automated transportation networks to lower costs as well.

      • 0 avatar
        ScarecrowRepair

        @cactuar — No, it’s called “comparative advantage”. Few people mix and knead and bake their own bread because it’s not cost effective. Same thing for making your own shoes, building your own house, drilling for oil and refining gas. (Google for “I, Pencil” for an excellent example for something as simple as a wooden pencil.).

        The same thing applies on larger scales. Car factories are too expensive and specialized to have one in each city or even state.

        There are simply too many different products manufactured to have every country, even ones as big as the US or China or Russia or India, be entirely self-sufficient.

        Imagine that the US was better at building literally everything than every other country. We could make better woven baskets, better cell phones, better cars, better clothes than everybody else, by a factor of ten. It would still make sense to outsource a lot of that production, simply because there are bound to be some products that we can build better than others. Maybe we can make baskets ten times as cheaply as other countries, but we can make cell phones 1000 times as cheaply. If we buy baskets at ten times the price from foreigners, that frees up production capacity to build even more cell phones which we can sell to those foreigners and buy far more baskets than we made.

        It sounds goofy and counter-intuitive, but make up numbers, plug them in, and you will prove it to yourself.

        This does assume we have limited capacity — that there is a tradeoff between baskets and cell phones. If we had infinite capacity, things would be different — but nothing is infinite except politicians.

        The first lesson of economics is scarcity: nothing is infinite. The first lesson of politics is to ignore the first lesson of economics and screw things up.

        • 0 avatar

          A number of economists seem to make the play that desires and consumption are infinite but yeah nothing really is.

        • 0 avatar
          Cactuar

          Thanks for the detailed explanation, looks like I had a naive view on things :)

          • 0 avatar
            ScarecrowRepair

            @cactuar — look for Henry Hazlit(sp?)’s “Economics in one lesson” — it’s not one page, it’s book size, but a free download, and a good simple clear explanation of basic economics in the classic sense. Not equations and stuff, IIRC, except the most basic arithmetic. Explains all sorts of interesting stuff that you never would have thought of as “economics”. It’s especially good at helping you see the “unseen” consequences of seemingly obvious actions, like why price controls make things scarcer instead of easier to buy.

        • 0 avatar
          tresmonos

          ScarecrowRepair –
          After living in the rust belt and textile belt, I don’t buy into this 100%. I can’t tell you how many locales I’ve witnessed full of unreported unemployment, usually neighborhoods right next to a vacant factory. I’m a biased motherf*cker, but it’s because of what I’ve experienced.

          • 0 avatar

            Tres,
            Many economists don’t like to admit the world is grey and as such rules don’t always work. Overall they are right trade makes the country wealthier. There was a study done that traced those displaced by offshoring. Many in economics based on overall numbers would tell you that most of these people would have good paying work with in a few years, but that wasn’t the case. I don’t have a link handy but the study found what many know to be true, in the wake of offshoring many of the former workers end up unemployed or underemployed for many years (decades). We are seeing the effects of that now in our politics.

          • 0 avatar
            ScarecrowRepair

            Society is not perfect. There’s always lags between fired and hired, between bankruptcy and new company. People follow imperfect and stale incentives, and when they get fired, put off looking into distant or different jobs if they think there’s a chance a closer or similar job might open up. Government welfare and unemployment change the incentives too, especially because they have no obvious cost like car insurance. That’s part of the unseen that is so easy to overlook.

            If a shoe factory closes, it may cost more to convert it to a tire factory than is worthwhile. It may have outdated equipment that has low productivity, and it is cheaper to import tires from the across the country or from halfway around the world than continue building them there. If it used to take 500 people to product 10,000 shoes a day, and new equipment makes it possible for the same people to produce twice as many, you might think that would drop the price of shoes in half, but people don’t want twice as many shoes and might buy at most 10% more shoes. So some shoe factory jobs have to go. That means fewer shifts or fewer factories. It takes time for the factory owner to find a buyer who can convert it to tires or bbq or anything else, and there are already factories producing those items, so the owner is really looking for a new industry or some other shoe company with even older factories.

            Meanwhile, the people who used to work there aren’t going to immediately uproot themselves and look for a new job and home 100 or 1000 miles away, so they wait a while to see who takes over the unused factory.

            At the same time, because the new factories are more efficient, shoes do drop in price, and everyone benefits from that. If you look only at the seen (the fired workers), things are awful. You have to look at the unseen too, which is not just cheaper prices for everybody, but also workers available for new jobs in new and more efficient industries.

            Google for the broken window fallacy (not the police policy, the economic parable). It’s all about the seen and the unseen, and makes you see the world in an entirely different way.

          • 0 avatar
            tresmonos

            ScarecrowRepair –
            I live among the ‘unseen.’ They seemed to have spoke this election cycle. I’m just afraid that the election is an indicator that things really *are* as bad as I’ve thought. I usually can rationalize my bias away. TTAC is where I troll my manufacturing insecurities, per se.

            All I can see is the loss of family values (church community) and in place of it is the propping up of the punk house / poverty cycle community. What is old is new again and we’re regressing back into ‘family’ structure that certain house hold members specialize in transportation, child care and income. Tax and welfare structures along with economic factors have led us to this non-nucleic sort of family structure. Is it any better or worse than that of the late 18th/early 19th century? Probably not.

            From that perspective, cheap durable goods are the least of the problem. It’s not necessarily a bad thing. I suppose this is a maturing economy that is feeling the leveling from globalization. I’d say property ownership is the new separating factor between economic freedom and subservient non-nucleic family structure. Like I said, what is old is new again.

            The stagnation of these people indicate that there will be no uprooting. Most blue collar families have the majority of their wealth in their home or pension. Mobility wasn’t an option. Their offspring were just as stagnant as the education system didn’t ready they for anything besides what their parents did. The regions I have lived do have bright spots here and there, but I’d say economic activity has slowed and the gap between the rich and poor is ever increasing.

          • 0 avatar
            Adam Tonge

            tresmonos preaches the truth. It is bad in rural Middle America. The Detroit area has received a bunch of investment dollars recently. It has billionaires to champion its cause. Drive three hours north, and people in those counties have been left behind. I spend a lot of time in Northern Michigan. Globalization has turned everything that isn’t tourism based into an economic wasteland.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            couple that with the utter destruction Purdue Pharmaceuticals is responsible for. Their entire executive suite should be in prison.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            If you’re in a rural area in a flyover state, the best you can hope for is to be within driving distance of a major city with both career and commercial opportunities (i.e., places to make your money and places to spend it), but also far enough away to have that wide-open country life that everyone’s always building sprawling suburbs to get a taste of.

          • 0 avatar
            tresmonos

            JFC, JimZ,
            Oxy has led to crazy levels of heroine usage where I’ve resided.

            This thread has me depressed as hell. Also thankful for the privileges I’ve been given by happenstance.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            “usually neighborhoods right next to a vacant factory.”

            Tresmonos agreed 100%

            The site of the old RCA factory on Indy’s near East side is the epicenter for some of the worst and most frequent and violent crime and drug dealing/prostitution, known locally as “the swamp.” Likewise on our near West side, where the Fisher body stamping plant was, that’s a very rough area, on par with the worst of what the east side has to offer. Indy still has Allison, rolls, and Lilly’s manufacturing plant, and Carrier thankfully. But I can’t imagine how much worse things would get if they too split.

            When these factories pull up roots, it absolutely decimates the surrounding neighborhoods. Everyone might have cheap electronics and other “upshots” that the economists keep telling us about, and how we extract a net benefit in this transition to a post-industrial economy. But man I don’t see it. I do see the fall out though.

        • 0 avatar
          golden2husky

          Comparative advantage make sense when you have some kind of level field. You make excellent computers; I make great planes. We trade. That’s healthy trade. When you offer nothing but cheap labor because your country $h!ts on their people and planet, that’s hardly comparative advantage. That’s a race to the bottom.

    • 0 avatar
      gtemnykh

      It’s funny undergarments got brought up, that’s actually one of the things my mom always brings up as a fond memory of when we first moved to the US and walked to our local Woolworths: high quality made in USA cotton t shirts and other undergarments. I can only assume they were reasonably priced, since at that time (1992) we weren’t in much of a position to splurge.

      I was actually looking around online and found made in USA jeans for about $70, comparable for what one would spend on Levis in a department store. Okay not Lees/Wrangler priced, but not entirely unreasonable either. If they can last 5 years like I seem to remember good jeans lasting in the past (my levis seem to struggle to make it to 3 years as of late) then I’d say that’s a fair price.

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        I have NOS Levi’s 501 STF from 1984 (Cone Mills USA denim) with the tags on them that say 29.99. That’s roughly $51, today. Prices haven’t gone up all that much. It’s that everyone breaks their arm jerking it to their cheap bullsh1t.

        I buy US cut and sewn Bravestar and Gustin branded jeans for roughly 90 shipped. Granted, they’re raw denim, but they’re milled in NC. Other option is Wranglers MWZ option – you get some good cowboy cuts with denim milled in Trion, GA. Just cut and sewn in Mexico.

        American Apparel is still selling cheap 4ss american milled and cut and sewn t shirts and underwear. They are going through Ch. 11. They are probably the last major US vertically integrated clothing manufacturer we will ever see. Their prices were competitive with inflation and they still failed. Luckily, Gustin has some very reasonably priced basics. American Giant isn’t so bad, either.

        • 0 avatar
          JimZ

          You piqued my interest with Gustin, then I go to their site and see

          1) they don’t have anything you can actually *buy* now, it’s all Kickstarter/crowdfunded BS, and

          2) apparently they don’t think guys less than 6 feet tall exist.

          • 0 avatar
            tresmonos

            sometimes they have stuff in their stock store. weargustin.com/stock

            It’s an inconvenience I put up with. Their regular fits on their button up shirts are definitely ‘shorter’ than usual. I can’t tuck them but I wear all my stuff untucked. Their inseams are certainly long enough for anyone and are meant for tailoring / cuffing. Tons of denim heads are looking to taper their pants as soon as they receive them.

      • 0 avatar
        Rick T.

        Jack Baruth’s website often has posts on American made products. Somewhere there is a link to a list as well.

      • 0 avatar
        FormerFF

        If you want reasonably priced US made jeans, do a search for Texas Brand jeans. Despite the name, they’re actually made in Asheboro NC. They’re better than the cheap jeans you find in Target or Kohl’s and a good value at around $30.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Donald J. Trump
      @realDonaldTrump

      We will make products on Wal-Mart shelves & in General Motors’ dealerships and vehicles American-made again! Win!

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        Wal-Mart tried that with 1888 mills. Nobody bought that sh1t. How can you afford your pillbilly dealer or your grandkids’ tuition when your towels cost an entire $3.99 more!?

        The bailout, Mexican assembled Bowtie trucks and Ford’s Mulally driven globalized parts operations proved that ‘domestic’ loyalists are mouth breathers that don’t have any [email protected] loyalty to their value stream’s ethical orientation.

    • 0 avatar
      brettc

      Can I get a $75 guacamole bowl instead? Please clap.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Quality needs to come in line with price, which means less money for wholesalers *gasp*.

    • 0 avatar
      tonycd

      tresmonos, I am not a Trump supporter. But I am a supporter of tariffs, as practiced successfully by the United States for 200 years until they were basically ended during the Reagan presidency.

      Yes, they make prices go up. But they also make incomes go up, so Americans have more money to buy things. It’s not a coincidence that the effective buying power of middle-class and working-class Americans has declined steadily since the 1980s. That decay is not the inevitable result of uncontrollable global forces or technology. It’s the predictable outgrowth of policy decisions, including this one.

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        There is both policy and economic factors. It is inevitable that standards of living will level out across the globe. You can slow it, but you can’t stop it.

        Consumerism will always be mindless. Protectionism will always put you in the poor house (this is debatable for the US since we have such a large market).

        The key to ethics is to think. Thinking isn’t what the majority of people do.

        So IMHO, we’re just f*cked either way. My domestic supply chain choices have been narrowing since I became aware. They will continue on this path.

    • 0 avatar
      DevilsRotary86

      You jest, but I actually spent $90 on a shirt the other week. I waffled on purchasing it for some minutes because I really struggle to justify spending that much on a shirt, but I really liked the shirt. Sturdy high thread count fabric with good texture, solid stitching, vibrant blue color, good design, good matching of colors, right size, and so on. Even asked my wife if she was OK with it. In the end both of us decided that while it was awfully pricey for a shirt but we could afford it and I really liked it. So in the bag it went.

      And it was made in Peru. I didn’t lose a wink of sleep.

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        Damn. 90 could have yielded you something like this:

        https://www.weargustin.com/store/4792

        If I’m exploiting sweatshop labor, I’m at least going to benefit from the value stream.

        I suppose you lined the designer and retailer with money. Which brick and mortar stores are dying off. So I can see that positive aspect of it. Good on you.

        • 0 avatar
          DevilsRotary86

          Yeah, that’s not really my style. I know you like Gustin, but it’s not really something I would want to wear I am afraid.

          • 0 avatar
            tresmonos

            Copy that. Style is definitely a personal thing. Adam Tonge opened my eyes up to Jack Donnelly. I used to wear office attire (slacks, etc), but now wear plant rat apparel as my job changed.

            Other brands:

            Ciano Farmer
            epauletnewyork
            Left Field NYC
            American Giant
            Taylor Stitch (used to be 100% US now only some USA made stuff)

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            well, it’s got to match well with the neon yellow vest :)

          • 0 avatar
            tresmonos

            LOL @ JimZ.

            I have I think 3 denim work shirts that I rotate. It’s simplified my laundry load out. I only wash ‘staples’ regularly. I can take off layers when I put on coveralls. Transitioning from the office to the plant took about 4 ruined outfits to finally figure it all out. Dress for durability and keep it simple and dark colored.

            It’s bad when you show up to dates wearing a denim tuxedo. So I just wear my cowboy boots hope it makes it look intentional.

          • 0 avatar
            Adam Tonge

            Jack Donnelly makes great pants and the price is acceptable. I also like that they are un-hemmed khakis and come in three fits.

          • 0 avatar
            DevilsRotary86

            Electrical Engineer here. Somewhere long ago, slacks and polo shirt became the de facto uniform for “sparkies” as my boss likes to call us. It’s what most of my colleagues and bosses wear. The style looks good on me, so it all works out.

            As a student, I bought mostly $5 Sears shirts. As I got into my professional career, I woke up and realized that this might be why my shirts wore out within 6 months. So I have since moved to a more premium outlet and things have been much better. Clothes are about the only thing remaining on my “never buy online” list.

    • 0 avatar
      DaPlugg

      As opposed to what walmart clothes? None of that sounds out of line in the slightest thats honestly a good price if its made in usa levis made and crafted run about 150 and american new balances about 220 so 100 would be welcome

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        Check bravestar, gustin, american giant, etc. I’ve listed a ton of brands above. If you look, there’s some good quality, reasonably priced responsibly sourced apparel out there.

        • 0 avatar
          DaPlugg

          which is good news there are reasonably priced american made options, i havent bought a pair of non us made pants in a long time i stick with citizens of humanity, rag and bone, bills khakis etc if everyone bought US made we would be better off

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Actually my underwear cost around $30 a pair.
      https://www.cityboxers.com
      Some of the best feeling underwear made.
      I buy quite a few Brooks Brothers shirts, Try to buy the ones made right here in North Carolina. Usually $100 shirts.
      You got me on the jeans. Though I do know their is a place near Durham that makes jeans I’ve been meaning to head up to.

      • 0 avatar
        tresmonos

        Do it, man. Raleigh denim is a custom shop. I took my ex to a place in Greenville called Billiam that custom tailored some Cone stretch selvedge for her. Her ass looked f*ckn fantastic in those jeans.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Greenville NC or SC?

          Found it meaning to try one of these just haven’t bought jeans in a while. A have one pair I love, one pair I accept, and 4-5 I can deal with.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    Very disappointing to see @POTUS using a Teleprompter after repeatedly mocking others for using them. Very sad!

  • avatar
    Dan R

    Still on the campaign trail.
    Stock market not happy.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    We’ve been down this path before, folks. Remember “trickle-down”? Same principle. And it did a splendid job at ballooning the budget deficit.

    Who makes money off budget deficits? Follow that trail.

    “When you want to expand your plant, or when Mark [Fields] wants to come in and build a big massive plant, or when Dell wants to come in and do something monstrous and special, you’re going to have your approvals really fast.”

    Cool beans. I propose the first such test be a brand new oil refinery…right across the road from Mar-A-Lago. And the property owners there can just suck it if they don’t like it. Or maybe they should vote. Make America Great Again!

  • avatar
    dal20402

    “When you want to expand your plant, or when Mark [Fields] wants to come in and build a big massive plant, or when Dell wants to come in and do something monstrous and special, you’re going to have your approvals really fast.”

    Getting from here to there would be a difficult exercise, that would require all of an 8-year presidential term, for even the most experienced, committed, and capable politician. Putting regulations in place is not easy from a process standpoint, and neither is changing or eliminating them. Trump has no clue how to do it. His team is mostly still not nominated (I think we’re up to around 40 of 660) and most of the ones he has nominated are jokers. It’ll be a while before he manages to change much of anything with respect to federal regulations and the processes they put in place.

  • avatar
    OldManPants

    He could assemble an iPhone with them tiny mitts!

    But I wouldn’t buy one from his conveyor.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      They’d come with pornhub pre-installed.

      • 0 avatar
        OldManPants

        And need quat cleaning.

      • 0 avatar
        gtemnykh

        Where was all this anti-womanizing hand wringing when Bill was inserting a cigar into a certain someone, and countless other sleazy episodes? Why are the progressive left with all their Pride parades and what not such Puritanical moralizers all of a sudden?

        • 0 avatar
          iNeon

          ^^ in the kitchen, making sandwiches.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          Ignoring Bill’s womanizing is the most hypocritical thing the left as a whole has done in my memory.

          On the plus side, I’m 95% sure it wouldn’t happen today. If the 1992 primary were held today he wouldn’t have made it through.

          • 0 avatar
            tonycd

            I agree, dal. And I say that as one of those who was guilty of it.

            https://burninganditching.wordpress.com/2012/07/02/thong/

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            “Ignoring Bill’s womanizing is the most hypocritical thing the left as a whole has done in my memory.”

            It’s not that it was “ignored” – it was more or less par for the course for politicians to end up in bed with other women. Voters in both parties have pretty much taken the ‘it happens’ attitude. Hell, about 50% of married couples fool around on each other, so they don’t ride the politicians who do it very hard.

            Notable exception: Anthony Weiner, who voters rode out of town on a rail. And he was a liberal Democrat. Is that overcompensating for the Clinton years? Maybe, or perhaps Weiner’s indiscretions were too over the top to ignore.

            A

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I also agree Dal.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            True that. And that’s a step in the right direction!

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            “CALLED OUT: Jenna Jameson Slams Bill Maher: ‘I’ve Seen You At Playboy Mansion, You Fit In With P**** Grabbers.’ ”

            https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/255369/

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          It’s a fair question, gtem,

          I think the left was remiss in not calling out Clinton’s womanizing while we was in office. Yes, it was 20 years ago and times were different, but any CEO caught messing with a young intern would have been canned, and for good reason.

          But I think it’s a mistake to confuse fighting for women’s rights with Puritanical moralizing. Most people just want their daughters and wives to be able to do their jobs without getting harrassed.

          That’s why they are marching, not to protest a President because he had 3 wives, or impregnated wife #2 while still married to wife #1; or bragged so forcefully about sexually assaulting women while married to wife #3; or made lewd comments about his daughter; or creeped out beauty contestants,…

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            WHO, exactly, is marching?

            And do they really, truly represent the common core (no pun intended) of what people think of as the “Democrat Party,” either now, or more importantly, as recently as…say…1996?

            (Whizzing sound of shot piercing air at hypersonic speeds above the bow reports)

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            “WHO, exactly, is marching?”

            Me, for starters.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            Oh, fer chrissakes… that’s not marching, that a silly walk!

        • 0 avatar
          orenwolf

          Bill wasn’t siding with a contingent of the US who firmly believes given women the vote (or indeed, any power at all) has been slowly leading to the downfall of civilization.

          But even more than that, HE got censured for his behaviour, while the current situation is quite the opposite. Tacit approval.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          @gtemnykh

          The key is that Bill Clinton’s womanizing never intersected politically with things like limiting reproductive rights.

          That, I believe, is the problem they see with Trump.

          And if your question is fair for liberals (which it is), then there’s another fair question for conservatives: since you went on an endless jihad against Bill Clinton for skirt chasing, why no jihad against Trump, who not only did it, but ***bragged about it***?

          And wouldn’t you say there’s a difference morally between a) a guy like Clinton, who has affairs with consenting adults, and b) a guy like Trump, who bragged about grabbing women by their genitals? The former is slimy and immoral. The latter is illegal.

          Keep in mind that a very large percentage of women have actually endured what Trump was bragging about doing. It’s hard to understand their gut-level reaction to this unless we walk a few feet in their shoes. As the father of a kid who WAS grabbed in the way Trump talked about on a bus, I can tell you I have FAR less tolerance for that sort of behavior than I do for someone who just wants to sleep around.

          • 0 avatar
            iNeon

            Trump bragged about starfckrs being easy grabs.

            I’m pretty sure he never threatened to grab every living woman’s pussy.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            When 11 women come forward publicly to tell their story of sexual assault, it’s not about “starfckrs” It’s about flight attendants, and marketing specialists and normal people trying to do their job.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            “I’m pretty sure he never threatened to grab every living woman’s pussy.”

            You don’t have to for that to be against the law.

          • 0 avatar
            iNeon

            @vogo

            Walk through a queerbar sometime.

            We’ve all been sexually assaulted. Get over it.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            iNeon: So just because something happens, that makes it right?

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            iNeon,
            Show us on the doll where the cute molester touched you, and you liked it.

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            As a true independent who really does despise what both major parties now represent and whom they truly work for/benefit, and who does not now view Trump favorably, allow me to ask –

            Has Trump used state troopers and resources to get his frequent quest for strange on, or has he allowed/encouraged White House interns of a relatively young age to perform fellatio on him while POTUS and in the Oval Office?

            The hypocrisy of the Democrats could NOT be stronger.

            And most if not nearly all of those Saturday marchers stilll idolize Bill Clinton.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @iNeon – “We’ve all been sexually assaulted. Get over it.”

            REALLY?

            Citations required

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            @DW:

            “Has Trump used state troopers and resources to get his frequent quest for strange on, or has he allowed/encouraged White House interns of a relatively young age to perform fellatio on him while POTUS and in the Oval Office?”:

            Valid points, but you’re talking about the immorality and/or improper use of political power. That’s a good question for the voters to debate.

            But Trump flat out bragged about about doing something that would be classified as sexual assault in this state.

          • 0 avatar
            don1967

            @FreedMike – Try reading the full transcript of what Trump actually said, instead of relying on the CNN version.

            In the transcript there is no admission of actually groping anyone, let alone doing it without consent. The conversation is about getting consent, and how easy it is “when you’re a star”. The groping itself is presented in a hypothetical, third-person context.

            Yes, there is talk of Donald not waiting for permission to kiss women at public events. But who does? Kissing has been an accepted social greeting for centuries, causing awkward moments for billions of people around the world.

            Only the pink-hair brigade would define any of this as an admission of sexual assault, and go on a car-torching rampage. To the rest of us it’s just Donald bragging about Donald, and so we roll our eyes and move onto more important things.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            There’s a difference between words and actions. Most people seem to understand that.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            TMI, iNeon

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            The voters already debated. It’s over. Deal with it.

        • 0 avatar
          30-mile fetch

          “Why are the progressive left with all their Pride parades and what not such Puritanical moralizers all of a sudden?”

          Because they’ve been labelled as moral degenerates by the same religious right who suddenly was OK with morally degenerate behavior from someone who could give them the Supreme Court they wanted.

          Not saying it’s consistent or ethical, but there you have it.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            DeadWeight, are you really trying to argue that if a latter-day Monica flashed her thong at Trump he wouldn’t bite? Come on now. The only reason he hasn’t used the power of the presidency to seduce the interns is because he’s only been president for three days.

            It’s fair to criticize the left for hypocrisy but you have to admit the right has been just as guilty. After leading a jeremiad to kick Clinton out of office they have totally turned a blind eye to the same conduct from Trump.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @gtemnykh – You raise a valid point. The “left” tends to view sexual misconduct more along the lines of “mutually agreeable”. If both participants consent then what ever occurs in private is fair game. (Legal exceptions apply).

          “Pride Parades” would indicate that you are moving the conversation towards LGBT. Sexual orientation isn’t deviant by most “left” standards. The right on the other hand tends to see it as such. They quote the bible but that is all “Old Testament” stuff. Calling onself “Christian” means Jesus Christ’s teaching over-rule it.

          ““Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)

          Here Jesus identifies three classes of men who should not marry women. Taking his categories in reverse order, first, there are those who have made themselves “eunuchs” for the kingdom of heaven, i.e., those who foreswear marriage to better serve God. Second, he mentions those who have been “made eunuchs by others,” an apparent reference to castrated males. But Jesus mentions a third category — eunuchs who were born that way. Some might argue that Jesus was referring to males born without testicles, but this would be extremely rare. Moreover, this interpretation ignores how the term “born eunuchs” was used in other literature of the time.

          In the ancient world, including ancient Jewish culture (as reflected in the Talmud), “natural” or “born” eunuchs were not associated with missing testicles. Rather, they were associated with stereotypically effeminate characteristics and behavior (just like modern gay men), and were thought by Rabbi Eliezer to be subject to “cure” (just like modern gays). Moreover, as we have also seen, eunuchs were commonly associated with homosexual desire. (For a complete discussion of the term “born eunuch” and the connection with homosexuality, see The Early Church Welcomed a Gay Man.) As a reasonably informed person of his time, Jesus would have been aware of this common view of eunuchs. Yet he very matter-of-factly asserts that some people are simply born that way. The implication of his statement is profound — God created gay people the way they are! Jesus says so.”

          Many will be familiar with the story (Matt 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10). As Jesus enters Capernaum a Roman Centurion asks Jesus to heal his servant. Jesus gets ready to go with the Centurion, but the man tells Jesus there is no need since he is accustomed to working under authority. Jesus merely needs to give the word and he knows his servant will be healed. Jesus agrees, the man goes home, his servant is healed.

          “But Michaelson want us to think about the story in a different way by focusing on the Greek term pais used in both Matthew and Luke. He argues that it does not mean “servant” here but “lover” and appeals, though not with any references, to the work of Thucydides, Plutarch and “countless other Greek sources.” He contends that translating pais as “servant” makes no sense since 1) one would not expect a Roman solider to beg on behalf of a slave, 2) although Luke calls the person in question a “slave” (doulos) the centurion calls him pais, 3) it was a common practice for Roman soldiers to have servants/lovers based on the Greek model. Michaelson acknowledges that the person in question was probably a servant, but also much more. He then views this story as Jesus extending an unhesitating, healing hand to a centurion and his homosexual lover just as he did to prostitutes.”

          This is what Glenn Beck said recently:
          “How many evangelical leaders in the 1990’s said they were not electing a pastor-in-chief when it came to Bill Clinton? Answer: None. Now, ask same question about Trump. Following the release of Trump’s less-than-Christian remarks about women, evangelical leaders circled the wagons around him, saying he wasn’t meant to be pastor-in-chief.”

          ““If you are comfortable with your vote for Donald Trump right now, if you’re really comfortable with it, you might want to reconsider some of the things. Because I think we’re becoming a nation . . . or, no, I’m sorry . . . I think the GOP has become the party of Bill Clinton”

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            “Sexual orientation isn’t deviant by most “left” standards. The right on the other hand tends to see it as such.”

            I’m talking about the fellows with assless chaps and d*ldos on their foreheads fornicating in public…

            I will also point to the bizarre acceptance/tolerance of what happens to women at the hands of Islamist fundamentalists both in their home countries in the ME as well as when they come to Europe in the form of “refugees” (curiously single adult men who seem to have left their wives and children in a warzone). The concept of “cultural relativism” taken to the extreme. There were angry feminists in Berlin two days ago chanting “Allah Akbar” as part of the anti-Trump protests. The sort of bizarre and twisted logic one must apply to make sense of such a scene is indeed profound.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            “I will also point to the bizarre acceptance/tolerance of what happens to women at the hands of Islamist fundamentalists both in their home countries in the ME…”

            Uh…last I checked, bombing these folks to hell isn’t “accepting” their behavior.

            As far as “accepting” misogynist social behaviors in places like Saudia Arabia is concerned…making women wear hijabs bugs me too. But what do we do about that – bomb them too? It’s not just Muslim countries in the Middle East – how culturally acceptable is forcing women to have abortions if they already have a child? China does that. When do we start bombing them?

            At some point we have to accept that other countries’ customs and cultural norms aren’t going to line up neatly with ours. And if we want to change things in places like Saudi Arabia, then we should be living as an example to them. Perhaps refusing to elect a president who brags about sexually assaulting women might have been a good step in that direction…

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Mike, believe me I’d like nothing more than to leave those folks the hell alone, but them having oil apparently precludes us from doing so.

            In my previous post I was more so bringing up the seeming strange bed fellows of shouting about how Islam is the religion of peace, how we should welcome all (economic) refugees from there, etc. from the same people who have strong feelings about women’s rights, sexual harassment and assault. Meanwhile there is an unprecedented spike in assaults and rapes in traditionally fairly safe Western European cities, with the culprits being overwhelmingly represented by the recently arrived North African and Middle Eastern demographic. Total cognitive dissonance (IMO).

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            gtemnykh – I do agree with you about the “assless chaps and d*ldos on their foreheads fornicating in public…”
            That does taint the rest of the LGBT community.

            Unfortunately there are many similarities about the “Christian far right” and “Islamist fundamentalists”. I’d say that in many instances they are interchangeable. Both tend to be intolerant of opposing views, both tend to stifle women and both tend to be anti-LGBT. “White far right” and Islamic Fundamentalist terrorism have killed similar amounts of people within the USA.

        • 0 avatar
          psarhjinian

          “Where was all this anti-womanizing hand wringing when Bill”

          A lot of people were complaining, especially feminists, because it was a serious power dichotomy.

          The reason they’re complaining louder now is a) it’s twenty years and we’ve progressed, and b) because there’s a big gap between “power dichotomy in a workplace relationship” and full-blown bragging about sexual assault.

          I know this seems to be hard concept, because I’ve seen more than a few questions about “Why are you okay with Patton Oswalt saying p_ssy, but not with Trump?” and the answer is that vulgarity is not the same as assault. Ain’t no ballpark, neither. It ain’t even the same sport.

          Here’s an example: it’s like the difference between a) Chris Rock using the N-word, and b) someone condoning lynching.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            “full-blown bragging about sexual assault.”

            Oh geez, not this again. Until there is more substantiated evidence of this actually physically happening and not just stupid talk (more than there is of Bill’s assaults) this is a moot point, and an incredibly poor analogy to boot.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            gtem, how many accusers do you need? Bill Clinton has three. Trump has at least twelve.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            C’mon Bill had way more in his prime, his philandering is near legendary. Plus former Clinton associates tend to wind up shot in the head or mouth, usually in wooded areas so comparing “counts” yields little. Bill’s rape powers *far* exceed those of Trump and most anyone else at that level of politics.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Bill had lots of consensual affairs and is a general horndog slimeball. No one is disputing that.

            The argument is about sexual assault. More women have accused Trump of it than have accused Bill.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “The argument is about sexual assault. More women have accused Trump of it than have accused Bill.”

            It is bizarre to read a “which sexual predator is worse?” argument knowing both were President of the US. And either political party just digs in and supports their side. Has the country ever not been f*cked?

            No wonder I find solace in machines.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            Funny how those “accusers” sell by date expired so quickly.

        • 0 avatar
          markf

          Cause he supported abortion. Support abortion and “feminist” will go a free pass to treat women anyway you please…..

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        Is pornhub Russian?

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    This 111 post (and counting) long thread may just be roughly 3 reply threads – I congratulate you fine fellows for being about as civil as I’ve seen you discussing politics in a long time. There’s some passion but very minimal snark and name calling.

    Wish I could have y’all over for steak and chilaquiles tonight. (You’d be responsible for the beer.)

  • avatar
    mtmmo

    I’m elated to read a lot of these posts as it confirms the party (Dem) I’m leaving is still beyond clueless. Trump will easily cruise to a second term. Cue any songs from Kill Bill Vol I…

    • 0 avatar
      OldManPants

      Yeah, it’s really hard for us kneejerk racists to stay with the Dems but the only real alternative is to be a tool for the hereditary oligarchs and unlike non-whites the oligarchs are *all* pricks.

      But at least you’re wearin’ that snappy new Plasti Dip coating, tool :-D

  • avatar
    xtoyota

    Answer this
    Why do Democrats when they lose…..yell, scream, beat drums and riot ??
    Republicans lose they don’t yell, scream, beat drums and riot ???
    Also
    who paid for all these people to show up in DC to protest against Trump…
    It was too well organized and happened too fast

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      That’s painting with a rather broad brush, methinks.

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        Can I ask that the people who are telling me that we lost the election and just get over it please stop waving those confederate flags in my face? Very distracting.

        Also, is there any chance you might recall all the attempts to delegitimize Obama for the last 8 years? You know, the birther movement, ‘you lie’, 6 years of Congress refusing to work with the president. Or did that not get much attention on Breitbart?

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      “It was too well organized and happened too fast”. I hoped it made you soil your tightly-whities. Yes, it was well organized, smart people are capable of doing that. It was organized at least a month ahead of time. No, it wasn’t solely lesbian couples with six cats attending the march in D.C. (Sorry April). Imagine hundreds of thousands of concerned wives and mothers marching for their rights and their daughters futures. You could always e-mail Bark about keeping baby mommas in line. I imagine that’s who he seeks as a life (unequal) partner.

    • 0 avatar
      golden2husky

      Had Pence been the President elect, you would not have seen those protests. T_Rump is a despicable human being, Unless you are an older white male. Make America 1965 Again.

      • 0 avatar
        markf

        As long as the person elected had an “R” after their name you would have seen the same thing. Just like on Jan 20, 2009 the “anti-War” movement ceased to exist. It wasn’t anti-war it was anti-Bush/Republican….

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          Maybe, just maybe, the American people recognized that there was a difference between an administration that involved the US in two wasteful, unnecessary wars (one due to falsified intelligence, the other due to poor use of intelligence) and its successor which reduced our involvement by 85%.

          • 0 avatar
            markf

            Maybe, just maybe since he had a “D” after his name ANSWER and all the other leftists and socialist front groups no longer cared about “war”

            Instead of bombing 2 countries we are now bombing 7 and Mr. “I was elected to end wars, not start them” has killed hundreds with drones.

            I also noticed the MSM daily body count stopped on Jan 20, 2009. Funny.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Strange since Obama dropped a bomb every 20 minutes for 8 years. Don’t remember Bush at war with Yemen, Syria, or Libya…

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Hummer, didn’t the guy get the Nobel Peace Prize when he got into office?

            Must have been for Community Organizing in Chicago’s slums because we’re in more real wars now than when he got into office.

          • 0 avatar
            JimZ

            “Strange since Obama dropped a bomb every 20 minutes for 8 years. Don’t remember Bush at war with Yemen, Syria, or Libya…”

            when we decapitated Iraq under Bush, that is what directly led to the destabilization of the region and the rise of IS. there’s no amount of delusion which can reasonably pin that on Obama. Saddam wasn’t a nice guy but it was absolutely not our place to take him out.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Newsflash, Hummer: only Congress can declare war. We are not at war with Yemen, Libya or Syria.

            But look, if you are desperate to see our nation in endless wars that nearly bankrupt us, if you loved the great recession and hate the way 15 million people now have health insurance, no one can stop you from crushing on Bush43. Enjoy that.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        Yes, please.

      • 0 avatar
        Malforus

        Umm…Pence is no sweetheart either, he hasn’t been good for the Indiana economy and his restrictive views on religion are his reasoning for needle exchange closures that are responsible for a huge uptick in AIDS in his state.

        You know that disease that can be managed with proper PreP treatments and anti-virals. Yeah its getting worse out in Indiana cause Pence thinks god wants people to die of AIDS.

      • 0 avatar
        GeneralMalaise

        “Had Pence been elected…”

        I call bulls**t.

  • avatar
    markf

    So mcuh winning we are all gonna get sick of all the winning. Trust me, its going to be tremendous, fantastic winning…..

    • 0 avatar
      VoGo

      Look at all the winning we have today:

      – Winning that the CIA is out to get him
      – Winning that the press reports actual facts, rather than his lies
      – Winning that so few turned up for the inauguration
      – Winning that BMW told him to take a hike
      – Winning that millions of women protested his presidency

      Oh wait. That’s not winning. That’s whining. They’re different.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        You’re gonna love this pal.

        -Establishment, duh.
        -Press = facts, ever (1830-present)? Nigga, please.
        -Can’t decide who is lying as Photoshop is not hard.
        -Oh zee Germans have a great shot at being made examples of
        -Yeah, those ain’t “women”. Females perhaps, but “women”, the real kind your generation is familiar with…? I’m not convinced.

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          Man, you are out there. I’ve never met someone this distrustful of the foundational elements of our nation.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          Questioning authority and power is good.

          But there comes a point where the questions have to be justified by reality.

          You often go way beyond that point.

          – Ask the CIA rank and file if they feel like “establishment.” They’ve been stepped on by the establishment for half a century.
          – The big-name press very rarely gets facts wrong. The issues with them (which are strikingly similar on the left and right) are which facts they choose to report and their attempts at analysis.
          – Not even Trump is accusing anyone of photoshopping inauguration pictures. He’s mad at the press for publishing them. Big difference.
          – Provoking a trade war with Germany would be so suicidal that I think even Trump would realize it. They and the countries in their sphere of influence (basically, northern Europe except the UK) are some of the only countries in the world rich enough to buy the sort of highly engineered goods the US does well at developing.
          – I don’t even understand this last point. Look at it from my point of view… probably a third of the women I know attended one or another of the marches. Believe me, there are more than a few in there about whom you wouldn’t have a moment’s doubt.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            -CIA has a seat at the table of ruling the American empire, and they have since OSS. I’m not going to pretend to be clairvoyant with facts but in my estimation they backed the fake Russian angle because the leadership fears change in the Executive Branch for whatever reason. Whatever Susie Secretary and Sam Spy in Langley think I don’t know.

            -Really, lets see they got Brexit wrong, they got the US election all wrong. They failed to follow up on the Wikileaks angle conveniently. They failed to ever press Clinton on anything of substance. Many of them backed the fake “Russian” angle post-election, and CNN famously backed the very fake golden showers memo to then be called fake news by the President-elect. More recently some outlets picked up on a fake story where Trump would meet Putin in Iceland, including Business Insider as shown below in a link. Trump has trolled them all and shown them to be masterful liars in many cases, the truth of it is though this is the first time they have been shown to have no clothes by a major figure. They have been lying since before Pearl Harbor, from the Gulf of Tonkin to the Gulf War “babies in incubators” propaganda. Wake up, reject the lies, and develop just a tad of skepticism.

            http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-putin-iceland?r=US&IR=T&IR=T

            “That same day, the front page of the New York Times reported: “President Johnson has ordered retaliatory action against gunboats and ‘certain supporting facilities in North Vietnam’ after renewed attacks against American destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin.”
            But there was no “second attack” by North Vietnam — no “renewed attacks against American destroyers.” By reporting official claims as absolute truths, American journalism opened the floodgates for the bloody Vietnam War.”

            http://fair.org/media-beat-column/30-year-anniversary-tonkin-gulf-lie-launched-vietnam-war/

            “Everything Nayirah said, as it turned out, was a lie. There were, in actuality, only a handful of incubators in all of Kuwait, certainly not the “hundreds” she claimed. According to Dr. Mohammed Matar, director of Kuwait’s primary care system, and his wife, Dr. Fayeza Youssef, who ran the obstetrics unit at the maternity hospital, there were few if any babies in the incubators at the time of the Iraqi invasion. Nayirah’s charges, they said, were totally false. “I think it was just something for propaganda,” Dr. Matar said. In an ABC-TV News account after the war, John Martin reported that although “patients, including premature babies, did die,” this occurred “when many of Kuwait’s nurses and doctors stopped working or fled the country” – a far cry from Bush’s original assertion that hundreds of babies were murdered by Iraqi troops.(3)”

            https://www.antiwar.com/orig/cohen1.html

            -I am accusing someone of Photoshopoing the pictures because I have seen both ones that show many people and ones that show few from different angles. Someone, somewhere, is lying and I don’t know who.

            -EU is finished as is Frau Merkel, bring the trade war with the faltering currency. Did you see where Draghi said for the first time they would let states leave the Euro if they would first settle their debts? Unthinkable as recently as a year ago. Brussels is getting desperate if it’s vassal states are really on the table.

            -I will try to see your point of view, but it is difficult for me to understand it as it may be difficult for you to understand my POV. I think we may value different things (well, outside of the automotive arena where we have similar, excellent, tastes)

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            “The big-name press very rarely gets facts wrong.”

            OMG, dal. You are so very above this incredibly naive assertion that it pains me.

            I’ll cite but one (a very critical one) of many examples of “big-name press” getting it wrong, but getting it wrong and helping lead the nation towards financial, moral and credibility decimation:

            Judith Miller, plant of Cheney and Scooter Libby (also Jack Abramoff & Richard World and Richard Wolfowitz), being allowed the ability to hijack the front page of the New York Times to knowingly, falsely claim that Iraq possessed vast caches of WMDs, helping to soften opposition to the calamitous Iraq War No 2.

            These were not opinion or op/ed pieces, but multiple news articles, presented as factual assertions, published over a period of more than a year, in Judith Miller’s own words, as a reporter for The New York Times, where Judith Miller and many on the Times executive board knew at some point during such allegations that Miller was completely full of sh*t, citing disreputable sources, yet they never really apologized for this, and only admitted that it occurred due their lack of reasonable diligence (on a monumental “story”) years later, after the immense damage was done.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            DeadWeight, the Judith Miller fiasco was the exception that proves the rule, and the NYT (and other outlets in its category) are painfully aware of the damage it did to them. Take any 1000 random New York Times news articles, and you might find a false fact in five of them at worst. At the same time, you will find more questionable “analysis” than you can possibly stomach, and you will wonder why you can’t find a bunch of newsworthy stories at all. The way to read large media outlets is to separate out the facts from everything else, and actively seek out stories you know you need to be following.

            28, I really don’t know where you are getting this information, but you need to choose your sources with more of an eye toward evidence.

            The Russia story is not remotely “fake” – even Trump and his top advisers barely go to the trouble of denying it, preferring to take either the angle that “it didn’t change anything” or, in Trump’s case that, “if Putin is my friend, that’s a good thing.” It was BuzzFeed, not CNN, that shared the contents of the dossier — CNN just reported its existence without saying anything meaningful about what’s in it. The alternative was to just keep hushing it up when it had been circulating among everyone in DC for weeks. That’s the sort of conduct that leads to accusations of media coverups.

            The New York Times article you cited on the Gulf of Tonkin, like the Judith Miller stuff, is one of those failures that haunts the media. Most of the time, it’s not like that. The media, I will say, is more prone to this stuff when war is brewing; it’s in their interest to have something big to cover. You’re not going to find that kind of falsehood in an article about whether Andrew Puzder is guilty of assault or whether Mick Mulvaney will go along with Trump’s defense budget proposals. Or, for that matter, whether Bill Clinton left bodies in the forest.

            – The angles make sense. The pictures from the Trump’s-speech viewpoint were only slightly above ground level. Perspective makes it hard to see anyone beyond about 3rd St, and the area closer than 3rd St (along with the next block back to 4th St) really was full. By contrast, the pictures from behind the crowd were taken from near the top of the Monument. From that high, there is no problem seeing the entire scene, both the full areas near the Capitol and the empty ones between 7th and 14th Sts. (For the first three years I lived in DC, I lived close enough to the Mall that I’d use it as my local park and running loop.)

            – Frau Merkel is likely finished. The EU may be finished, although I wouldn’t personally bet on it. *Germany* is not remotely finished and will remain possibly our most important export market, along with the fully westernized East Asian countries. If Trump wants American manufacturing to succeed, he can’t afford to pick a trade war with those places.

            – You’re a smart and well-read guy, and when you are well-informed you have viewpoints that make sense (whether or not I agree with them). I like talking with you. The only reason I ever have a bone to pick with you is when you say nonsense that’s based on poorly sourced information.

          • 0 avatar
            GeneralMalaise

            One of the good thing about the election results is how quickly dissent stopped being RACIST!!! and became patriotic once again.

      • 0 avatar
        markf

        72 hours in office and the Left’s collective head is exploding, it’s gonna be a fun 8 years……

    • 0 avatar
      GeneralMalaise

      We’ll win so much we’ll get sick of winning. We’ll get so sick of winning. And then we’ll lose. And we’ll build a wall to stop the losing. And then we’ll be forced to win again!

  • avatar
    el scotto

    If we gotta have Mssrs Baruth giving us Alt-right editorials; I say bring back ALL the banned people. ALL, as in each and every one of them. Let SilvyZ71 use his own handle, let BTSR go on about MOARRRRR TRRRRUMP!!! Let Bertel come back and tell all of us how stupid we are. Let your readers decide who’s worthy and who’s not. BAn the Ban Hammer! I say and let anything go on TTAC. We have this editorial as a shiny example. Let the readers decide an example of “what”. Seems fair t me.

    • 0 avatar
      Adam Tonge

      We pretty much let everything go. It’s extremely rare that something gets moderated. And it’s never been for political opinion. Sometimes I wish people were nicer to each other, but I feel like that about life in general.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        then why even have moderators?

        • 0 avatar
          Adam Tonge

          There are certain things that have needed to be moderated. Neither Kyree or I make it a point to overmoderate. In internet terms, arguments around here are usually benign. Although, they have gotten more heated and political since November.

          As far as Bark’s article from earlier being deleted, I don’t know. Maybe Mark will eventually weigh in on that. The whole thread became a cesspool though.

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        Hmm, Bark’s column from this morning is no longer visible on the website.

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        “it’s never been for political opinion”

        What I find funny is all of these people talking American politics on a Canadian site.

        And………………how many of the people pissing and moaning about the American political system ACTUALLY took the time to vote? How many can’t even vote in American elections?

        Political Science majors would find that what Trump did on his first Monday on the job to be YUUUUGE! Hey, and it’s only day one.

        I’m no Trump fan. Didn’t vote for him. But by golly, there’ll be some changes comin’. Brace yourselves!

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        “it’s never been for political opinion”

        What I find funny is all of these people talking American politics on a Canadian site.

        And………………how many of the people p!ss!n’ and moaning about the American political system ACTUALLY took the time to vote? How many can’t even vote in American elections?

        Political Science majors would find that what Trump did on his first Monday on the job to be YUUUUGE! Hey, and it’s only day one.

        I’m no Trump fan. Didn’t vote for him. But by golly, there’ll be some changes comin’. Brace yourselves!

        • 0 avatar
          RobertRyan

          @highdesertcat
          Certainly not tainted anyway regarding US Politics, but your 100% right, he is an eccentric game changer. He will try and reset the clock. Very interesting US in the next 6 months.
          As the Chinese proverb goes ” may you live in exciting times”

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            RR, it’s going to be very interesting for the next four years.

            But we Americans will know by Nov 2018 if Trump has kept the promises he made to his movement. And he’s also got a pen, and a phone…….

            If he has kept those promises, he’ll be re-elected for another term; An even worse nightmare for the ‘crats than his initial election.

            If not, he’ll be a one-termer.

            But if he gets it right, does what his movement elected him to do, I see the Republicans running America for the next 50 years.

            Seriously! People and governments around the globe are scared schitless of what this guy represents.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @highdesertcat – “What I find funny is all of these people talking American politics on a Canadian site.”

          Why is that funny?

          1. “How many can’t even vote in American elections?”
          The USA is the most powerful country in the world. What it does directly or indirectly affects many other countries.
          Human rights are universal and aren’t constrained by borders. Putinsorangepotus has by his own admission violated a lot of human rights.
          2. The internet is global.
          3. I do agree “pissin” and moaning” and not voting is wrong.
          4. You didn’t vote so that would mean that you don’t have a right to gloat either.
          5. “Brace yourselves!” That answers all of your questions.
          6. Since you mentioned that this site is “Canadian owned” – the owners of this site can refuse to allow any political commentary.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “4. You didn’t vote so that would mean that you don’t have a right to gloat either.”

            WTF are you whining about?

            Of course I voted, just not for Trump.

            And who’s gloating?

            I had hoped to see more automakers move down to Mexico because of union harassment driving GM and Chrysler into the grave.

            Now we found out Trump is a union man.

            That sucks!

            More jobs for Americans is a good thing. More union involvement trying to bankrupt these employers is not.

            Long history of unions driving employers out of the US of A.

  • avatar
    GeneralMalaise

    After that, my guess is that you will never see that column again. The greatest trick TTAC ever pulled was convincing the world that column never existed. And like that… it is gone.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    @Dead Weight–I could not have stated it any more eloquently and I totally agree with you assessment of the Democratic Party Elitists and the coronation of Hillary Clinton during their alleged Democratic Convention. The Democratic Party left the working middle class out to dry. Trump spoke to those working middle class but the real question is will Trump deliver? Is Trump negotiating to get a better deal on NAFTA and if so how far will he go? As far as cars go will Trump’s actions lead to fewer jobs in the automotive industry and a trade war or will he manage to pull a rabbit out of the hat and negotiate better trade deals and more US jobs? I am hoping for the latter but I am skeptical.

  • avatar
    April S

    What I want to know is where that love letter to the Women’s March that Bark M. put out went.

  • avatar
    VoGo

    People question what everyone was marching about over the weekend, and here is proof it has already started. “Trump orders broad hiring freeze” is the headline across the all the major papers today.

    I mean, first of all, they are women. We don’t need to call them names from the 1950’s. Second of all, this is exactly the kind of discrimination the federal government is supposed to protect us from, and here it is promoting it.

    Just wrong. All kinds of wrong.

  • avatar
    pecos bill

    TTAC: Just another political blog.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • redapple: No. NO F ing way will i take the 16 inch center screen. I want the real knobs. No sale. I May need to get a...
  • Daniel J: I just don’t see the interior being 14k more than my Mazda 6 grand touring reserve.
  • ToolGuy: @Dan, The GMT400 vs. GMT800 question has always been interesting to me. I recently did some work on my...
  • sayahh: I used to buy Defenders but I haven’t been driving much, so I might get a set of Michelin’s Pilot...
  • Scoutdude: Be sure to look at the tirerack testing numbers too, at least for the tires that they have tested. That is...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber