2016 US Presidential Elections: Candidates on Global Trade – By Rosaliene Bacchus

Three Worlds One Vision

2016-US-Presidential-Elections

Photo Credit: Maps of World

Here’s how our top four presidential candidates propose to address global trade.

Donald Trump – Republican Party

Trade reform—

  • Appoint trade negotiators whose goal will be to win for America: narrowing our trade deficit, increasing domestic production, and getting a fair deal for our workers.
  • Renegotiate NAFTA.
  • Withdraw from the TPP.
  • Bring trade relief cases to the world trade organization.
  • Label China a currency manipulator.
  • Apply tariffs and duties to countries that cheat.
  • Direct the Commerce Department to use all legal tools to respond to trade violations.

Learn more at https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/economic-vision

View original post 139 more words

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Comments

  • Clyde Duncan  On September 1, 2016 at 9:07 pm

    Hillary Clinton More Popular Than Everyone Except Obama, Relatively Speaking

    by Gary Norton – Daily Kos

    A lot of folks in the media are getting the vapours today about a new poll which shows that Hillary’s popularity is low.

    For instance here’s a headline announcing that a “Record Number Of Americans Dislike Clinton.”

    The poll gives her ratings of 41% favourable and 56% unfavourable.

    Those are not good results, for sure, but contrary to the implication of the headline they are little changed from two months ago when the same poll gave her ratings of 42% favourable and 55% unfavourable.

    But what this story and all the stories failed to mention is that Hillary’s poor favourability ratings are really quite good compared to the ratings of other politicians.

    In reality, the American populace is in a sour mood and gives virtually everyone and everything unfavourable ratings.

    In fact compared to others who are ranked, Hillary is almost at the top of the heap.

    Here are the favourability ratings of some other politicians and Parties from the Huffington Post aggregate of poll results against which Hillary stacks up quite nicely:

    *Trump 34% favourable, 60% unfavourable

    *Paul Ryan 33% favourable, 42% unfavourable

    *Mitch McConnell 16% favourable, 44% unfavourable

    *Harry Reid 22% favourable, 42% unfavourable

    *Nancy Pelosi 24% favourable, 48% unfavourable

    *The Republican Party 34%, favourable 57% unfavourable

    In fact it seems that the only people or Party doing better than Hillary are President Obama with a rating of 52% favourable, 44% unfavourable and the Democratic Party with a 45% favourable, 47% unfavourable.

    So when you hear people moan about Hillary Clinton having terrible favourability ratings keep in mind that virtually everyone polled has terrible favourability ratings and hers are better than most.

    **After Donald Trump’s display in Mexico and his subsequent campaign speech in the USA – It is fair and right to be completely dismissive of anything Trump says on the stump – nothing but hot air.

  • Clyde Duncan  On September 3, 2016 at 7:39 am

    How Donald Trump Could Win the USA Election
    by Matt Lewis – Independent UK

    Donald Trump is neither a statesman nor an everyman. He’s a political schizophrenic.

    Anyone who doubts this need only look back to Wednesday (August 31, 2016) as a microcosm of his mercurial campaign. It was a tale of two Trumps: one, the aspiring statesman, and the other, the demagogic hero of the American workingman.

    It started in Mexico, where Trump met with President Enrique Peña Nieto. He shrewdly positioned himself next to a foreign head of state, as if the president’s power and status were contagious. If the goal was to make him look statesmanlike and diplomatic, it worked.

    But it wasn’t just the optics. Rhetorically, Trump struck a conciliatory tone while talking about “shared goals.”

    For a moment, at least, it appeared that he might have outflanked Hillary Clinton.
    Then he crossed the border into Arizona.

    Trump immediately reverted to his hard-line message, hurling red meat to his adoring fans. He recommitted to mass deportations (even mentioning a new “deportation task force”) and suggested an elaborate vetting process for immigrants. “We will build a great wall along the southern border, and Mexico will pay for the wall,” he boasted, not for the first time.

    There’s nothing inherently wrong with a sovereign nation wanting to control its borders. But statesman Trump had disappeared, only to be replaced by a populist rabble rouser. He even joked that Hillary Clinton might be deported. It was almost as if there were two Donald Trumps. South of the border, he was civil and irenic — north of the border, he was a vulgarian.

    But this isn’t just the story of an image torn asunder. Trump’s campaign team, like his campaign message, is a house divided against itself. His two top aides couldn’t be more different: Steve Bannon (the newly hired, hard-charging CEO of the campaign) has no campaign experience, and Kellyanne Conway (his campaign manager) is a veteran political operative who wants a kinder, gentler Trump.

    Bannon comes from Breitbart.com, the right-wing website that has been instrumental in mainstreaming the unseemly “alt-right” movement. Picture him as the whisperer on Trump’s shoulder who reinforces his worst instincts.

    Conway is a pollster by trade, and she understands data and realises Trump must perform better with women, minorities, and so on if he wants to have a prayer of winning in November. Picture her on the other shoulder. She’s whispering in his ear, “Remember the ladies.”

    Speaking of ladies, scuttlebutt suggests that the ladies in Trump’s life (Conway and Trump’s daughter, Ivanka), along with ex-Fox News boss Roger Ailes (who had his own trouble with the ladies), are responsible for the recent instances when Trump has pivoted and softened his stance on issues such as immigration.

    So who’s right? Devil or Angel?

    There are basically two theories on how Trump can win this campaign. One suggests you should just “Let Trump be Trump.” After all, he has managed to defy the odds thus far by following his own instincts. Maybe his minions should double down on recruiting the support of working-class white men. Perhaps the polls are wrong, and there is an appetite in America that rivals what happened during the BREXIT vote. Most strategists would advise against this, but if Trump loses, he might sleep better knowing he ran the campaign his way and didn’t compromise or water down his message.

    The competing theory insists Trump simply cannot win if he continues to alienate women and minorities. People who espouse this view realise that Trump can’t suddenly abandon his core beliefs, but, they insist, he must be more eloquent and disciplined in how he presents his ideas. They argue that Trump must maintain his support with the Republican base but present his positions in a more eloquent and palatable manner.

    Both of these philosophies are defensible. But a choice must be made. What does not work is oscillating between the two. And that’s just what he’s doing.

    Rather than settling on one guru or Sherpa, Trump’s latest strategies tend to reflect the thoughts and ideas of the last person with whom he spoke. Rather than settling on one theory of winning and then ruthlessly adhering to it, the strategy instead is ad hoc and reactive.

    The frightening thing for voters is that it’s impossible to tell who Trump is, what he really believes, and whether he would listen to the devil or the angel on his shoulder in the Oval Office. What it all ends up looking like is that he is a nihilist who lacks a coherent worldview, much less a consistent strategy.

    Sometimes it’s not so much what you decide but that you decide on something. You’ve got to decide who you are and what you believe, and then you must stick by it — come hell or high water. Success, honour, and loyalty require making commitments, and (for better or for worse) sticking to them.

    F Scott Fitzgerald once, in vain, warned Ernest Hemingway that “a man, torn between two women, will eventually lose them both.”

    A man torn between two messages has the same problem. Trump must make his choice.

    [I believe it is written somewhere else that no one can serve two masters.]

  • Tata  On September 5, 2016 at 10:39 pm

    Yes we all do, Sa……We all worship both the Devil and a BEING we call Supreme. So, as a reminder, Do you honestly believe the outrage by the MEDIA and those of us against Donald Trump is the work of the ” Supreme Being” ?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: