Bernie Sanders Exposes Trump's Bait and Switch Trade Deals!

[Sunstone]

QUOTING BERNIE SANDERS HERE:

We have been told by politicians in both parties that the newest trade deal or tax cut will help workers, but then the opposite happens: corporate lobbyists write the trade agreements and tax code to throw millions of American workers out on the street, shut down factories here and move abroad, all while CEOs are paid tens of millions of dollars.

I am proud to be the only candidate running for president who not only voted against NAFTA and PNTR with China, but also stood on the picket lines with union workers opposing these unfair trade deals. But lobbyists rammed the deals through Congress, and the result is that America has lost literally millions of jobs.

Trump has continued this bait and switch. He promised he would reduce the trade deficit, stop the outsourcing of American jobs, and rip up NAFTA.

But since he’s been in office, our trade deficit has shot up to a record-breaking $891 billion. He has given out $50 billion of government contracts that are shipping jobs overseas. He passed tax cuts that reward companies for offshoring even more jobs. His new NAFTA includes no enforceable labor standards, but does include special giveaways to the pharmaceutical industry. And now more than 185,000 American jobs have been shipped overseas under his watch.

That is unacceptable and that has got to change. When we are in the White House:

• We will sign an executive order ending federal contracts to corporations that outsource American jobs and refuse to pay American workers livable wages with good benefits.
  
  
• We will renegotiate all of our unfair trade deals to prevent the outsourcing of American jobs, raise wages, protect the environment, and lower the outrageously high price of prescription drugs. And we’re not signing any trade agreements that let foreign companies overturn our country’s laws.
  
  
• We will not appoint a trade representative that comes from Wall Street. We are going to appoint a trade representative that comes from the trade union movement.
  
  
• We will repeal Trump’s tax breaks that reward companies for moving their factories overseas and that encourage companies to replace American workers with robots.
  
  
• We will label China a currency manipulator and prevent it from dumping artificially cheap products into the U.S.
  

Here is the bottom line: We can no longer sit idly by as thousands of American workers are thrown out on the street. American jobs must no longer be our number one export. Trade is a good thing, but it has got to be fair. We need a trade policy that works for working people, not the CEOs of multinational corporations. And working together, that is exactly what we are going to do.​

The source is the Judd Popular Information Newsletter, which is becoming quite influential in political circles. Well worth subscribing to.

Questions? Comments?

 

[joe1776]

I have experience as a negotiator but trade negotiation is a complex economic problem that I don't understand. I doubt the average voter has a clue about which politician to trust on this issue. So,even if Bernie is right, I doubt whether his argument on trade will persuade on-the-fence voters to vote for him.

I think he needs to go after Trump on the trust issue and hammer it hard. "Americans want a President they can trust." Voters will understand that.

 

[Woberts]

inb4 "socialism sux, hyuk hyuk"

 

[wellwisher]

These conclusions are not consistent with the record low unemployment, the record number of available jobs, and the growth in the manufacturing sector of the US. Those numbers define a different overall trend.

The article appears to pander to emotional thinking. If you hate Trump, the hate will make the article appear to make sense. But if you limit your emotions, and look at the employment data, it makes no sense.

 

[Augustus]

I think he needs to go after Trump on the trust issue and hammer it hard. "Americans want a President they can trust." Voters will understand that.

That would be a terrible idea.

Any opponent of Trump need to focus on communicating their own positive vision for America, and not any kind of anti-Trump message.

Everyone understands Trump doesn't really care about whether or not what he says is factually correct or not. For voters, either it is a problem already and they won't vote for him, or it doesn't really bother them and hammering the point will likely be ineffective or even counterproductive.

 

[joe1776]

... For voters, either it is a problem already and they won't vote for him...

How did you jump to that conclusion? What logic or evidence leads you to believe that the trust issue is not exactly like all the other issues with the voters? It might be an issue but not their top issue. A smart campaign would try to make trust the top issue for swing voters.

...or it doesn't really bother them and hammering the point will likely be ineffective or even counterproductive.

If Trump's lack of integrity doesn't really bother swing voters, I'd be wrong and very surprised. I would expect voters who don't care about his lack of integrity to be Trump voters who I'm not expecting to turn anyway.

Lack of trust is Trump's obvious weakness. Opponent's can't give him a pass on it. I suspect you're short-changing the trust issue because it's too obvious.

 

[Augustus]

How did you jump to that conclusion? What logic or evidence leads you to believe that the trust issue is not exactly like all the other issues with the voters?

Knowledge and experience

It might be an issue but not their top issue. A smart campaign would try to make it the top issue for swing voters.
If Trump's lack of integrity doesn't really bother swing voters, I'd be wrong and very surprised. I would expect voters who don't care about his lack of integrity to be Trump voters who I'm not expecting to turn anyway.

Lack of trust is Trump's obvious weakness. Opponent's can't give him a pass on it. I suspect you're short-changing it because it's too obvious.

To get back to the OP, the Dem last time who inspired people was Bernie who ran on his own issues. Like Trump (and Obama before him), he positioned himself as something other than 'more of the same'.

Clinton positioned herself as a 'safe pair of hands', and as 'not Trump'. It was insipid and lost the election. You are advocating doing the same thing again.

Saying 'Vote for me, I'm not a liar' will lose you the election. It is not a vision, it is not optimistic, it has no emotional impact, it doesn't give you hope or pay the bills. You win elections with pathos, not logos.

Nobody is going to say "By jove! You are right, he is somewhat economical with the truth. I can never vote for such a scoundrel". They already know, and either care or don't care. He's dishonest. He's unethical. He cheats on his pregnant wife. None of this matters as it's common knowledge and if it hasn't affected you by now, it never will.

You think it should, but it doesn't. People will vote for whoever makes them feel better. People, as a whole, are not rational.

Compare Bernie's message above with "Trump tells fibs", are you seriously saying the latter will have more resonance?

 

[Subduction Zone]

The only thing that I oppose on a short scan is his stance against robots replacing workers. Like it or not that is progress and it increases the productivity of a company. If we are competing with other countries that rely on extremely cheap labor the only way to do that at times is through modernization. There is a reason that hand knotted rugs are not made in the U.S. even with the cheapest of illegal immigrants. It simply cannot be done economically here. But a machine weaving a similar rug can be far cheaper than those that rely on abused child workers in third world countries. Perhaps instead he should propose a program for retraining people whose jobs are replaced by modernization. That would be a reasonable solution. Opposing progress only gets one steamrolled by those that accept it eventually.

 

[joe1776]

Knowledge and experience

In other words, you jumped to your conclusion and can't offer a logical explanation. Besides, my knowledge and experience are obviously greater than yours.

To get back to the OP, the Dem last time who inspired people was Bernie who ran on his own issues. Like Trump (and Obama before him), he positioned himself as something other than 'more of the same'.

You sound like the generals who champion strategies that won the last war.

Clinton positioned herself as a 'safe pair of hands', and as 'not Trump'. It was insipid and lost the election. You are advocating doing the same thing again.

False analogy. Clinton couldn't run a campaign on the trust issue because the ton of evidence of Trumps lack of integrity became obvious only after he was elected. Moreover, her years in the establishment left her more vulnerable to attack on the trust issue than Trump was at the time.

Saying 'Vote for me, I'm not a liar' will lose you the election...

Well, of course it would. It's dumb. Is that the best you could do as a candidate?

Quoting David Gergen, who worked for five Presidents, would be a more persuasive way to begin.

“Trust remains the coin of the realm in politics. A President who is trusted, by the people, by the congress, by the press, by foreign countries, is a President who can get a lot of good things done.”

 

[metis]

Quoting David Gergen, who worked for five Presidents, would be a more persuasive way to begin.

“Trust remains the coin of the realm in politics. A President who is trusted, by the people, by the congress, by the press, by foreign countries, is a President who can get a lot of good things done.”

Trust Trump? Really? Let's see, he's averaging 10 lies per day when he speaks publicly, and yet we're supposed to trust him?

BTW, Gergen can't stand Trump as I have listened to him on many occasions.

 

[joe1776]

Trust Trump? Really? Let's see, he's averaging 10 lies per day when he speaks publicly, and yet we're supposed to trust him?

BTW, Gergen can't stand Trump as I have listened to him on many occasions.

I was suggesting that trust should be the number one issue for Trump's opponents in order to beat him. Did you understand that?

 

[shmogie]

QUOTING BERNIE SANDERS HERE:

We have been told by politicians in both parties that the newest trade deal or tax cut will help workers, but then the opposite happens: corporate lobbyists write the trade agreements and tax code to throw millions of American workers out on the street, shut down factories here and move abroad, all while CEOs are paid tens of millions of dollars.

I am proud to be the only candidate running for president who not only voted against NAFTA and PNTR with China, but also stood on the picket lines with union workers opposing these unfair trade deals. But lobbyists rammed the deals through Congress, and the result is that America has lost literally millions of jobs.

Trump has continued this bait and switch. He promised he would reduce the trade deficit, stop the outsourcing of American jobs, and rip up NAFTA.

But since he’s been in office, our trade deficit has shot up to a record-breaking $891 billion. He has given out $50 billion of government contracts that are shipping jobs overseas. He passed tax cuts that reward companies for offshoring even more jobs. His new NAFTA includes no enforceable labor standards, but does include special giveaways to the pharmaceutical industry. And now more than 185,000 American jobs have been shipped overseas under his watch.

That is unacceptable and that has got to change. When we are in the White House:

• We will sign an executive order ending federal contracts to corporations that outsource American jobs and refuse to pay American workers livable wages with good benefits.
  
  
• We will renegotiate all of our unfair trade deals to prevent the outsourcing of American jobs, raise wages, protect the environment, and lower the outrageously high price of prescription drugs. And we’re not signing any trade agreements that let foreign companies overturn our country’s laws.
  
  
• We will not appoint a trade representative that comes from Wall Street. We are going to appoint a trade representative that comes from the trade union movement.
  
  
• We will repeal Trump’s tax breaks that reward companies for moving their factories overseas and that encourage companies to replace American workers with robots.
  
  
• We will label China a currency manipulator and prevent it from dumping artificially cheap products into the U.S.

Here is the bottom line: We can no longer sit idly by as thousands of American workers are thrown out on the street. American jobs must no longer be our number one export. Trade is a good thing, but it has got to be fair. We need a trade policy that works for working people, not the CEOs of multinational corporations. And working together, that is exactly what we are going to do.​

The source is the Judd Popular Information Newsletter, which is becoming quite influential in political circles. Well worth subscribing to.

Questions? Comments?

Appropriate rhetoric for about 1972.

It simply is mostly nonsense for today. The unemployment rate puts the lie to the basic premise here.

Anything out of Sanders mouth is tainted by his socialist/communist goals.

He obviously enjoyed his honeymoon in the USSR, since he wants to bring government control and intrusion into to every part of our lives.

Therefore his comments about what he will do as president have no validity.

 

[metis]

I was suggesting that trust should be the number one issue for Trump's opponents in order to beat him. Did you understand that?

Actually I didn't since I weighed-in late, so thanks for the heads-up..

 

[Quetzal]

The only thing that I oppose on a short scan is his stance against robots replacing workers. Like it or not that is progress and it increases the productivity of a company. If we are competing with other countries that rely on extremely cheap labor the only way to do that at times is through modernization. There is a reason that hand knotted rugs are not made in the U.S. even with the cheapest of illegal immigrants. It simply cannot be done economically here. But a machine weaving a similar rug can be far cheaper than those that rely on abused child workers in third world countries. Perhaps instead he should propose a program for retraining people whose jobs are replaced by modernization. That would be a reasonable solution. Opposing progress only gets one steamrolled by those that accept it eventually.

I agree, we cannot stand in the way of progress due to protecting an inefficient labor force (no offense intended). It is my estimation that other professions will spring from these automation technologies and that the overall change will be gradual. At least, that is my hope.

 

[Koldo]

Knowledge and experience



To get back to the OP, the Dem last time who inspired people was Bernie who ran on his own issues. Like Trump (and Obama before him), he positioned himself as something other than 'more of the same'.

Clinton positioned herself as a 'safe pair of hands', and as 'not Trump'. It was insipid and lost the election. You are advocating doing the same thing again.

Saying 'Vote for me, I'm not a liar' will lose you the election. It is not a vision, it is not optimistic, it has no emotional impact, it doesn't give you hope or pay the bills. You win elections with pathos, not logos.

Nobody is going to say "By jove! You are right, he is somewhat economical with the truth. I can never vote for such a scoundrel". They already know, and either care or don't care. He's dishonest. He's unethical. He cheats on his pregnant wife. None of this matters as it's common knowledge and if it hasn't affected you by now, it never will.

You think it should, but it doesn't. People will vote for whoever makes them feel better. People, as a whole, are not rational.

Compare Bernie's message above with "Trump tells fibs", are you seriously saying the latter will have more resonance?

Nevertheless, part of his victory was due to being seen as anti-establishing. By the way, here in Brazil the biggest reason as to why our current president won was because he was pictured as a politically incorrect white knight that opposed the biggest political party.

Being anti-something can work wonderfully. You just need a lot of people that can relate to that.

 

[PureX]

I agree, we cannot stand in the way of progress due to protecting an inefficient labor force (no offense intended). It is my estimation that other professions will spring from these automation technologies and that the overall change will be gradual. At least, that is my hope.

We just keep on ignoring the fact that the purpose of commerce is to serve the well being of the humans engaged in it, and not the other way around. And yet you and SZ seem to be completely oblivious of this, as do nearly all of the world's "leaders", because they are nearly all benefitting quite handsomely from that ignorance, while the people they are supposed to be serving get screwed.

I am happy to let machines do the manual labor that humans currently do so long as the well-being of the humans is being served by that choice, and not the well-being of a few rich guys that own the company. For a society of humans to allow the latter is patently nihilistic. It is illogical, and should be labelled "insane". And yet every time, by nearly everybody in our current culture, this is exactly the goal that gets advanced, and it's the ONLY goal that ever gets advanced, to the exclusion of any and all others. And this happens so consistently that few humans are even able to recognize the self-destructive insanity of pursuing this strategy (except, of course, for the few rich guys that own the company).

 

[Left Coast]

False analogy. Clinton couldn't run a campaign on the trust issue because the ton of evidence of Trumps lack of integrity became obvious only after he was elected.

Lol oh come ON Joe! Anyone who was not a die-hard unchangeable conservative could tell Trump was full of it looong before election day. The coverage of his repeated lies/false statements on the campaign trail was everywhere. Many conservatives also knew he was full of it, but calculated that despite his constant, embarrassing verbal diarrhea he would be more likely than Clinton to fulfill a conservative policy agenda in office.

Dem candidates need to be able to walk and chew gum. They can absolutely attack Trump on his credibility, but also need to be prepared to put forward specific policy ideas that they know are popular among the American people and will benefit middle/low income people.

 

[joe1776]

Lol oh come ON Joe! Anyone who was not a die-hard unchangeable conservative could tell Trump was full of it looong before election day.

No. You had him pegged and I had him pegged because we're both uniquely qualified to recognize guys who are full of it. But I doubt that the general public was as well-informed until the Washington Post, and then other publications, began keeping daily score.

May 9, 2019 ....Over the course of 17 hours, President Donald Trump repeated 17 false and misleading claims that we have written about since he became president.
FactCheck.org

Dem candidates need to be able to walk and chew gum. They can absolutely attack Trump on his credibility, but also need to be prepared to put forward specific policy ideas that they know are popular among the American people and will benefit middle/low income people.

I'm predicting that Elizabeth Warren will be the challenger. Yes, she needs to continue putting forth specific policy ideas as she has done but those aren't going to swing the undecided votes to her. The trust issue is the fat pitch she needs to hit out of the ballpark.

 

[fantome profane]

I'm predicting that Elizabeth Warren will be the challenger. Yes, she need to continue putting forth specific policy ideas as she has done but those aren't going to swing the undecided votes to her. The trust issue is the fat pitch she needs to hit out of the ballpark.

I sincerely look forward to the day when Trump must refer to Warren as “President Pocahontas”.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Trust Trump? Really? Let's see, he's averaging 10 lies per day when he speaks publicly, and yet we're supposed to trust him?

BTW, Gergen can't stand Trump as I have listened to him on many occasions.

For person who lies , he certainly seems to accomplish a fair deal of things in addressing a lot of his campaign promises.