Trump Rejects "Bringing Jobs Home" To Get Himself Reelected

Thom plus logo Donald Trump's trade guy, Peter Navarro, proposed that America should spend roughly $2 trillion to bring manufacturing back to the United States from China.

Doing this would both strengthen American national and domestic security, and create an explosion in what could be very good-paying jobs for American workers.

While this would seem to be absolutely consistent with the positions Donald Trump campaigned on, it turns out his administration is actually opposed to it. Which has everybody scratching their heads.

Why would Trump tell Americans, over and over again for five years, that he wants to bring jobs home, and then reject a reasonable effort to do just that?

Is it because offshoring was always a Republican thing? Nixon, after all, opened us up to China, Reagan and HW Bush negotiated NAFTA, and the historic opposition to outsourcing has come from Democrats like Senators Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders.

So is Trump just returning to Republican orthodoxy?

Or is there some other reason why he doesn't want to do anything genuinely proactive about bringing jobs back to America?

John Bolton's new book seems to put all this in context.

When you consider Trump's opposition to bringing manufacturing home to his requesting that President Xi of China help him in the 2020 campaign the way President Putin did in the 2016 campaign, it suddenly makes perfect sense.

Trump is hoping that China will mobilize its vast and sophisticated Internet capabilities, along with its extraordinary economic power, to make him look good, hurt Joe Biden, and help Donald Trump get reelected.

Therefore, he's not willing to risk upsetting China right now.

He is not only betraying our country and the values that underpin a democratic republic, but he is also selling out the hopes and dreams of the American working people.

Trump's craven and cowardly outreaches, in 2016 and now, to foreign governments asking for their help in corrupting an American election, is nothing short of treason.

-Thom

Comments

hankgagnon's picture
hankgagnon 13 weeks 6 days ago
#1

Senile creepy Joe Biden is going to lose either way. He is BRAIN DEAD hiding in his basement! The Democrats deserve to lose as they did in 2016. The entire corrupt con men at DNC MSNBC CNN ABC NBC CBS ignored their constitiuents and picked a clown they could control. The entire corrupt corporate controlled DNC establishment rigged the primary in 2016 and 2020. Biden DOES NOT DESERVE THE NOMINATON. He was not elected he was annpointed by the corrupt DNC elitist scum bags. The GOP(RepubliCONS) and the DNC (DemoRATS) are controlled by large foreign multi-national corporations. ITS GREEN PARTY REVOLUTION TIME! Tom you are complicit in all this. All these years of having Bernie Sanders on your show, then you turncoat on him and follow the establishnment con men line when he is on the verge of taking the nomination! Tom Hartman is a FRAUD. Hartmans books are all fiction he really does not beleive in. Because when you had a chance to support Bernie Sanders, TOM HARTMAN bailed on BERNIE SANDERS and succumb to the corrupt corporate DNC pressure!

whatabout's picture
whatabout 13 weeks 6 days ago
#2

Thom, trying to figure out where you are coming from. The United States has not had a president in decades that is pushing for more products to be made in America. Even you who rely on an Apple phone should understand how vulnerable we have become to the hacking of your security by allowing the Chinese to know our every movement. The CCP is not the world's friend. Everything should be done to reduce our imports from one source, especially those that could be sensitive to our security.

Hopefully, you recognize President Trump is well aware that administrations both democrat and republican have allowed the US to become even more and more dependent on Chinese technology and he is trying to take the necessary steps to slow their access to our security.

Also re-evaluate your position NAFTA that you try to dump on republicans. William Jefferson Clinton was president and he had every opportunity to veto that as it crossed his desk.

Legend 13 weeks 6 days ago
#3

"Before sending it to the United States Senate Clinton added two side agreements, the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC) and the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), to protect workers and the environment, and to also allay the concerns of many House members. The U.S. required its partners to adhere to environmental practices and regulations similar to its own.[citation needed] After much consideration and emotional discussion, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act on November 17, 1993, 234–200. The agreement's supporters included 132 Republicans and 102 Democrats. The bill passed the Senate on November 20, 1993, 61–38.[21] Senate supporters were 34 Republicans and 27 Democrats. Clinton signed it into law on December 8, 1993; the agreement went into effect on January 1, 1994.[22][23] Clinton, while signing the NAFTA bill, stated that "NAFTA means jobs. American jobs, and good-paying American jobs. If I didn't believe that, I wouldn't support this agreement."[24] NAFTA then replaced the previous Canada-US FTA."

avn013's picture
avn013 13 weeks 5 days ago
#4

@hankgagnon Peace brother. It felt like you were roaring and i almost missed your point.

The DNC made its mistake (presumably not the first one) in 2016. The "good" thing was that this opened my eyes (and definetely a lot of others'. Most probably yours were already open, which justifies your anger). It was evident even to an idiot/naive like me, that strong forces inside DNC did not like the appeal of Sanders, especially among YOUNG voters (our immediate future). Retrospectively, it was not a matter of like or dislike. It was actual fear. Instead of thinking rationally and letting Sanders win the nomination, they succumbed to Hillary's hubris, revealing exactly what (i think) you are accusing them of, namely an opposition to what the majority of USA-ians need and are trying to express it politically (respectable education, health, income, UBI, free-time (play-time) for ALL, equal treatment by the Law forALL, i.e. re-enforcing that part of our Constitution (our (social) contract, as I heard from Tevor Noah recently),which implicitly or explicitly guarantees the above). Strategically, what you call the corrupt part of DNC, made (because of their panick) a stupid mistake. Sanders would have ,most probably, lost and the so called "left" (one of the shortest jokes for those of us who know Europe or Asia) would go on to hibernation for quite sometime. Hillary got what she deserved (Ok to lose, but by whom?)and despite her support by Sanders!!! Do you remember that till a few months ago, Hillary was hoping that DNC would officially beg her to join the nomination race? Remember how she paid back Sanders by opposing him? DNC again stepped in to stop Sanders, interfering once more with a people's process. Sanders wisely stopped his campaign early enough because he learned from 2016. This early acceptence, most probably, has already given him more leverage behind the scenes. Very smart move. On the inside he will have a better chance to pass some of his ideas to some extent, without taking credit. On the outside, people like us will see that DNC once more goes against its principles. Sanders may be physically too old to continue (that is what the corrupt part of DNC wanted to achieve). But will his ideas go away? Of course not. Mainly because these are not only his ideas. Sanders for decades has been the voice of an increasing number of USA-ians with the same or similar ideas. There are many other younger "Sanderss" carrying the torch, Andew Young and the personification-of-adrenaline AOC! Sanders (as a carrier of ideas) is much younger that what DNC believes. DNC will keep finding many "Sanderss" in front of it, till it either follows them or till it disintegrates in one or more pieces. Any guess which will be the largest one?

Can Trump get away with normalizing a coup?

Thom plus logo One of the big lessons that Donald Trump has learned through his years at the center of the New York tabloid media is that he can normalize just about anything.

When he was getting bad press because he was having an affair on his first wife, for example, he called newspapers pretending to be his own assistant to say that Marla Maples was astonished with "the best sex ever." It changed the entire newspaper narrative, and Trump proved to himself one more time that he can normalize just about anything.
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Right through the worst of the Bush years and into the present, Thom Hartmann has been one of the very few voices constantly willing to tell the truth. Rank him up there with Jon Stewart, Bill Moyers, and Paul Krugman for having the sheer persistent courage of his convictions."
Bill McKibben, author of Eaarth
From Unequal Protection, 2nd Edition:
"Beneath the success and rise of American enterprise is an untold history that is antithetical to every value Americans hold dear. This is a seminal work, a godsend really, a clear message to every citizen about the need to reform our country, laws, and companies."
Paul Hawken, coauthor of Natural Capitalism and author of The Ecology of Commerce
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"With the ever-growing influence of corporate CEOs and their right-wing allies in all aspects of American life, Hartmann’s work is more relevant than ever. Throughout his career, Hartmann has spoken compellingly about the value of people-centered democracy and the challenges that millions of ordinary Americans face today as a result of a dogma dedicated to putting profit above all else. This collection is a rousing call for Americans to work together and put people first again."
Richard Trumka, President, AFL-CIO