Rudy, don't you have jockstraps to wash?
You get a great big “DERP” for your dumbness on this one, Jethro.
Rudy, don't you have jockstraps to wash?
There you go with the clueless DNC narrative. Trump has done a LOT for the American public. You lack the honesty and grey matter to comprehend that snowflake. You are the definition of mindless partisanship.
And, more to the point of this thread, "Trumpism" isn't even a principled political outlook, such that we could say people Trumpists because Trump has aligned with their policy positions. Rather "Trumpism" is a cult of personality. Its policy positions can change wildly over time, because policy is beside the point. Trump could propose new trade rules tomorrow that greatly lowered tariffs, and they'd be for that, too. He could announce that we should pull out of Afghanistan immediately, or that we should double our troop strength there, and they'd support either. It's all about the partisanship itself, rather than being partisan in favor of particular ideas.
You get a great big “DERP” for your dumbness on this one, Jethro.
Fine, as long as you get back to the laundry bitch.
No dumbass, it is simply the partisan opposite to your statement by dropping a couple of words. Course, if you are a mindless partisan you might not get that. The DNC? How did you make that stretch?
Move on, Mary. This isn’t your finest hour.
You're very talented, posting and handling jocks at the same time.
btw, we all know you didn't graduate from Notre Dame.
That's a good example. For my own part, I found myself against Obama on a number of issues, because my policy principles aren't dictated by what the head of the Democratic Party believes at a given moment. That included disagreeing with the US getting involved in Syria... and Libya. But that kind of consistency,in the fact of partisan political pressure, is ever rarer on the right.
Republicans were ( some still are ) under the misconception we have free trade. I think it'smore an awarenes now that Trump had brought it to the forefront.The point of this thread isn't to argue whether China's well-behaved or NAFTA can be improved. The point is to contrast each side's reaction to the issue as a whole. China didn't suddenly become much worse shortly after Obama took office, then improve, then get vastly worse in 2015 through 2017, then get better again. NAFTA's terms didn't get overhauled in huge ways that made it much worse, then better, then worse, then better again. The violent swings of Republican opinion are not the slow evolution of someone gradually adjusting his opinions to new data (that's what the Democratic graph looks like). Instead, the Republican graph is what it looks like when you have people with no principles operating on very low information, such that they just spasm in whatever direction they've been triggered by their handlers.
You do know that? How?
Wow, this is some revisionist stuff. The biggest flank of Bernie's campaign was based on trade. Did you not watch the primaries?
Spare me the "wingnut" crap. That's mindless partisan rhetoric. You're young so you clearly are unaware of the history of trade deals in this country, union positions on trade and who supported what
You ought to write this thread about Democrats who found religion on free trade once Trump won office.
did you actually buck that stupid R2P crap Hillary was selling for regime change in Libya? good for youThat's a good example. For my own part, I found myself against Obama on a number of issues, because my policy principles aren't dictated by what the head of the Democratic Party believes at a given moment. That included disagreeing with the US getting involved in Syria... and Libya. But that kind of consistency,in the face of partisan political pressure, is ever rarer on the right.
You had the capacity and ability to think an issue through and come to a decision. That's what it SHOULD BE about. Here at JPP, it seems to be a Red Team/Blue Team 'sports-type' affair. You have the Politically Correct Fascists on one side, then you have the Fox News Parrots on the other side. There are some that seem to be able to discuss an issue without the usual "You're a Libtard" or "You're a Conservotard" epithets.
Congrats on the OP and pointing out the Partisanship here. (Doubt it will do much good, I think it is 'culturally' ingrained here)
no we are wedded to getting China to stop it's trade barriers and IPR theft.And, more to the point of this thread, "Trumpism" isn't even a principled political outlook, such that we could say people are Trumpists because Trump has aligned with their policy positions. Rather "Trumpism" is a cult of personality. Its policy positions can change wildly over time, because policy is beside the point. Trump could propose new trade rules tomorrow that greatly lowered tariffs, and they'd be for that, too. He could announce that we should pull out of Afghanistan immediately, or that we should double our troop strength there, and they'd support either. It's all about the partisanship itself, rather than being partisan in favor of particular ideas.
I voted for him and campaigned for him. I'm very familiar with what he emphasized. Trade was a side issue for him. You can confirm here:
https://berniesanders.com/issues/
As you can see, the word "trade" doesn't come up even once on the first page of his issues list. Wealth inequality, college tuition, and getting big money out of politics were his top three issues. He found space on that front page to discuss a lot of things, from big-ticket items like climate change, on down to niche stuff like "standing with Guam," "supporting historically black colleges," and "fighting for nurses," but no mention of trade at all.
If you dig down further into his issues, you'll find trade, but even then it isn't listed as a top item. For example:
https://berniesanders.com/issues/income-and-wealth-inequality/
Trade policies are the fourth thing he focuses on, after raising taxes on corporations and the wealthy, increasing the minimum wage, and investing in infrastructure.
What makes you think I'm ignorant of that. Is there anything specific in what I wrote that you think I got wrong?
Take another look at those graphs. THINK! Now, do you really think the big story there is Democrats "finding religion" on free trade after Trump won? Again, as you'll see, the majority of Democrats have been pro-free-trade all along. They gradually became more so even before Trump made it a headline item, and their percentage actually held steady over the last two years.
Because you're dumb.
Republicans were ( some still are ) under the misconception we have free trade. I think it'smore an awarenes now that Trump had brought it to the forefront.
Since they are more wedded to "free trade" (sic) it was more of a sudden swing then from Dems who generally
were skepticle of NAFTA/WTO.
But this is a really difficult argument to make -since there are so many factors that effect our impressions-
that's it's somehow bound to partisanship