Post removed

[atreides1]

1. That's your only concern?

You're not concerned about the equal and civil rights of certain groups of Americans! You don't care about the idea of a Muslim registry, gays and women losing some rights, people of color having their civil rights denied!

The TPP is it for you?

You need to look at the big picture, not just the little bubble you've encased yourself in!!

[charlyvi]

4. Privatization of Medicare and Social Security

Obamacare repealed, pubic education dismantled, foreign policy upended, climate change ignored. But, hey, as long as the TPP fails, it's all good! (but he isn't repealing NAFTA)

[Miles Archer]

26. Stacking TPP against Social Security and Medicare, my attitude is "screw TPP."

Seriously, I will not be one of the people saying Trump's Presidency "wasn't that bad" if Medicare and Social Security are "privatized."

Those actions would be a death sentence to an untold number of seniors.

How the hell could we possibly witness that and say he "wasn't that bad?"

[MFM008]

2. Um....

The trade off isn't worth it.
Not even close.

[still_one]

3. did you see who has appointed on his "team"? Sorry, trump is exactly who he appears

to be, and anyone believing that "it isn't going to be that bad", is living in another world.

Sure, they are only "kidding" about repealing the ACA, and privatizing Medicare and Social Security. His Supreme Court picks are going to be a real "riot". I can hardly wait.

There is a reason financials, drugs, and oils are the sectors that have risen the most since the election

When someone says something, then appoints the most radical extreme people on his team, and you don't believe that he will be that bad?

Is this a sick joke?

[hamsterjill]

30. +1

How can anyone not see what this monster is? He doesn't even try to hide it.

People see what they want to see.

[liberal N proud]

5. It is going to be worse than any of us can imagine

[TheFrenchRazor]

6. Trump is a mixed bag on economics; we shall see what actually happens. nt

[rurallib]

7. Considering the way Trump lies, I wouldn't bet the TPP is off either

They'll make some cosmetic changes, sell it as a great deal for America and ram it through before we know what hit us.
Oh - and Trump will make millions and millions on it.

meanwhile we will lose healthcare and social security and public schools and net neutrality and there will be huge voter suppression .......

[mvd]

8. Stopping TPP is a good thing. BUT..

Trump is bad on almost everything else. He is anti-union, anti-higher minimum wage, generally for the corporation over the worker. So the TPP opposition would definitely be offset. He is every bit as bad as advertised - look at his nominations!

[TomCADem]

16. I Personally Thought TPP As An Issue Was Overblown...

...yet it dominated this Board during the primaries, and it along with NAFTA became one of the main issues that Trump hit Hillary with along with e-mails. You did not hear about all of the other issues that most traditional liberals care about such as reproductive rights, voting rights, tax policy, health care, etc. During the DNC primary, you had protesters shouting down BLM speakers with cries of "No TPP."

Put another way, was the attention given to TPP commensurate with its importance? Well, if so, then if Trump kills TPP, then is it an overall win? Sure we have rolled back healthcare, environmental protections, etc., but thank god he saved us from TPP and Hillary's e-mails.



I have had many debates with folks who thought free trade, er "trade deals," were the root of all evil and a tool for worker oppression. Well, in Trump, we will have a President who is as openly hostile to trade deals. It will be interesting to see if this hostility to trade translates into a better standard of living for Americans.

[mvd]

17. It will only translate if the other economic goals are progressive

We need to keep more jobs here, but also need workers to have good jobs and not be exploited.

[TomCADem]

20. I Am Fearful That Trump's Presidency Will Be Worse Than Dubya...

...but I hope that I am wrong, because if I am not, then we are talking about real suffering on a wide scale. Think of the thousands of people dead under Bush due to 9-11, the Iraq War, and Katrina. Think about the millions who lost their jobs and their homes in the Great Recession. Yet, Trump makes Dubya look like a genius.

That being said, I would happily give up any pleasure in being proven right, if it means that we do not have a repeat of the Dubya years or worse.

[mvd]

23. I am extremely worried also

You have freedom of the press issues here and also his instability could start wars. I think he may resign early out of being completely unfit for the job. We still get Pence, but we could gloat and 2020 should be an even easier win for us.

[ucrdem]

21. Overblown and completely misunderstood.

The scary baloney that Assange peddled on his disinfo site became the de facto truth of the entire deal, that and the snappy "NAFTA on steroids," which when you get down to it wouldn't have been a bad thing. Barack wanted it to happen to turbocharge his recovery and I believe it would have by opening markets for all kinds of US products, including agricultural, which should have had those rural swing state folks cheering, and right around election season too.

But it was not to be, sigh.

[mvd]

22. You and I will never agree about the TPP, sorry

I respect Obama's opinion, but I am not buying it. It is not the only issue though.

[stevenleser]

45. And its importance in terms of providing a trading block to

act as a counter to Chinese economic strength cannot be understated.

[DanTex]

9. Yes, it will. But one silver lining might be.

If Trump does actually impose tariffs and cancel free trade agreements, when it does nothing to raise middle and working class incomes, maybe we can get over the current isolationist fad.

[boston bean]

10. Is this DU???

[lonestarnot]

51. I really wonder about that.

[pbmus]

11. TPP has not been signed off , been some talk,

But we all know how much the Trumpster s words are really worth...

Kleptocracy

[JHan]

12. No it won't be a good thing - And none of our trade deals really resemble "Free trade"

They're all imperfect- I am in favor of trade, but often what's called " free trade" favor the big players in the market - the same big players who already benefit from subsidies and tax loopholes , maximizing their profits.

High tariffs will not fix this, instead high tariffs hurt everyone, trade barriers hurt all business. We've all benefited from cheap imported goods, and a wide assortment of goods. We are spoiled for choice , more than our grandparents ever were. All ending the TPP will do is reduce our competitiveness globally- China and Russia will fill the void in the asia-pacific basin. And China is already making in-roads in South America.

Manufacturing jobs aren't coming back and if they do come back, they will be outsourced to automation and if not, their expiry date is fast approaching.

One of the reasons Hillary didn't promise jobs in the way Trump did ( or even Sanders to an extent) is because she's well aware of this nor could she outright say "those jobs aren't coming back" because it would have been a huge political risk. But make no mistake it is the coming reality. Even jobs in the service sector will become automated. And we will be doubly hurt under Trump. Protectionist policies won't stop job scarcity, it will just trigger price inflation, hurt small businesses------ anddddddd on top of that there's Trump's belief that workers are paid too much. That means we won't see anything close to a discussion about UBI ( Universal Basic Income) or increases to the minimum wage - even if incrementally ( which I favor)

But this is an opportunity for Democrats to take the initiative and start talking about policies that will prepare us for the age of automation- not fall into Trump's "populist" trap. We should be the party that understands the economy now and the economy of the future and how best to navigate the rough waters ahead

[BainsBane]

13. The deals he negotiates will be far more pro-business and anti-worker

So if that's what you want, then he's not so bad.

[ucrdem]

14. Yanking TPP was always a RW agenda item.

It's not a free trade agreement, it's a complex regulatory framework and the Trumps of the world hate regulation.

Anyway I hope you're not trying to rationalize a vote for Trump because there's nothing but ruin down the road if he takes office.

[think]

19. The GOP was all for fast tracking it in congress. The House Democrats strongly opposed it

Only 28 House Democrats vote for it:


http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/245417-house-approves-fast-track-218-208-sending-bill-to-senate

[ucrdem]

24. That was after it had become a political football.

Pelosi was a nervous wreck during that vote and finally voted against it once it squeaked by. Why? Because the RW had politicized it with help from a few you'd think would know better:

[think]

27. There were 151 House Democrats strongly opposed as far back as 2013

http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/151-House-Democrats-Say-No-to-Fast-Track-Authority

Obama, many Senate Democrats, and the majority of the GOP were the ones for the TPP.

Only 23 House Republicans were against it.

The House Democrats wanted nothing to do with it from the git go....

[ucrdem]

33. Fast Track vote was after the deal was completed

and after Assange et al had been scaring the populace with death panel rumors for five years. Well, it worked.

[think]

34. The unions were against it, the environmental groups were against, the House Democrats against it

Doctors without Borders against it.

The only ones for it were the corporations and the GOP.

[ucrdem]

35. Yes the campaign was quite successful. RW disinfo campaigns often are.

See Nov. 8, 2016. .

[think]

36. Were all those groups duped? Were all those House Republicans voting for fast track doing it

as a ruse?

Come on....

[ucrdem]

39. When their public statements echo "concerns" manufactured by Assange

in language that echoes if not directly quotes wikileaks, I think it's fair to say that yes, they were duped.

[think]

42. These groups have their own lawyers and advisers who did their own due diligence.

The AFL-CIO, the Sierra Club, Doctors without Borders and the many other groups opposed understood very well what was in the TPP.

[ucrdem]

43. Possibly but their public statements didn't reflect it.

And defending embattled trade talks isn't in their mission statements anyway so why would they stick their necks out?

[think]

44. The TPP sucked. That's why.

http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/Trans-Pacific-Partnership-Free-Trade-Agreement-TPP/Ten-Critical-Problems-with-the-Trans-Pacific-Partnership

http://www.sierraclub.org/compass/2015/10/more-dozen-environmental-organizations-warn-trans-pacific-partnership-risks

[ucrdem]

46. I read it awhile back. I noticed two things:

1) it bore no resemblance whatsoever to the insidious monster that Asshat conjured up, and b) it reflected Barack Obama's interest in micro-legislation. I could not for the life of me find anything worrisome. Most of it seemed intent at getting US products into closed markets and cracking down on software piracy and other forms of IP theft. Okay, maybe that would hurt the flea market trade, if that's important to you, but it certainly didn't merit this:



or this:

[think]

52. The House Democrats, the unions, and the environmental groups all opposed it. Sometimes the obvious

is just that.

The TPP represented the interests of the over 600 corporate advisers who helped craft it.

Sure the TPP had some good parts in it but there was way too much that was just a corporate give away.

If the TPP was such a great thing all those House Democrats would have lined up with Obama on it. That didn't happen.

The GOP congress critters remained quiet but overwhelmingly voted for it.

When the majority of our Democratic congresspeople are against it and the majority of the Republicans are for it that should be a a warning sign that something isn't right.

[sheshe2]

18. TPP???????????????????

WTF?

He will have the nuclear codes, has stated that he wants to use them and you are talking about TPP?

[RonniePudding]

25. Seems like something that would play well at JPR

Fuck Trump and the horse he rode in on.

[ucrdem]

29. I believe the intention was ironic.

[Miles Archer]

28. I'm having a hard time believing that you actually posted this.

I won't even attempt to guess why you did, and I am assuming that things like Social Security and Medicare aren't on your radar at this point in life.

But to provide a direct response to your question:

No, it won't be that bad. It will be much worse than you can even fucking imagine.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

[TwilightZone]

31. In exit polls, trade wasn't even in the top 10.

"It cannot seriously be disputed that TPP and NAFTA were the dominant issues that concerned Americans."

Not only can it be disputed, it is demonstrably false. Terrorism, immigration, economy, and foreign policy were the top four.

Trump won the first two; Clinton won the last two.

[think]

32. Trump is a con man. Look at the Carrier deal.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/06/he-got-up-there-and-lied-his-a-off-carrier-union-leader-on-trumps-big-deal/?utm_term=.bc3992731013

[ucrdem]

37. Trump said NAFTA was terrible, the worst, a catastrophe.

Many seem to like being conned.

[think]

38. as a candidate Obama promised to renegotiate NAFTA and invite the unions to the table.

[ucrdem]

40. Canada and Mexico are TPP signatories.

https://ustr.gov/tpp/

He kept that promise. As for unions, It appears that he promised that labor would have a seat at the table, and it apparently does, per the aflcio:

http://www.aflcio.org/Issues/Trade/Fast-Track-Legislation/Labor-s-So-Called-Seat-at-the-Table-at-TPP-Negotiations

Their beef might be perfectly legitimate but I don't see it as a broken promise

[TwilightZone]

41. He reversed his position on NAFTA because of the global financial meltdown.

He felt that it was more important to shore up the economy rather than further limit it in the midst of a financial crisis.

It can certainly be argued that he should have revisited it later in his administration, but in the context of '09, it was a catch-22. Risking further meltdown was probably worse than maintaining the status quo, but your mileage may vary.

[tandem5]

47. I skipped the threads that had "TPP" in the title during the primary. Why didn't I skip this one?

sad face:

[DonCoquixote]

48. so as long as a issue youc are about is addressed

to hell with the rest of us, right?

Ladies and gents, I have here, the very mindset that allowed trump to steal the election!

[SaschaHM]

49. Hmm...

I feel like the point of this post was missed by a lot of people.

[Dream Girl]

50. You must be a straight white Christian male.