protectionist
Diamond Member
- Oct 20, 2013
- 58,623
- 19,343
- 2,250
We've probably all seen the latest Clinton attack ad against Donald Trump. The one bragging about the clothes that is Made in USA. It shows the owner of a shirt factory making shirts in America. The guy says >> “Donald Trump’s brand of shirts come from China, his suits from Mexico, his coats from India,” He then says >> “Trump’s products have been made in 12 other countries because he says there’s no place in America that he can make them."
Very effective ad. It has one problem though. It's truthfulness is highly questionable. By this time, we all know the Clintons don't hesitate to lie to get what they want. Well, actually for many years, Donald Trump has been licensing HIS NAME to companies both in the US, and outside of it. They pay a one-time fee or royalties to just put Trump's name on their products.
The products are NOT "Trump products" as the TV ad claims. They are companies owned by others, not Trump, they have been in those overseas countries all along, and no American workers have ever had any connection to the company - no outsourcing.
But the Clintons have already gotten what they want. Millions of voters walking around thinking Trump is a hypocrite who outsources while condemning outsourcing. It also a clever DEFLECTION on Hillary's part since she is a pure GLOBALIST, and her 25 year long involvement & support of outsourcing both international and domestic (AKA "immigration) is well established, and a major strike against her in this presidential campaign.
Without a smear job on Trump (best defense - good offense), Trump's nationalism, opposition to illegal immigration (domestic outsourcing), H1B visas (more domestic outsourcing) and tough stance against international outsourcing (lowering corporate tax rate to 15% & placing tariffs on imports), would put Hillary in a very perilous and vulnerable position politically. I'm sure the Clinton campaign people know this, and thus the willingness of them to run what should be a very controversial , if not damaging to them, TV ad.
Another thing giving them the confidence to go ahead and run the risk, is the overwhelming pro-Hillary bias of the media, which so far hasn't said a word about the fraudulent nature of the ad, has generally accepted it as true, and the internet is flooded with articles from liberal organs touting it as true.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveol...s-create-a-brand-and-license-it/#2a3f258e26e7
How much does the Trump brand pay?
The real way Donald Trump makes money
Very effective ad. It has one problem though. It's truthfulness is highly questionable. By this time, we all know the Clintons don't hesitate to lie to get what they want. Well, actually for many years, Donald Trump has been licensing HIS NAME to companies both in the US, and outside of it. They pay a one-time fee or royalties to just put Trump's name on their products.
The products are NOT "Trump products" as the TV ad claims. They are companies owned by others, not Trump, they have been in those overseas countries all along, and no American workers have ever had any connection to the company - no outsourcing.
But the Clintons have already gotten what they want. Millions of voters walking around thinking Trump is a hypocrite who outsources while condemning outsourcing. It also a clever DEFLECTION on Hillary's part since she is a pure GLOBALIST, and her 25 year long involvement & support of outsourcing both international and domestic (AKA "immigration) is well established, and a major strike against her in this presidential campaign.
Without a smear job on Trump (best defense - good offense), Trump's nationalism, opposition to illegal immigration (domestic outsourcing), H1B visas (more domestic outsourcing) and tough stance against international outsourcing (lowering corporate tax rate to 15% & placing tariffs on imports), would put Hillary in a very perilous and vulnerable position politically. I'm sure the Clinton campaign people know this, and thus the willingness of them to run what should be a very controversial , if not damaging to them, TV ad.
Another thing giving them the confidence to go ahead and run the risk, is the overwhelming pro-Hillary bias of the media, which so far hasn't said a word about the fraudulent nature of the ad, has generally accepted it as true, and the internet is flooded with articles from liberal organs touting it as true.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/steveol...s-create-a-brand-and-license-it/#2a3f258e26e7
How much does the Trump brand pay?
The real way Donald Trump makes money
