Trump lays out 7 point plan to protect American jobs

[Preacher]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

 

[320 Years of History]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan that should have been presented months and months ago, such as during the nominating convention, which itself was a year after the candidate first announced, which was in turn two years after the candidate indicated an interest in running.

 

[Norman]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan it is.

It takes you more than two weeks to read seven points?

That does sound like the common Hillary voter...

 

[owebo]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan that should have been presented months and months ago, such as during the nominating convention, which itself was a year after the candidate first announced, which was in turn two years after the candidate indicated an interest in running.

It's nice that he's getting started early, being that he's already won.....

 

[Lakhota]

Funny. Trump can't even run his campaign - let alone protect American jobs or anything else. He's just a Molotov cocktail for pissed off voters.

 

[owebo]

Funny. Trump can't even run his campaign - let alone protect American jobs or anything else. He's just a Molotov cocktail for pissed off voters.

Yawn....

 

[320 Years of History]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan it is.

It takes you more than two weeks to read seven points?

That does sound like the common Hillary voter...

It's not about how long it takes me to read them. It's about the plan's level of comprehensiveness.

Remember, Trump is not a politician and he has no public governance experience. Just as with someone whom one might interview for any job and whom one knows lacks experience, the bar is higher on that person having to demonstrate that they they truly know well the things that will face them were they to get the job. It'd be different were he Bernie Sanders or most of his GOP competitors from the primary. I'd have the same higher expectation re: the plans presented were it Mrs. Fiorina or Dr. Carson who won the nomination.

 

[owebo]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan it is.

It takes you more than two weeks to read seven points?

That does sound like the common Hillary voter...

It's not about how long it takes me to read them. It's about the plan's level of comprehensiveness.

Remember, Trump is not a politician and he has no public governance experience. Just as with someone whom one might interview for any job and whom one knows lacks experience, the bar is higher on that person having to demonstrate that they they truly know well the things that will face them were they to get the job. It'd be different were he Bernie Sanders or most of his GOP competitors from the primary. I'd have the same higher expectation re: the plans presented were it Mrs. Fiorina or Dr. Carson who won the nomination.

Did you vote Obama?

 

[Norman]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan it is.

It takes you more than two weeks to read seven points?

That does sound like the common Hillary voter...

It's not about how long it takes me to read them. It's about the plan's level of comprehensiveness.

Remember, Trump is not a politician and he has no public governance experience. Just as with someone whom one might interview for any job and whom one knows lacks experience, the bar is higher on that person having to demonstrate that they they truly know well the things that will face them were they to get the job. It'd be different were he Bernie Sanders or most of his GOP competitors from the primary. I'd have the same higher expectation re: the plans presented were it Mrs. Fiorina or Dr. Carson who won the nomination.

What comprehensiveness? These are very simple things he is talking about. Sanders wanted to have the federal government take over the entire education system, and no questions asked... Now that Trump wants to withdraw from a treaty "HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT???", "EXPERIENCE??"

What a moron...

 

[Syriusly]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

Renegotiate NAFTA how?
TPP doesn't apply to China but okay- Trump's plans will stop losing our jobs to Australia?
Direct his commerce secretary and the United States Trade Representative to "use every tool...to end foreign trade abuses that hurt the American worker." That is already the USTR's job.
Lifting restrictions on coal and oil production? When oil prices and coal prices are at historic lows?

 

[320 Years of History]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan it is.

It takes you more than two weeks to read seven points?

That does sound like the common Hillary voter...

It's not about how long it takes me to read them. It's about the plan's level of comprehensiveness.

Remember, Trump is not a politician and he has no public governance experience. Just as with someone whom one might interview for any job and whom one knows lacks experience, the bar is higher on that person having to demonstrate that they they truly know well the things that will face them were they to get the job. It'd be different were he Bernie Sanders or most of his GOP competitors from the primary. I'd have the same higher expectation re: the plans presented were it Mrs. Fiorina or Dr. Carson who won the nomination.

What comprehensiveness? These are very simple things he is talking about. Sanders wanted to have the federal government take over the entire education system, and no questions asked... Now that Trump wants to withdraw from a treaty "HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT???"

What a moron...

Okay, let's go with withdrawing from a treaty.

• What are the impacts of our doing so, not just on us, but also on the other parties to the treaty?
  • Domestic and international economic impacts?
  • Domestic and international political impacts?
  • Domestic and international social impacts?
  • Domestic and international legal impacts?
  • As a result of the withdrawal, who will be the winners? The losers? As individuals, as classes of individuals?
  • Given the foreseeable negative impacts, what mitigations are proposed to counter them?

As I said, given that Trump has zero governance experience, I want to know that he's considered those questions and impacts and has sound answers/approaches for dealing with them. I'm not going to put my vote behind him when I don't have any idea of whether those things have crossed his mind, and I'm certainly not of a mind to trust him if he doesn't, unlike other politicians, present a clear and cogent case for his proposal. Indeed, the thing that should distinguish a "non politician" from a career politician is that the former be vastly more candid with the American people. As we all know, "candor" is not at all Trump's "middle name," just as it's not that of myriad career politicians, but at least we know they do have experience addressing and considering the impacts of their proposals.

 

[Norman]

Trump Details 7-Point Plan to 'Protect American Jobs'

I just don't understand how ANYONE can be against this? It baffles me. Is he crass and vulgar yep sure is....but his words don't worry me anywhere near as much as Clinton's actions!

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan it is.

It takes you more than two weeks to read seven points?

That does sound like the common Hillary voter...

It's not about how long it takes me to read them. It's about the plan's level of comprehensiveness.

Remember, Trump is not a politician and he has no public governance experience. Just as with someone whom one might interview for any job and whom one knows lacks experience, the bar is higher on that person having to demonstrate that they they truly know well the things that will face them were they to get the job. It'd be different were he Bernie Sanders or most of his GOP competitors from the primary. I'd have the same higher expectation re: the plans presented were it Mrs. Fiorina or Dr. Carson who won the nomination.

What comprehensiveness? These are very simple things he is talking about. Sanders wanted to have the federal government take over the entire education system, and no questions asked... Now that Trump wants to withdraw from a treaty "HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT???"

What a moron...

Okay, let's go with withdrawing from a treaty.

• What are the impacts of our doing so, not just on us, but also on the other parties to the treaty?
  • Domestic and international economic impacts?
  • Domestic and international political impacts?
  • Domestic and international social impacts?
  • Domestic and international legal impacts?
  • As a result of the withdrawal, who will be the winners? The losers? As individuals, as classes of individuals?
  • Given the foreseeable negative impacts, what mitigations are proposed to counter them?

As I said, given that Trump has zero governance experience, I want to know that he's considered those questions and impacts and has sound answers/approaches for dealing with them. I'm not going to put my vote behind him when I don't have any idea of whether those things have crossed his mind, and I'm certainly not of a mind to trust him if he doesn't, unlike other politicians, present a clear and cogent case for his proposal. Indeed, the thing that should distinguish a "non politician" from a career politician is that the former be vastly more candid with the American people. As we all know, "candor" is not at all Trump's "middle name," just as it's not that of myriad career politicians, but at least we know they do have experience addressing and considering the impacts of their proposals.

I didn't know that answering all those questions was a requirement in a policy discussion. Which other politician do you hold to this standard? Oh, you don't...

No one even asked a question in Germany before importing hordes of immigrants. And now we know the effects.... Where are the questions regarding Clinton's similar policies? Oh, they aren't...

Clinton is scandal after scandal so what she has is worse than experience. She is known to be incapable of doing the job, let alone considering the impacts of her disastrous policies.

 

[320 Years of History]

I don't know what the plan says, but I do know that two weeks before Election Day is too late to introduce whatever Presidential-level (assuming it's even got the degree of detail one would expect of such a thing) plan it is.

It takes you more than two weeks to read seven points?

That does sound like the common Hillary voter...

It's not about how long it takes me to read them. It's about the plan's level of comprehensiveness.

Remember, Trump is not a politician and he has no public governance experience. Just as with someone whom one might interview for any job and whom one knows lacks experience, the bar is higher on that person having to demonstrate that they they truly know well the things that will face them were they to get the job. It'd be different were he Bernie Sanders or most of his GOP competitors from the primary. I'd have the same higher expectation re: the plans presented were it Mrs. Fiorina or Dr. Carson who won the nomination.

What comprehensiveness? These are very simple things he is talking about. Sanders wanted to have the federal government take over the entire education system, and no questions asked... Now that Trump wants to withdraw from a treaty "HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT???"

What a moron...

Okay, let's go with withdrawing from a treaty.

• What are the impacts of our doing so, not just on us, but also on the other parties to the treaty?
  • Domestic and international economic impacts?
  • Domestic and international political impacts?
  • Domestic and international social impacts?
  • Domestic and international legal impacts?
  • As a result of the withdrawal, who will be the winners? The losers? As individuals, as classes of individuals?
  • Given the foreseeable negative impacts, what mitigations are proposed to counter them?

As I said, given that Trump has zero governance experience, I want to know that he's considered those questions and impacts and has sound answers/approaches for dealing with them. I'm not going to put my vote behind him when I don't have any idea of whether those things have crossed his mind, and I'm certainly not of a mind to trust him if he doesn't, unlike other politicians, present a clear and cogent case for his proposal. Indeed, the thing that should distinguish a "non politician" from a career politician is that the former be vastly more candid with the American people. As we all know, "candor" is not at all Trump's "middle name," just as it's not that of myriad career politicians, but at least we know they do have experience addressing and considering the impacts of their proposals.

I didn't know that answering all those questions was a requirement in a policy discussion. Which other politician do you hold to this standard?

No one even asked a question in Germany before importing hordes of immigrants. And now we know the effects.... Where are the questions regarding Clinton's similar policies?

Clinton is scandal after scandal so what she has is worse than experience. She is incapable of doing the job.

Red:
Already answered. Also see blue text above.

 

[Norman]

It takes you more than two weeks to read seven points?

That does sound like the common Hillary voter...

It's not about how long it takes me to read them. It's about the plan's level of comprehensiveness.

Remember, Trump is not a politician and he has no public governance experience. Just as with someone whom one might interview for any job and whom one knows lacks experience, the bar is higher on that person having to demonstrate that they they truly know well the things that will face them were they to get the job. It'd be different were he Bernie Sanders or most of his GOP competitors from the primary. I'd have the same higher expectation re: the plans presented were it Mrs. Fiorina or Dr. Carson who won the nomination.

What comprehensiveness? These are very simple things he is talking about. Sanders wanted to have the federal government take over the entire education system, and no questions asked... Now that Trump wants to withdraw from a treaty "HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT???"

What a moron...

Okay, let's go with withdrawing from a treaty.

• What are the impacts of our doing so, not just on us, but also on the other parties to the treaty?
  • Domestic and international economic impacts?
  • Domestic and international political impacts?
  • Domestic and international social impacts?
  • Domestic and international legal impacts?
  • As a result of the withdrawal, who will be the winners? The losers? As individuals, as classes of individuals?
  • Given the foreseeable negative impacts, what mitigations are proposed to counter them?

As I said, given that Trump has zero governance experience, I want to know that he's considered those questions and impacts and has sound answers/approaches for dealing with them. I'm not going to put my vote behind him when I don't have any idea of whether those things have crossed his mind, and I'm certainly not of a mind to trust him if he doesn't, unlike other politicians, present a clear and cogent case for his proposal. Indeed, the thing that should distinguish a "non politician" from a career politician is that the former be vastly more candid with the American people. As we all know, "candor" is not at all Trump's "middle name," just as it's not that of myriad career politicians, but at least we know they do have experience addressing and considering the impacts of their proposals.

I didn't know that answering all those questions was a requirement in a policy discussion. Which other politician do you hold to this standard?

No one even asked a question in Germany before importing hordes of immigrants. And now we know the effects.... Where are the questions regarding Clinton's similar policies?

Clinton is scandal after scandal so what she has is worse than experience. She is incapable of doing the job.

Red:
Already answered.

So basically, you demand more from Trump, because he is Trump. Apparently the "experienced" politicians always consider all the impacts of their policies (wait, they don't have a clue, "You can keep your plan")

You are a stupid, dumb racist, simple as that.

 

[320 Years of History]

It's not about how long it takes me to read them. It's about the plan's level of comprehensiveness.

Remember, Trump is not a politician and he has no public governance experience. Just as with someone whom one might interview for any job and whom one knows lacks experience, the bar is higher on that person having to demonstrate that they they truly know well the things that will face them were they to get the job. It'd be different were he Bernie Sanders or most of his GOP competitors from the primary. I'd have the same higher expectation re: the plans presented were it Mrs. Fiorina or Dr. Carson who won the nomination.

What comprehensiveness? These are very simple things he is talking about. Sanders wanted to have the federal government take over the entire education system, and no questions asked... Now that Trump wants to withdraw from a treaty "HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT???"

What a moron...

Okay, let's go with withdrawing from a treaty.

• What are the impacts of our doing so, not just on us, but also on the other parties to the treaty?
  • Domestic and international economic impacts?
  • Domestic and international political impacts?
  • Domestic and international social impacts?
  • Domestic and international legal impacts?
  • As a result of the withdrawal, who will be the winners? The losers? As individuals, as classes of individuals?
  • Given the foreseeable negative impacts, what mitigations are proposed to counter them?

As I said, given that Trump has zero governance experience, I want to know that he's considered those questions and impacts and has sound answers/approaches for dealing with them. I'm not going to put my vote behind him when I don't have any idea of whether those things have crossed his mind, and I'm certainly not of a mind to trust him if he doesn't, unlike other politicians, present a clear and cogent case for his proposal. Indeed, the thing that should distinguish a "non politician" from a career politician is that the former be vastly more candid with the American people. As we all know, "candor" is not at all Trump's "middle name," just as it's not that of myriad career politicians, but at least we know they do have experience addressing and considering the impacts of their proposals.

I didn't know that answering all those questions was a requirement in a policy discussion. Which other politician do you hold to this standard?

No one even asked a question in Germany before importing hordes of immigrants. And now we know the effects.... Where are the questions regarding Clinton's similar policies?

Clinton is scandal after scandal so what she has is worse than experience. She is incapable of doing the job.

Red:
Already answered.

So basically, you demand more from Trump, because he is Trump. Apparently the "experienced" politicians always consider all the impacts of their policies (wait, they don't have a clue, "You can keep your plan")

You are a stupid, dumb racist, simple as that.

Come on, paraphrase my remarks accurately or stop replying to them. It's not at all because he's Trump. It's because he's got no experience with public governance. I made that clear every time I discussed it here. I even offered examples of two others to whom I'd apply the same standard.

I don't care if it's Trump or anyone else having no experience in national or state governance. It could even be experience whereby the person goofed, at least they have some experience and will have learned from their governing mistakes just as everyone else does.

 

[guno]

the uneducated unskilled rube jobs aren't coming back

 

[Norman]

What comprehensiveness? These are very simple things he is talking about. Sanders wanted to have the federal government take over the entire education system, and no questions asked... Now that Trump wants to withdraw from a treaty "HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO DO THAT???"

What a moron...

Okay, let's go with withdrawing from a treaty.

• What are the impacts of our doing so, not just on us, but also on the other parties to the treaty?
  • Domestic and international economic impacts?
  • Domestic and international political impacts?
  • Domestic and international social impacts?
  • Domestic and international legal impacts?
  • As a result of the withdrawal, who will be the winners? The losers? As individuals, as classes of individuals?
  • Given the foreseeable negative impacts, what mitigations are proposed to counter them?

As I said, given that Trump has zero governance experience, I want to know that he's considered those questions and impacts and has sound answers/approaches for dealing with them. I'm not going to put my vote behind him when I don't have any idea of whether those things have crossed his mind, and I'm certainly not of a mind to trust him if he doesn't, unlike other politicians, present a clear and cogent case for his proposal. Indeed, the thing that should distinguish a "non politician" from a career politician is that the former be vastly more candid with the American people. As we all know, "candor" is not at all Trump's "middle name," just as it's not that of myriad career politicians, but at least we know they do have experience addressing and considering the impacts of their proposals.

I didn't know that answering all those questions was a requirement in a policy discussion. Which other politician do you hold to this standard?

No one even asked a question in Germany before importing hordes of immigrants. And now we know the effects.... Where are the questions regarding Clinton's similar policies?

Clinton is scandal after scandal so what she has is worse than experience. She is incapable of doing the job.

Red:
Already answered.

So basically, you demand more from Trump, because he is Trump. Apparently the "experienced" politicians always consider all the impacts of their policies (wait, they don't have a clue, "You can keep your plan")

You are a stupid, dumb racist, simple as that.

Come on, paraphrase my remarks accurately or stop replying to them. It's not at all because he's Trump. It's because he's got no experience with public governance. I made that clear every time I discussed it here. I even offered examples of two others to whom I'd apply the same standard.

I don't care if it's Trump or anyone else having no experience in national or state governance. It could even be experience whereby the person goofed, at least they have some experience and will have learned from their governing mistakes just as everyone else does.

Yes, Hillary has learned so much from her mistakes! That's what her scandal after scandal proves indeed...

You have no case, at all. These politicians primarily worry how to get votes, they are no policy experts, and never will be.

 

[320 Years of History]

Okay, let's go with withdrawing from a treaty.

• What are the impacts of our doing so, not just on us, but also on the other parties to the treaty?
  • Domestic and international economic impacts?
  • Domestic and international political impacts?
  • Domestic and international social impacts?
  • Domestic and international legal impacts?
  • As a result of the withdrawal, who will be the winners? The losers? As individuals, as classes of individuals?
  • Given the foreseeable negative impacts, what mitigations are proposed to counter them?

As I said, given that Trump has zero governance experience, I want to know that he's considered those questions and impacts and has sound answers/approaches for dealing with them. I'm not going to put my vote behind him when I don't have any idea of whether those things have crossed his mind, and I'm certainly not of a mind to trust him if he doesn't, unlike other politicians, present a clear and cogent case for his proposal. Indeed, the thing that should distinguish a "non politician" from a career politician is that the former be vastly more candid with the American people. As we all know, "candor" is not at all Trump's "middle name," just as it's not that of myriad career politicians, but at least we know they do have experience addressing and considering the impacts of their proposals.

I didn't know that answering all those questions was a requirement in a policy discussion. Which other politician do you hold to this standard?

No one even asked a question in Germany before importing hordes of immigrants. And now we know the effects.... Where are the questions regarding Clinton's similar policies?

Clinton is scandal after scandal so what she has is worse than experience. She is incapable of doing the job.

Red:
Already answered.

So basically, you demand more from Trump, because he is Trump. Apparently the "experienced" politicians always consider all the impacts of their policies (wait, they don't have a clue, "You can keep your plan")

You are a stupid, dumb racist, simple as that.

Come on, paraphrase my remarks accurately or stop replying to them. It's not at all because he's Trump. It's because he's got no experience with public governance. I made that clear every time I discussed it here. I even offered examples of two others to whom I'd apply the same standard.

I don't care if it's Trump or anyone else having no experience in national or state governance. It could even be experience whereby the person goofed, at least they have some experience and will have learned from their governing mistakes just as everyone else does.

Yes, Hillary has learned so much from her mistakes! That's what the scandal after scandal proves indeed...

You have no case, at all...

Oh, Lord. There it is. The very instant a Trumkin no longer can defend Trump, they change the object of the discussion to someone else. Well, I'm not going to be a party to that. I'm happy to stay on topic and discuss the sufficiency and completeness, or lack thereof, of Trump's plan as that is the topic of the thread. If you want to introduce a new person to discuss, fine, but you'll have that discussion with someone else.

We began this discussion when you asserted that withdrawing from a treaty is a simple thing. I showed that it's not and that there is a lot more to consider than merely withdrawing from it. We even have a real-world example of the complexity of doing that: Brexit. Go take a look at the level of detail the Brits covered in the runup to the Brexit vote. Then compare it with what Trump has shared about his treaty withdrawal proposals. I also expressed very clearly why I require more detail up front of Trump, or any other would be public policy novice. If you have no topically direct and cogent refutation of those points, we're done.

 

[Norman]

I didn't know that answering all those questions was a requirement in a policy discussion. Which other politician do you hold to this standard?

No one even asked a question in Germany before importing hordes of immigrants. And now we know the effects.... Where are the questions regarding Clinton's similar policies?

Clinton is scandal after scandal so what she has is worse than experience. She is incapable of doing the job.

Red:
Already answered.

So basically, you demand more from Trump, because he is Trump. Apparently the "experienced" politicians always consider all the impacts of their policies (wait, they don't have a clue, "You can keep your plan")

You are a stupid, dumb racist, simple as that.

Come on, paraphrase my remarks accurately or stop replying to them. It's not at all because he's Trump. It's because he's got no experience with public governance. I made that clear every time I discussed it here. I even offered examples of two others to whom I'd apply the same standard.

I don't care if it's Trump or anyone else having no experience in national or state governance. It could even be experience whereby the person goofed, at least they have some experience and will have learned from their governing mistakes just as everyone else does.

Yes, Hillary has learned so much from her mistakes! That's what the scandal after scandal proves indeed...

You have no case, at all...

Oh, Lord. There it is. The very instant a Trumkin no longer can defend Trump, they change the object of the discussion to someone else. Well, I'm not going to be a party to that. I'm happy to stay on topic and discuss the sufficiency and completeness, or lack thereof, of Trump's plan as that is the topic of the thread. If you want to introduce a new person to discuss, fine, but you'll have that discussion with someone else.

We began this discussion when you asserted that withdrawing from a treaty is a simple thing. I showed that it's not and that there is a lot more to consider than merely withdrawing from it. We even have a real-world example of the complexity of doing that: Brexit. Go take a look at the level of detail the Brits covered in the runup to the Brexit vote. Then compare it with what Trump has shared about his treaty withdrawal proposals. I also expressed very clearly why I require more detail up front of Trump, or any other would be public policy novice. If you have no topically direct and cogent refutation of those points, we're done.

Withdrawing from the treaty is a simple thing... duh...

You just want to bring an extremely detailed analysis into it, something you didn't ask for when entering the treaty. That because "Trump's experience"... laughable. Either talk about the policy as usually, or get out of here. Trump's experience has nothing to do with the matter.

 

[320 Years of History]

Red:
Already answered.

So basically, you demand more from Trump, because he is Trump. Apparently the "experienced" politicians always consider all the impacts of their policies (wait, they don't have a clue, "You can keep your plan")

You are a stupid, dumb racist, simple as that.

Come on, paraphrase my remarks accurately or stop replying to them. It's not at all because he's Trump. It's because he's got no experience with public governance. I made that clear every time I discussed it here. I even offered examples of two others to whom I'd apply the same standard.

I don't care if it's Trump or anyone else having no experience in national or state governance. It could even be experience whereby the person goofed, at least they have some experience and will have learned from their governing mistakes just as everyone else does.

Yes, Hillary has learned so much from her mistakes! That's what the scandal after scandal proves indeed...

You have no case, at all...

Oh, Lord. There it is. The very instant a Trumkin no longer can defend Trump, they change the object of the discussion to someone else. Well, I'm not going to be a party to that. I'm happy to stay on topic and discuss the sufficiency and completeness, or lack thereof, of Trump's plan as that is the topic of the thread. If you want to introduce a new person to discuss, fine, but you'll have that discussion with someone else.

We began this discussion when you asserted that withdrawing from a treaty is a simple thing. I showed that it's not and that there is a lot more to consider than merely withdrawing from it. We even have a real-world example of the complexity of doing that: Brexit. Go take a look at the level of detail the Brits covered in the runup to the Brexit vote. Then compare it with what Trump has shared about his treaty withdrawal proposals. I also expressed very clearly why I require more detail up front of Trump, or any other would be public policy novice. If you have no topically direct and cogent refutation of those points, we're done.

Withdrawing from the treaty is a simple thing... duh...

You just want to bring an extremely detailed analysis into it, something you didn't ask for when entering the treaty. That because "Trump's experience"... laughable. Either talk about the policy as usually, or get out of here. Trump's experience has nothing to do with the matter.

Blue:
Trump's lack of experience has everything to do with it. That shortcoming I suspect even goes so far that I doubt he's actually read the terms of the treaty he proposes cancelling. Why do I think that? Because to date, he's not mentioned so much as one term of any treaty and with which he takes exception. He talks about renegotiating our trade deals, but he's still not identified the terms that he finds so objectionable that he feels they need to be scrapped and renegotiated. Even ignoring the fact that he's not addressed impacts of the cancellation, it's hardly too much to ask that he identify what terms of, say, NAFTA disconcert him.

Red:
Yeah, right. Ask the Brits who are withdrawing from the EU whether that's so. That you'd seriously and in public even say that indicates you don't know 10th of what it is you're talking about. As I said before, we're done. I mean it this time.