Free traders no more? GOP warms up to Trump’s use of tariffs

Associated Press ^ | June 7, 2019 | Lisa Mascaro

[Olog-hai]

Well, imagine getting such support two years ago. And then following up with a repeal of the 16^th Amendment. Too much to ask?

[familyop]

An agreement was signed with Mexico.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

[familyop]

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

[House Atreides]

“...indefinitely suspended...”
*************************
Only “suspended”....they can be resurrected should Mexico later be shown to be pulling a fast one.

Now all the COWARDLY RINOs can lie and say they supported the threat of tariffs all along. LIARS!

[magua]

Trump just doing the job Congress refused to do. All the Republicans can come out from under their desks.

[Intolerant in NJ]

Free traders no more? GOP warms up to Trump’s use of tariffs...take a deep breath and try to understand that Trump doesn't use tariffs as tariffs - he uses them as weapons to get the attention and cooperation of some very ornery people who otherwise would go on thumbing their noses at us as they have for decades - as the stick as in speak softly and carry a big stick......

[Olog-hai]

“Permit free trade between all nations regardless of communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.”

— Communist goal #4

This is the RINO definition of free trade; there is no mistake about that. Therefore, RINO = communist. (Not an affirmation of consequent fallacy.)

[monkeyshine]

Don’t allow these never-Trumpers to change the point.

These tariffs are not about protectionism, nor are they anti-free trade.

They are meant for diplomatic negotiating leverage and to encourage freer and fairer trade. It’s not for the revenues or to protect domestic producers - if it were the tariffs would not be against specific countries, they would be imposed on entire classes of imports from many or all countries.

This is not the first article I’ve seen where someone is using this “anti-free-trade” argument. That is just ignorant of (or to distract from) the issues that caused Trump to put them on in the first place.

[ConservativeMind]

Ted Cruz said no Republican senators supported Trump on the Mexican tariff.

Ted Cruz is one sick puppy. The Chamber of Commerce is more important to him than his constituents.

[Luke21]

Asspress loved NAFTA and GATT.

[bitt]

dirty RINOs “Oh, we were with DJT alllllll the way!”

[MrEdd]

There is a reason the drunken Irish Transvestite was competitive against Ted in the Senate election.

That reason is because this is who Ted really is.

[Olog-hai]

When you say “refused”, rest assured it was a refusal and a blatant one at that.

[tsomer]

He should have called them “economic sanctions.”
Nobody minds those.

[kvanbrunt2]

maybe this is the wall?

[Olog-hai]

Unless they’re on Iran of course.

[libh8er]

“backing off his threat”.

No, no, no..he didn’t back off anything, you dumb leftards. He won, they lost. And by extension you lost too because you wanted him to lose.

[datricker]

Its a sign of losing an argument and propaganda when the press starts playing word games like this. Most of what was described as free trade - was not. The whole underlying premise is garbage, this idea we had free trade and now we don't - I'm not sure how true that is.

It’s not for the revenues or to protect domestic producers - if it were the tariffs would not be against specific countries, they would be imposed on entire classes of imports from many or all countries.

I would have thought is common actually at least trying it out as a result of a campaign promise by some politician

[MotorCityBuck]

Exactly.

[JPJones]

“Only “suspended”....they can be resurrected should Mexico later be shown to be pulling a fast one.”

For a change, WE should be he ones pulling a fast one.

Put the tariffs in on Monday.