Trump is going to win.


Read the speech. Read it all.

Update: Right on cue, the US Chamber of Commerce goes ballistic. Main St. versus Wall St.

The target demographic.


Trump has a long way to go before he wins the election, although he may be helped by Brexit. But as far as economic policies go, he's nothing but a national socialist enemy of free trade and free markets. If he really wanted to help U.S. workers, he would pledge to streamline trade and remove barriers to the free movement of goods and services across borders instead of promising to erect more of them. He rightly objects to the regulation and tax burden placed on U.S. businesses, (which is the real reason why companies move production offshore) but offers no specifics as to what taxes and regulations he would amend or repeal. Not that this makes Hillary a better choice, but Trump or Hillary is not much of a choice in any event.

...or even better, WATCH and HEAR Trump's speech at the YouTube link below.
He starts his speech about 10 minutes into the video - he's going to win, BIG.

Watch Live Streaming here - Istanbul Ataturk Airport Attack

I can't fathom why one would want Trump to win, much less expect him to win. We haven't seen a GOP candidate this weak in a long, long time. As to this particular speech, I congratulate the speechwriter for their wordsmithing. Its too bad Trump has no positions of his own to market.

Holy crap Dennis, what bigoted and uninformed comments. I find it hard to believe you actually read or listened to any of Trump's speeches or positions.

Drink some more Kool-Aid, just don't spike it this time, it makes you meander into intellectual ineptitude.

Seriously, the thought of Hillary isn't enough?

I just hope President Trump understands that Canada is also a victim of freer trade. I've wondered why the more trade we do, the poorer we get, and how is that a good thing. Canada's manufacturing has wholesale packed up and left just like the US.

And isn't that what the NDP and all the OWS types in Canada were complaining about? The Free Trade agreement. They also want NAFTA gone. Perhaps it is better that it comes down to bi-lateral agreements between countries that are in a similar position. We may be 'partnering' with Asian countries on trade but realistically we can't compete because a country like China uses slave labour and child labour to make things. Same goes for most of the other Asian countries....slave or child labour that we can't compete with. That's not a partnership that's surrender to their economic reality, which we can't compete with.

Because Hillary Clinton is a patently evil human being. She is an outright liar and a thief. Of course idiots such as you and other marxists/socialists don't think so because you're uneducated and...frankly....quite stupid.

You need to go to educate yourself on how Hillary Clinton supported a rapist as Governor and then as President and made it her life work to destroy and humiliate the dozens of women who accused her scumbag husband of sexual assault and rape. You need to educate yourself about how she allowed a US ambassador and three courageous soldiers to die in Libya.

If you don't educate yourself on what this despicable thing has done in her life then you should just STFU forever because your stupidity is frightening and dangerous.

What's bigoted about what I said? Trump's philosophy, for the most part, conforms to the philosophy of national socialism; i.e. restrictions on trade, commerce and economic freedom allegedly for the sake of the "nation". It's a collectivist, not an individualist, philosophy, which is why I disagree with Trump.

I want him to win, but this is disingenuous.

Manufacturing jobs left parts of America -- not all of -- because greedy, arrogant union workers kept voting themselves raises and platinum benefits packages they didn't deserve.

I grew up in Hamilton. There were factory workers in my family. They are overpaid for the work they do and they know it. It isn't brain surgery.

If these "jobs come back," who will take them? All I heard growing up was how horrible these (well paying) jobs supposedly were. How they couldn't wait to retire or win the lottery. Now I'm supposed to believe that people who are even more lazy and entitled than they were in the 70s are going to work in factories?? You can't get them to work in Wal-Mart or McDonalds -- that's beneath them.

I'm expected to believe that a populace that pretty much refuses to mow its own lawns, pick its own crops and raise its own children is going to line up to work on an assembly line in shifts.

Most of what Trump says in his speech, especially the sentiments regarding trade, is something that you routinely hear from socialist parties this side of the border. Why is this guy considered a Republican at all?

I notice Trump uses the communist term 'workers' to describe employees. Hopefully not intentionally...
We shall see if what he says and what he does are the same thing...

What's bigoted about what I said? Trump's philosophy, for the most part, conforms to the philosophy of national socialism; i.e. restrictions on trade, commerce and economic freedom allegedly for the sake of the "nation".

Yeah, let's keep buying that cheap slave produced material, while they keep our competing products out.
Yeah, lets have free trade for our competitors and unfair trade for us.

So long as people get their cheap gadgets, they're happy. Even if the slaves are jumping out of the windows of the factories that produce the gadgets.

Have you forgotten? 'Bigoted' now means "I don't like what you said, but I'm too cowardly to argue facts so shut up".

Otherwise, I mean, hell - what exactly would it be bigotry against? White people? Men? Bad combovers?

A bewildered nation waits and watches for an explanation.

With no disrespect intended, it's a hell of a lot easier to haul your sorry ass to a !00K/yr job with benefits and a pension than it is to sing the company song at WallMart for twelve bucks an hour.

The guys I knew from "the mountain" back in the day may have called themselves "stelco scumbags" and hated the work, but they liked their houses, cars and holidays...and they could easily afford all and still have savings.

Fixing that by moving manufacturing back here works in theory, but only in theory.

You have a large swath of the country that's grown up being fed entitlements and never had to work or, to be frank, grow up. Even if the regulatory hurdles were cleared and we started building factories, what do you think happens when someone tries to get them to work there? What do you think happens when they face their 'benefits' being cut off if they *don't* work?

Kathy Shaidle noted this problem above. Look at France for an extreme example - where it's difficult for companies to get their employees to work more than a few hours a day. The rest of the day they spend lounging around and drinking (and being paid for it). "It's the French way", they say. This is why a rich French industrialist laughed in the government's face when they tried to get him to open a factory there.

Even stripped of regulatory hurdles, the imposition of a minimum wage, mandatory benefits, etc. - which I think we can both agree that Trump will not manage, and likely not even attempt - it won't take very long for manufacturers to realize that opening factories in America is a losing proposition.

The lack of manufacturing jobs is a symptom, and treating the symptom is not going to solve anything.

Yes, much easier to reap the benefits of slave labour...making the economics of doing business here even less profitable.

Circle the drain even quicker, real smart...

Trump wants to cancel NAFTA?
That would be a disaster for Canada.
I don't care about his other attributes.
Canadians need to pray for Hillary.

Being a loose-cannon populist frees Trump up ideologically to spew protectionist jargon in place of economic wisdom. One would have thought and hoped that the days of Smoot-Hawley were long gone. This is where Trump might get political traction but it's also where he is weakest in policy. Deregulation and tax reform make sense but ignoring competitive advantage by forcing the US to be a place where low skill labour competes worldwide is potentially very expensive to consumers while risking trade wars. I have more confidence in the near dysfunctional US Congress in preventing Trump from accomplishing the type of protectionism he is proposing should he become POTUS.

I absolutely despise Mrs. Clinton but on this file, from a Canadian perspective, I fear that she might be preferable.

very well said, and I agree.

Alyric, but there is some hope for smaller businesses, and they could form a base that may expand, when the "givemes" get hungery

I worked in union packing plants back in the 1970s. Edmonton had 4 big ones employing 500 to 1,000 people. It was a wonderful job and they might have hired 1/10 of the people who applied. Then they broke the unions in the US and Canadian plants were mostly shutting down but some like Peter Pocklington, who couldn't afford to shut down, fought to reduce wages and he paid a terrible price in goodwill and despite cutting wages severely, the plant shut down. Now with the union broken slaughtering shifted to Southern Alberta and guess what - they couldn't find workers. What did they do? They imported Somalians to do the work. I didn't mind working up to my elbows in blood and guts as long as I made more money than 80 % of the fools out there. My favorite expression is that there is no such thing as a labour shortage, just a pay shortage.

Get use to saying President Trump!

Oh Shi*! Trump is doomed now!

In 2008, at SDA the headline was ,"Why McCain will Win", then in 2012, it was, Why Romney Will Win".

We know what happened.

F***! Four years of Hillary,here we come.

SDA,the anti-Sylvia Brown.(not that she was ever right,either)

I bet many here just can't wait for the photos of Hillary and Justin grinning together. (gag, hurl) this republican candidate wants tariffs imposed and trade deals ended.

Whatever. It's quite comical though to read these comments and the cheerleading for Trump. It's like the cbc.

Btw, it isn't unions that destroy industry, it's government regulations that allow unions to act with impunity. It's government regulations that hand cuff development and investment. It's government regulations that impede trade within our own borders.

But I'm just another bigot.

1) Be careful throwing around the term 'slave labor'. It is (of course) real, it unfortunately exists, and it should be stopped when it's found. But too many on the left use that term as synonymous with "they're only paid x dollars per week!" while ignoring the local cost of living.

As I've pointed out before, Mark Twain's observation in "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" (Chapter 33, Sixth Century Political Economy) still holds true:

"What these people valued was high wages; it didn't seem to be a matter of any consequence to them whether the high wages would buy anything or not."

2) Of course it's not smart, but I never said or implied that it was; only that it wasn't going to change. Real change would require politicians with courage, economic literacy, and a dedication to America rather than themselves. Which, of course, is the problem.

Free trade is great but often these deals are not free trade deals, but managed trade. And managed to the benefit of large corporations and other crony interests. How much easier is t to cross the US/Canada boarder or do trade across it. The bureaucracy has multiplied and small companies cannot support that easily.

so it would appear that Brussels called the US chamber of commerce:-)))

No shortage of communist, chicken in every pot, one worlder types...they just gave up, can't compete and want the gov't to save them with trade deals. Trade deals where corporations can take sovereign nations before tribunals. The decisions being without appeal.

Meanwhile, the consumer has to settle for buying cheap crap that lasts a third as long. And worth a third of it's price.

Dennis - This: "... as economic policies go, he's nothing but a national socialist enemy of free trade and free markets." Total unsubstantiated garbage from you, reeking of prejudice. Get it Alyric, notwithstanding some people do consider criticism bigoted? Calling someone a NAZI generally is a bigoted remark, unless one is talking about Hitler, or the SS, or the KK maybe. So don't lump my comments in with PC idiocy; Dennis is way out of line.

As for the rest, when has Trump said he would cancel NAFTA? You obviously didn't read his speech properly or at all. He said he would renegotiate it for better terms, something a guy named Jean Chretien promised too once in an election campaign. Is Chretien a trade NAZI too? Look past the headlines.

Free trade is a good thing when properly structured and is actually an anarchic, rather than globalization policy, which while removing trade barriers, does not do the same with borders and overall national sovereignty. Common markets like the EU, which in fact goes even further with surpranational bureaucrats wielding unelected power, are a symptom of establishment and crony capitalism globalism that erodes the nation state and her electors' will.

I disagree with him on his NAFTA position, Mexico's trade with the US is not out of line for a smaller economy trading with other under reciprocity. The problem with Mexico is illegal immigration which they're doing zero about, letting illegals into the US, instead of properly securing her border.

OTOH, China and Japan do not have free trade agreements with the US, and their trade surpluses with the US dwarf that of her free trade partners. They must provide access to their markets too if they expect to continue to do business with other countries.

Trump can go on a vacation and still win the elestcion. He is so far ahead of Hillary that its laughable.

See my other comments on Free Trade. The free trade agreements that are all the rage these days are managed trade, not free trade.

Well Trump is the one who said he would end trade deals and impose tariffs. He also said he wants nationalized health care. So if one concluded that he is a socialist enemy of free trade and free markets, that would be a reasonable assumption.

Didn't read anything about him being call a nazi. But I suppose you're linking national socialist as being nazi. You get pretty offended over that. What if Dennis called Bernie or Hillary that. Would you have the same reaction?

I guess those who don't have a man crush on Trump line up in the bigots column.


Trump said that if the NAFTA partners do not agree to gut the treaty he will:

I will submit notice under Article 2205 of the NAFTA agreement that America intends to withdraw from the deal.

IOW, he is promising to cancel NAFTA because the chances of him offering terms that Canada and Mexico can accept is near zero.

The guy would be a disaster for Canada.

It's the US that's doing nothing about the illegals. As far as Trump goes the polls don't look good at all. I want him to win too but I'm getting the sense that it's already over.

R of O: "Free trade is great but often these deals are not free trade deals, but managed trade... to the benefit of large corporations and other crony interests." Well said, reciprocity, not "managed trade," is better. Trump intends to look critically at existing & pending deals; that's a good thing.

Trump will come around on free trade, with no PACs are telling him what position to take, unlike Hillary who has to check with SA on energy issues, and other cronies on this or that issue, lapping up sycophants' congratulations and more foreign campaign bribes.

If I were an American voter, I would be more interested in his views on illegal immigration, security and political corruption.

Having said that, is Trump pandering to certain constituencies? Sure he is; he's that much of a politician.

"Workers" is now the anti communist term. It means people who work. Not everyone who works is an employee.

You haven't seen a GOP candidate win. Oh yes, they all claim to be Conservative when they need the dedicated foot warriors for campaigns, but none of them have delivered any Conservative results. The current bunch, in control of senate and house of representatives, have all enabled Obama's socialist actions - immigration, spending and debt, etc.

Folks have had enough and Trump is a way to stick it to the repubs. and Washington establishment, full of profressional pols and grafters.

Wow Kathy, you caught most everything I was thinking while reading it. Thanks for saving me lots of typing.

I said way back that Trump was sooo full of bullsh*t that he was actually overqualified to be a politician. That said, I do admire the often distasteful Trump because of what he has ALREADY accomplished in this race. He has exposed the GOP for the elitists that they are, steadfastly highlighted the long and short-term dangers of Islam to the west and waged a successful one-man war on the dishonest and PC-addled media. Who else of the 1/3 billion Americans is capable of that?!?! He is already a national hero to many Americans who respect sovereignty and the concept of the will of the people. But, whether he can accomplish much more from here on out is questionable because his bombastic style has created and motivated cut-throat enemies everywhere.

Go Trump Go! Watch your back!

Ha! (In a derisory sense). Hilary has an enormous ambition to be the first woman president, but beyond that, she's for sale. She will be no more a friend of Canada than Obama.

Yes C.O. you said it well. Who knows whether he will accomplish what he says - but he has already achieved so much!

Trump 2016!

He didn't call Trump a Nazi.

He identified Trump's politics as national socialism. Yes, the Nazi party was the National Socialist German Worker's Party, but they are not the only national socialists in history.

Nor is Trump alone in the modern world - all those supposedly 'far right' European parties the media keeps bleating about? Socialist parties, almost without exception, in favor of nationalizing industry, healthcare, etc., etc. But because of the anti-immigration stance (hence, nationalist), they are labelled as 'far-right' in spite of their obvious left-leaning policies.

Perhaps you simply need a thicker skin.

As a side note:

a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

Dennis's comment, while you might not have agreed with it, was polite and thoughtful, even offering credit to some of Trump's comments: "He rightly objects to the regulation and tax burden placed on U.S. businesses,(...)"

Your response? "Total unsubstantiated garbage from you, reeking of prejudice."

There is definitely prejudice and bigotry at work here, but I have yet to see any from Dennis.

Whatever, unless Trump can pull off a miracle by making a complete fool of Hillary in the televised debates,it's Hillary in a landslide.

Hillary is the American Establishment's choice, both Republican and Democrat.

President Hillary Clinton. Get used to it.

Canuks who have no say in the matter arguing over which person running for POTUS is the lesser of the two evils. It's only going to get sillier.
Clinton is an evil person; I hope anyone other than her wins. All other reasons are relatively inconsequential.

Trump would rip up NAFTA the same way zero closed Gitmo. It ain't happening because Congress won't let it.
I don't think Trump can win (to bad) but even if he did talk of ripping up trade deals is the stuff for elections not governing.
Canada is the Americans largest trading partner.

Remember when you were all militantly pro-trade? Remember when unions, academics and other assorted lefties criticised NAFTA as a threat to the working and middle classes that benefited wealthy elites at the expense of working stiffs, and you dismissed them out-of-hand as a bunch of economically illiterate socialists?

No? Well, then at least remember that you "conservatives" picked Trump as your guy. Coulda picked Cruz, coulda picked Fiorina, coulda picked Rubio, coulda picked Walker, etc. But no, you picked Trump, who's now on the record as being against trade and capitalism ("globalization" being simply the application of capitalist logic and practices on a global scale).

Instead, he promises to somehow -- presumably through the sheer Trumpian Art of the Deal -- unilaterally put the proverbial genie back in the bottle and return America to a mythical Golden Age of domestic manufacturing and prosperity (never mind that it was Ronald Reagan himself who first proposed a US-Mexico free trade agreement during his 1980 presidential campaign).

Tell the people what they want to hear -- Demagoguery 101.

"One would have thought and hoped that the days of Smoot-Hawley were long gone"
Exactly! and ditto Kathy Shaidle DENNIS and Alyric
I've listened to a few of his speeches and this one was his weakest yet. If this is all he has on the trade front, no wonder his campaign seems to have stalled.

There is a choice this November, Hillary or Trump. Trump is the only sound choice, as no good ever comes from putting criminals in charge of anything.

Sorry to say it, but every North American union survives by stoking the bad side of human nature-resentment, if not if not outright hatred, of management, GREED, and a total disregard of the union's exorbitant demands on the health of the organization , or on its customers, who are poorly served. Barry Obama is your classic labor organizer type of personality . Contemptible.

Unions are bad in and of themselves

Leave a comment


November 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Recent Comments

  • ebt: I never lived in Hamilton but I spent time there read more
  • KevinB: Geez, Kathy, I used to think you had some brains. read more
  • steakman: "...Btw, it isn't unions that destroy industry, it's government regulations read more
  • LindaL: "unless Trump can pull off a miracle by making a read more
  • scar: "America was not "the Arsenal of Democracy" during WWII with read more
  • MissAnthropy: The Free Traders have one glaring blind spot in their read more
  • abtrapper: If Canadians had a vote they would overwhelmingly vote Clinton. read more
  • Fearless Leader: About time we had a lose cannon turned on these read more
  • Stephen Carter: Read the speech and replace America and American with Canada read more
  • Robert of Ottawa: A loose cannon with executive and managerial experience get rid read more