Hillary Clinton Needs To Declare the Trade War Lost
She'll have more credibility if she doesn't try to convince voters they're better off than they are.
In a close race, every constituency is key -- including the long-neglected. A new New York Times analysis of likely voters shows the percentage of white voters without a college degree who say they're planning to vote for the Republican candidate is exactly the same as it was four years ago.
With all the reporting on how Trump is winning white working-class voters, this suggests he's not doing any better than Mitt Romney did. The problem for Clinton, though, is that she isn't doing as well with that group: 35 percent said they were supporting Obama in 2012. Only 29 percent are supporting Clinton. More say they're undecided.
To win them over, Clinton needs to acknowledge that we have lost the trade war and pledge to use every legal means at her disposal to protect American workers and industries from the continued onslaught of imports. Specifically, she should vow to:
- Initiate trade cases against countries that target American industries by subsidizing their exports, exploiting workers, manipulating their currencies and polluting the environment.
- Threaten to impose tariffs on every imported product from countries that refuse to implement the regulations as in US Occupational Safety and Health guidelines.
- Do the same when it comes to US Environmental Protection Agency regulations and federal, state and local tax requirements that are imposed on American businesses.
Last night she mentioned only part of this -- initiating trade cases -- but she tried to put a patina on trade and NAFTA.
Clinton should also be more specific about her promises to build a strong infrastructure. Such a program would put the skills, materials and physical strength of working-class Americans to work and improve the competitive economic environment in economically hard-hit states that she needs to ensure an Electoral College victory. Clinton has identified specific programs but she needs to do more to explain how she will pay for them. Otherwise, her campaign platform will sound too much like an echo of past hollow campaign promises.
She should not let her loyalty to President Barack Obama and her husband jeopardize her credibility. The more Clinton tries to claim the objective conditions are fine, the more trouble she gets into. Does she really believe that the African-American community is not suffering? Does she believe working-class communities have not been hurt by NAFTA?
As for Trump's claim that not paying taxes makes you smart, Clinton needs to respond more directly, reminding working people that it's an option only for the rich with clever accountants. Not paying your fair share isn't "smart." It makes you a crook and un-American.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
In a close race, every constituency is key -- including the long-neglected. A new New York Times analysis of likely voters shows the percentage of white voters without a college degree who say they're planning to vote for the Republican candidate is exactly the same as it was four years ago.
With all the reporting on how Trump is winning white working-class voters, this suggests he's not doing any better than Mitt Romney did. The problem for Clinton, though, is that she isn't doing as well with that group: 35 percent said they were supporting Obama in 2012. Only 29 percent are supporting Clinton. More say they're undecided.
To win them over, Clinton needs to acknowledge that we have lost the trade war and pledge to use every legal means at her disposal to protect American workers and industries from the continued onslaught of imports. Specifically, she should vow to:
- Initiate trade cases against countries that target American industries by subsidizing their exports, exploiting workers, manipulating their currencies and polluting the environment.
- Threaten to impose tariffs on every imported product from countries that refuse to implement the regulations as in US Occupational Safety and Health guidelines.
- Do the same when it comes to US Environmental Protection Agency regulations and federal, state and local tax requirements that are imposed on American businesses.
Last night she mentioned only part of this -- initiating trade cases -- but she tried to put a patina on trade and NAFTA.
Clinton should also be more specific about her promises to build a strong infrastructure. Such a program would put the skills, materials and physical strength of working-class Americans to work and improve the competitive economic environment in economically hard-hit states that she needs to ensure an Electoral College victory. Clinton has identified specific programs but she needs to do more to explain how she will pay for them. Otherwise, her campaign platform will sound too much like an echo of past hollow campaign promises.
She should not let her loyalty to President Barack Obama and her husband jeopardize her credibility. The more Clinton tries to claim the objective conditions are fine, the more trouble she gets into. Does she really believe that the African-American community is not suffering? Does she believe working-class communities have not been hurt by NAFTA?
As for Trump's claim that not paying taxes makes you smart, Clinton needs to respond more directly, reminding working people that it's an option only for the rich with clever accountants. Not paying your fair share isn't "smart." It makes you a crook and un-American.
In a close race, every constituency is key -- including the long-neglected. A new New York Times analysis of likely voters shows the percentage of white voters without a college degree who say they're planning to vote for the Republican candidate is exactly the same as it was four years ago.
With all the reporting on how Trump is winning white working-class voters, this suggests he's not doing any better than Mitt Romney did. The problem for Clinton, though, is that she isn't doing as well with that group: 35 percent said they were supporting Obama in 2012. Only 29 percent are supporting Clinton. More say they're undecided.
To win them over, Clinton needs to acknowledge that we have lost the trade war and pledge to use every legal means at her disposal to protect American workers and industries from the continued onslaught of imports. Specifically, she should vow to:
- Initiate trade cases against countries that target American industries by subsidizing their exports, exploiting workers, manipulating their currencies and polluting the environment.
- Threaten to impose tariffs on every imported product from countries that refuse to implement the regulations as in US Occupational Safety and Health guidelines.
- Do the same when it comes to US Environmental Protection Agency regulations and federal, state and local tax requirements that are imposed on American businesses.
Last night she mentioned only part of this -- initiating trade cases -- but she tried to put a patina on trade and NAFTA.
Clinton should also be more specific about her promises to build a strong infrastructure. Such a program would put the skills, materials and physical strength of working-class Americans to work and improve the competitive economic environment in economically hard-hit states that she needs to ensure an Electoral College victory. Clinton has identified specific programs but she needs to do more to explain how she will pay for them. Otherwise, her campaign platform will sound too much like an echo of past hollow campaign promises.
She should not let her loyalty to President Barack Obama and her husband jeopardize her credibility. The more Clinton tries to claim the objective conditions are fine, the more trouble she gets into. Does she really believe that the African-American community is not suffering? Does she believe working-class communities have not been hurt by NAFTA?
As for Trump's claim that not paying taxes makes you smart, Clinton needs to respond more directly, reminding working people that it's an option only for the rich with clever accountants. Not paying your fair share isn't "smart." It makes you a crook and un-American.