Type to search

Donald Trump’s Candidacy Is The Third Biggest Risk To The Global Economy. Here’s Why.

Campaign 2016 Elections Featured Post Politics Top News World

Donald Trump’s Candidacy Is The Third Biggest Risk To The Global Economy. Here’s Why.

Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally in St. Clairsville, Ohio June 28, 2016. REUTERS/Aaron Josefczyk

In March, the Economist Intelligence Unit, a research and intelligence firm, listed the possibility of a Donald Trump presidency as the sixth greatest risk to the global economy. By June, Trump’s candidacy had climbed up the ranking. He now stands at third place, ahead of the break-up of the European Union, a Grexit (Greek exit from the EU), jihadi terrorism, global growth surges, the Brexit, military conflict in South China Sea due to Chinese expansionism, and a future oil price shock prompted by a collapse in investment in the oil sector.

The prospect of Donald Trump being president is less of a global risk, apparently, than just two scenarios: a sharp economic slowdown in China, and a global emerging markets crisis prompted by the U.S. federal reserve raising interest rates.

Here’s why:

1. Trump v. Free Trade

“[Trump] has been exceptionally hostile towards free trade, including notably NAFTA, and has repeatedly labelled China as a ‘currency manipulator’ … In the event of a Trump victory, his hostile attitude to free trade, and alienation of Mexico and China in particular, could escalate rapidly into a trade war – and at the least scupper the Trans-Pacific Partnership between the U.S. and 11 other American and Asian states signed in February 2016.” — The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Global Forecasting Service

Trump has said NAFTA “was a disaster for this country,” and while any experts would agree with regard to free trade’s impact on the American middle class, most agree that for all of its faults, NAFTA expanded America’s economy and lifted global standards of living.

The North American Free Trade Agreement came into effect in 1994 and was designed to relax trade and other relations among the United States, Canada and Mexico.

In an April article for the libertarian Reason magazine, Nick Gillespie observed that when NAFTA was passed into law, U.S. unemployment was at 6.7 percent, and by 2008 – before the financial crisis – it had dropped to below 5 percent. Between 1994 and 2008, the U.S. created a net total of 25 million jobs, and according to data from Harvard economist Robert Z. Lawrence, the average wages and benefits of blue collar workers, when adjusted for inflation, increased by 11 percent.

The argument against free trade is that it incentivizes outsourcing, costing millions of U.S. manufacturing jobs.

On Tuesday, during a speech at an aluminum scrap metal factory in Monessen, Pennsylvania, Trump announced that if elected president, he will tell U.S.’s NAFTA partners that he intends to “immediately renegotiate the terms of that agreement to get a better deal for our workers,” and if they don’t agree to said renegotiation, Trump will “submit notice under Article 2205 of the NAFTA agreement that America intends to withdraw from the deal,” The Hill reports.

Withdrawing from NAFTA would trigger an increase in tariffs on imports from partnering countries and exports from the U.S. abroad: a “trade war.”

As Politico noted, Trump’s criticism of NAFTA is based on U.S. companies’ outsourcing of jobs; he has vilified Carrier Corporation, which is sending 1,400 manufacturing jobs to Mexico.

Trump has proposed using tariffs to discipline companies moving operations overseas and to encourage other countries to lift restrictions on U.S. exports. For instance, Trump threatened Carrier Corp. with a 35 percent tariff on all products shipped back to the U.S. He would deal with China similarly, by declaring the country a currency manipulator and imposing high “countervailing [anti-subsidy] duties” on their exports to the U.S.

Such moves would require congressional approval that he probably wouldn’t get from Republicans, as such a drastic measure would likely draw volatile protest from businesses and consumer groups alike – and although Democrats are more cautious of new trade deals, there isn’t any evidence to suggest they’d be open to dismantling 70 years of trade regulations, which could result in a recession and trade wars.

Politico reports Kathy Bostjancic, head of U.S. macro investor services at Oxford Economics in New York, wrote in an April research brief that Mexico and China would likely respond to Trump’s punitive tariffs by imposing their own on U.S. goods, which would drive the inflation rate up to 3.5 percent, and would “lower both the level of real GDP by 1.6 percent and employment by 1.4 million by 2020” – numbers less than current forecasts.

Reuters reports on Tuesday that Trump also described the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership as unsalvageable in terms of renegotiation, hinting at his intention to withdraw.

Trump said “The TPP, as it’s known, would be the death blow for American manufacturing.”

2. Trump v. the Middle East, and pro-ISIS blowback

“[Trump] has also taken an exceptionally punitive stance on the Middle East and jihadi terrorism, including, among other things, advocating the killing of families of terrorists and launching a land incursion into Syria to wipe out IS (and acquire its oil) … [Trump’s] militaristic tendencies towards the Middle East (and ban on all Muslim travel to the US) would be a potent recruitment tool for jihadi groups, increasing their threat both within the region and beyond.”

In December, Trump told Fox News he would “knock the hell out of” ISIS, and criticized the current administration for “fighting a very politically correct war.” Trump said “when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don’t kid yourself. When they say they don’t care about their lives, you have to take out their families.”

In an email, EIU analyst Robert Powell told The National Memo that Trump’s brash approach would add a major spending burden to the U.S. budget and radically destabilize the Middle East, which would likely drive oil prices way up.

Less immediate effects involve strengthening the enemy.

Almost everyone agrees that U.S. military intervention is necessary in the war against ISIS and the virus of jihadi terrorism. However, Donald Trump’s proposed solution differs from that of most experts, in terms of “thuggishness.”

Boaz Ganor, a leading Israeli counter-terrorism expert and former consultant to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, told CNN that “Any deliberate attacks aimed against civilians is a war crime, regardless if they are family members of terrorists or presidents or presidential candidates.”

Ganor argued Trump’s endorsed tactics would defeat “one of the most important pillars of counterterrorism: the differences of morality.”

“Adopting this policy is immoral and against the common liberal democratic values,” said Ganor, adding that, “Deliberate attacks against the terrorist families is blurring the moral differences between the terrorist organizations and the state which is fighting terrorism. This by itself might benefit the terrorists which are trying to claim that they are fighting a moral war against relentless and immoral entity.”

During a December speech to the Republican Jewish Coalition, CNN reports South Carolina Sen. Lindsay Graham remarked “what Mr. Trump’s saying about how to handle this war is empowering the enemy.”

“ISIL loves Donald Trump because he is giving them an opportunity to bring people their way,” Graham said.

In March, terrorism expert Malcom Nance told MSNBC “Donald Trump right now is validating the cartoonish view that they tell their operatives … that America is a racist nation, xenophobic, anti-Muslim, and that that’s why you must carry out terrorist attacks against them.”

3. Trump V. NATO: Russian Fallout

 “[Trump’s] vocal skepticism toward NATO would weaken efforts to contain Russia’s expansionist tendencies.”

Trump has said he would “certainly look at” pulling the United States out of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, because, he said, the international security alliance is “obsolete” and “costing us a fortune.”

NATO was created in 1949 by the U.S., Canada and 10 Western European nations as a means of common defense against the former Soviet Union. NATO now includes 28 member nations.

Trump thinks NATO doesn’t serve its founding purpose and detests that the U.S. contributes more funding than any other member. He would like to see the alliance restructured to shift its focus to Islamic terrorism, with other members picking up more of the bill.

Over the past few years U.S.-Russian relations have drastically deteriorated in the face of a Russian expansionist movement – which ignited the Ukrainian civil war – that runs counter to NATO regulations. The U.S. and its NATO allies have imposed sanctions on Russia, deployed anti-ballistic missile systems in Romania and Poland, broadened military exercises on Russia’s borders and increased land, air, and sea forces.

Russia has responded by building up forces along the country’s Western borders – measures that include adding more nuclear capable missiles – which heightens the risk of escalation due to accident or miscalculation. In the meantime, the Washington Post reports, France and Germany have not compelled the Ukrainian government to honor the Minsk accords, written to negotiate an armistice.

Currently, in an effort to ease qualms of eastern members in the midst of tensions with Russia surrounding the Ukrainian crisis, NATO is further reinforcing forces on Russia’s borders and Russian defense minister Sergei Shoigu says his military will respond with equal measures, the Associated Press reported.

4. Trump vs. the Asian Nuclear Arms Race

“Elsewhere, and arguably even more alarmingly, his stated indifference towards nuclear proliferation in Asia raises the prospect of a nuclear arms race in the world’s most heavily populated continent.”

In March, Trump said he might permit Japan and South Korea to build nuclear weapons arsenals to ease U.S. defense commitments.

Experts say this would be incredibly dangerous.

Jeffrey Lewis, the director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, told Business Insider that Japan developing nuclear weapons would be a “total catastrophe for Japan and US nuclear power programs.”

Lewis said Trump’s reasoning is an outdated pretense under which the U.S. used to operate. “Everybody has a friend,” Lewis said. “And so if you can give them the path of saying it’s good when our allies have them and bad when our enemies have them, you get to the point where everybody has them. It’s better to have a system … in which we say no more nuclear-weapons states and try to maintain that.”

Kingston Reif, director for disarmament and threat-reduction policy at the Arms Control Association, said “This idea that this would bring more security to Japan and South Korea than the U.S. troops deployed there and the U.S. defense commitment to those countries is not borne out by the evidence.”

It could even encourage China to bulk up its own nuclear arsenal.

Reif said China’s “doctrine regarding when it might employ nuclear weapons might be described as one of minimum deterrence,” but the country “right now is believed to have no more than 300 total nuclear weapons, which is a small arsenal relative to what the US and Russia possess.”

“But in the event that South Korea and Japan acquire independent nuclear weapons, it’s highly likely that China would revisit its minimum deterrence posture and likely accelerate its ongoing nuclear modernization efforts and consider increasing the overall size of its nuclear arsenal.”

Lewis said “It would be a free-for-all.”

“It would be a giant science experiment that I would not want to see.”

Photo: Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally in St. Clairsville, Ohio June 28, 2016. REUTERS/Aaron Josefczyk



  1. Otto T. Goat June 30, 2016

    Trump is bad because he doesn’t want to start a war with Russia.

    1. Daniel Jones June 30, 2016

      He likes Putin, but that’s not equated to being a peacenik.
      The reasons he’s against NATO are stated, but I understand an Autogrief’s inability to actually read.

      1. Independent1 July 1, 2016

        And it’s hard to comprehend anything you read when you have less than one truly functioning brain cell.

  2. AgLander June 30, 2016

    Name a company, ANY company engaged in lawful commerce that would hire a 70 year habitual liar under an active criminal investigation by the FBI as their CEO…..simply because she’s a woman!!

    Only in America can madness like this even be possible!

    1. Independent1 June 30, 2016

      What’s your point there lowlife?? There isn’t a company that would hire Trump even as a janitor – his name has become so toxic, that if any company even suggested such a thing, virtually every country, including America would put out a boycott recommendation for the products or services from that company. That is a far worse endictment than suggesting no one would hire Hillary.

      And even more than that, should Trump become president, virtually all America’s allies would pass legislation boycotting Trump from entering their country and the people would refuse to let their leaders negotiate with such a con man.

      1. AgLander June 30, 2016

        You will be horrified to learn that the latest Rasmussen poll just released (after Brexit and Orlando) shows a huge surge for Trump and now has him leading Clinton by 4 points nationally. It’s only gonna get worse from this point forward and I predict that Trump puts a “Mondale” beating on the pants suit queen. It’s going to be so much fun!! Are you willing to accept the will of the people this November?

        1. Independent1 June 30, 2016

          And you don’t really think I’m dump enough to fall for all that crap are you?? Rasmussen is just one more right-wing rag that polls mostly Republicans and right-wing leaning Independents who frequent publications like the Wall Street Journal and Faux News.

          1. Box July 1, 2016

            But you believe the liberal polls, dont you?

          2. Independent1 July 1, 2016

            Not the majority of them, and especially this early in the election cycle. If I put much credence in any polls, it’s some of the ones run by universities – not ones operated by corporations which are by-in-large right-wing biased; and I especially don’t believe the WSJ/NBC, the Gallup and the Rasmussen polls. I find them clearly GOP biased.

            And personally, I believe all polls should be banned within 2 months of the election because it’s too easy for polls to be highly biased with their results gimmicked to try and sway public opinion.

        2. Dominick Vila July 1, 2016

          Rasmussen also predicted Romney winning by a landslide. His numbers were so encouraging that the RNC booked ballrooms to celebrate Mitt’s victory…

          1. Bill P July 1, 2016

            Thanks for pointing that out, right wing trolls will use only that poll and ignore the Bloomberg poll, Quinnipiac poll and the Nat Silver 538 poll (which was extremely accurate in the 2012 election). The Republicans have to grasp any straw poll that shows Trump ahead.

    2. Dona Lee July 1, 2016

      And the media has finally been pointing out that 90% of what the Great Pumpkin spouts is also a lie. They are both politicians. If their lips are moving, they are probably lying. He is 70 and under active felony fraud investigation. Woohoo. We are suffering from a two party system that is totally corrupt on both sides. But Mrs. Clinton is the far safer bet. She knows what she is doing and how to use tact. Something Agent Orange doesn’t have knowledge of or the ability to learn. He is like a two year old having a tantrum. I have yet to hear anything intelligent come out of his mouth. Full of nothing but B.S. A Wall??? You have to be joking. WTF will that do? You think they can’t build a mechanical ladder that pops up and lets the illegals over it? You think they won’t build MORE tunnels to go under it? And don’t forget the vast majority of illegal immigrants entered the country legally and then didn’t renew their green cards. They just stayed. Europe and the U.K. think he is a buffoon and even considered banning him from their countries. Canada and Mexico, our closest neighbors both detest him and the things he has insinuated. China doesn’t give a damn. And he likes Putin. That tells you about everything of the measure of the man. He likes the guy who has his country under HIS thumb. Which is exactly what he wants to do here. It isn’t going to happen. Even the GOP realizes what a horrible mistake he is. Oh, they dislike Hillary, but they have survived under Obama, and they will continue to survive under Hillary. Even they are aware that Agent Orange will destroy the United States and most likely take the world down with him.

      1. Independent1 July 1, 2016

        Great assessment!!

    3. The lucky one July 1, 2016

      Name a company, ANY company engaged in lawful commerce that would hire a 70 year habitual liar under an active criminal investigation by NYS as their CEO…..simply because he’s a Trump!!

      1. AgLander July 1, 2016

        You’re confused……Trump hires people which makes him a hated man to the typical liberal where an employer is look upon with scorn and contempt. They’d rather have everyone work for the federal government where they can better control them.

        1. The lucky one July 1, 2016

          God you’re even dumber than the typical Trumpster. Yah trump “hires” people and when he thinks he can get away with cheating them on their pay he does it.

  3. Dominick Vila June 30, 2016

    A Donald Trump presidency would be a disaster, not only because his trade policies, and foreign policy proposals are reckless, but because of what he represents to most country, and our closest trading partners in particular. It will be a long time before Mexico and China forget what this man has said about them, and the threats he has directed at them. In his favor, he acknowledged, and even boasted, about his unpredictability, a personal attribute that most foreign leaders consider a liability rather than an asset.
    Electing a man whose discourse ranges from overt narcissism, to hate speech, to irresponsible statements, and proposals that, if implemented, would destabilize the entire world (think dismantling NATO, letting Japan and South Korea acquire nuclear weapons, carpet bombing, etc), may be a welcome change for his cult members. It is a reason for great concern for those capable of rational thought, and for those who consider the long term effects of our actions and rhetoric.

    1. Box July 1, 2016

      You know, its very odd. People are so used to Obama being a dictator that they assume every future President would be the same and bypass Congress. Whatever Trump truly wants, he may never get it from Congress so what is the worry exactly?

      1. Dominick Vila July 1, 2016

        Investment in infrastructure and alternative energy sources. Rejected by Congress.
        Allotment of $1.3B to fight zika and pay off the debt incurred fighting the Ebola virus. Rejected by Congress.
        Closing the Gitmo prison camp. Rejected by Congress.
        Bringing Gitmp prisoners to the USA for trial. Rejected by Congress.
        Raising the tax rate of those earning over $250K a year. Rejected by Congress.
        Rewarding companies that invest at home, and penalize those that invest overseas. Rejected by Congress.
        What did you say about dictatorships?

      2. I of John July 1, 2016

        You have no idea what a dictator looks like do you? Do you think Stalin would have suffered thru a GOP congress like Obama has? No, he would executed the lot of them. You have no idea how damned lucky you are to be free enough to even utter such words as you spew forth so thoughtlessly.

      3. Independent1 July 1, 2016

        You want to know who THE REAL DICTATOR has been over the past 7 years!!! Emperor Mitch McConnell who has used his fake filibuster more than 400 times to DICTATE what legislation would and would not get passed. In fact, Emperor Mitch, actually killed several pieces of legislation that were passed on a bipartisan basis and even had Tea Party people voting for it BUT MITCH DIDN’T LIKE IT SO HE KILLED IT!!!

        And if you think Obama has been a dictator, please enlighten us has to how he’s done that given that he’s issued far fewer Executive Orders than were issued by all presidents in office since 1900. In fact, only Ford may have issued less; and where Obama has issued around 250 – there have been 4 GOP presidents since 1900 who have issued over 1,000 EOs; one of the close to 2,000!!

        So stop throwing out worthless accusations and lets see you be specific – tell us all what Obama has done to be a ‘dictator’, given that the GOP has worked 24/7 over the past 7 years to thwart well over 75% of what Obama had hoped he could accomplish while in office.

      4. Independent1 July 1, 2016

        Say, do you think there’s a time coming when many of you clueless right-wing nut cases will pull your heads out of your butts so you can at least see the light of day; rather than living in darkness as you clearly have been for so long???

        1. plc97477 July 1, 2016

          Not as long as they can be kept afraid and they are largely cowards that scare easily.

      5. FireBaron July 1, 2016

        KInd of hard to be a dictator when Congress refused to vote on anything you propose because they are afraid to give you even a minor success.

      6. latebloomingrandma July 1, 2016

        How can he be a dictator and “weak” at the same time?

  4. Dona Lee July 1, 2016

    I absolutely destest Trump and all he stands for, BUT…”Trump has said NAFTA “was a disaster for this country,” and while any experts would agree with regard to free trade’s impact on the American middle class, most agree that for all of its faults, NAFTA expanded America’s economy and lifted global standards of living.” This is the problem.
    Yes, NAFTA was great for the 1% of our economy that owned the corporations that juiced up their profits and made their investors even richer, and yes, it helped lift the same elites in other countries…but for the regular people, the middle class and poverty class, it made things worse. We had stagnant wages for decades while prices increased, we lost jobs to people who aren’t making enough in their countries to improve their lives, and except for the elites, the governments, and the global corporations, the vast majority of people throughout the world did NOT improve their standard of living. It has fallen for most. TPP will be make the problem far worse. These agreements are written by corporations and the politicians they own to increase their value. They are not to increase the standard of living of the slaves they have made.

    1. FireBaron July 1, 2016

      Guess what – THE DONALD benefited from NAFTA and a lot of these trade deals. Do you honestly think any of the crap that was sold in Macy’s with his name on it was made in the USA? Hell no, it was made in Mexico, China, Indonesia, etc.

    2. Box July 1, 2016

      Correct. You said, “we lost jobs to people who aren’t making enough in their countries to improve their lives,” Thats right. Just one example is call centers. USA outsourced tech support to the lowest-bidding countries, but those jobs, for example in the Philippines, dont pay even half a subsistence wage for the workers. So what was gained?

      Worse yet, in the case of jobs like that, the governments were thrilled because of $1 million a day coming in the country on aggregate call center contracts, but it wasnt a thousand workers who got that money, it was 100,000. Thats right, $10 a head. Im not really exaggerating because I know the rate in Philippines, its full time work for $300 a month. Dont say its ok for them, the min you need there is $1000 a month and such a call center worker is shacked up in a bunk room and can afford nothing.

      Thats what NAFTA did, it screwed the workers it was supposed to help. So screw NAFTA. And which of the candidates supports getting rid of it?

    3. Box July 1, 2016

      I think you would appreciate the book I mentioned above, New Deal or Raw Deal. Your good post portrays policies of the 1930s actually. And here we are again in the same soup.

  5. Sharon3454 July 1, 2016

    I currently make about 6k-8k bucks on monthly basis from freelancing online. So if you are looking to do easy freelance work for few hours daily from comfort of your home and earn good paycheck while doing it… Then this gig is for you… http://self19.com


  6. Box July 1, 2016

    NAFTA helped wreck our jobs and make neighbors rich. I personally want all Americans to raise their standard of living FIRST. We helped China to the point they will become the worlds top economy and will show no mercy to the US. So why would anyone fight the idea that bringing jobs back to US and re-firing the factories would be a bad thing? The only people who benefited were the giants who moved their HQs to China and elsewhere to not only cut wages but cut YOUR job. Its now 20 years of NAFTA and how is YOUR life? Better??

    1. johninPCFL July 1, 2016

      “Blaming Mexico and China for the fate of our steel industry is like blaming email for the decline of telegrams. The biggest reduction in steel jobs came before the globalization of the past two decades. The number fell from 450,000 to 210,000 in the 1980s.”
      “But U.S. manufacturing output is 54 percent higher today than in 1994 and 27 percent higher than in 2001. Those years are pertinent because 1994 was the year NAFTA took effect and 2001 is the year China gained entry to the World Trade Organization — events Trump portrays as catastrophic for American industry.
      Manufacturing jobs have vanished not because we don’t manufacture anything but because companies have learned to produce more goods with fewer people. Higher productivity is what eliminated most of the jobs Trump mourns. He’s no more capable of restoring them than he is of bringing back the dodo.”

      1. Independent1 July 1, 2016

        Well said!! See a post I’ll make to Box here.

        1. johninPCFL July 1, 2016

          Not my words, but they convey the importance of looking at all of the data, not just relying on jingoistic nonsense.

          1. Independent1 July 1, 2016

            Exactly, many who criticize the trade agreements, seem to forget that the GOP has relentlessly worked to drive workers wages down with ‘right-to-work’ laws in many states; and by encouraging employers to work part-time jobs with lower pay; and that Mitt Romney and his ilk are more responsible for the loss of millions of American jobs overseas than our trade agreements.

    2. Independent1 July 1, 2016

      Wow!! You’re almost as big a lying snake-oil-salesman as The Donald himself. You were once a Democrat!! What a joke!!

      But see this turkey – you really know nothing about what you post just like AgLander and everyone of your other clueless right-winger friends!!

      And johninPCFL was SO RIGHT!!

      See this from The Atlantic:

      According to Martin Baily and Barry Bosworth of the Brookings Institution, for the past 50 years industrial production in the U.S. has grown at the same rate or even faster than the economy as a whole. This means that contrary to conventional wisdom, manufacturing has not lost ground in terms of its importance in the U.S. economy. Until 2011, when China inched slightly ahead, the United States boasted the world’s largest manufacturing sector, and it continues to be an industrial powerhouse. The general impression that factories in America are disappearing may be true for some sectors and in some regions and cities, but it is inaccurate in the aggregate. We perceive an industry in decline because the great strides that have been made in efficiency and productivity have not generated a proportional increase in jobs. More is being produced, and fewer workers are needed. Between 2000 and 2010, the United States lost 5.7 million manufacturing jobs.

      One reason for these job losses is the economic crisis that began in 2008. But another, more fundamental explanation is the manufacturing industry’s uneven growth. Most of the expansion of U.S. manufacturing has taken place in one specific sector: computers and electronics, while the 90 percent of manufacturing outside this branch—automobiles, aviation, appliances or chemicals, for example—is showing slower growth.


  7. AgLander July 1, 2016

    Melania Trump speaks 4 languages and will bring grace and glamour to her role as first lady.

    Hillary Clinton is a foul curser in only 1 language, although she speaks in tongues when tossing vases and lamps at Bill during one of her numerous psychotic rage filled tantrums worthy of an Arkansas trailer park.

    Donald Trump keeps his zipper zipped when in public and will maintain the proper workplace standards and decorum we expect within the environs of the White House.

    Bill Clinton shows no signs of having deviated from his sex predator ways and would load up for “Animal House-Act II”. His zipper very seldom remains in the closed position and he likes to wear his pants around his ankles when in the presence of young female interns
    Make America proud again, or turn the White House over to a psychotic and her sex predator husband to once again debase our culture and our image? The choice seems pretty clear to all except the walking zombies, better known as the Democrat base.

    1. I of John July 1, 2016

      Does Trump keep his zipper zipped? Ask his ex-wives, oh wait they are forbidden to talk lest the become homeless. What dignity the latest wife has, was bought and paid for not earned.

      1. FireBaron July 1, 2016

        You mean the one who was “The Other Woman” during Marriage number 2? I just wonder what is waiting in the wings when THE DONALD gets tired of number 3?

      2. AgLander July 1, 2016

        The running joke within Democrat circles is that if Hillary somehow gets elected, Bill has no plans to move many clothes with him to the White House because he realizes that at his advanced age and physical limitations, pants will be a burden to remove quickly when he sees an intern, so he simply plans to go naked from the waist down!

        1. Independent1 July 1, 2016

          Do you suppose that was also true of Washington and Lincoln and Jefferson and FDR and JFK and LBJ and Bush 1 and even Ben Franklin?? All very highly thought of leaders and others in American history who were big womanizers??

          You are such a small minded person, you can only seem to think of trash!! Why is that?? My guess is because you fit the bill too.

          1. AgLander July 1, 2016

            Ma’am: You actually answered yourself because the Clintons ARE trash so it’s only natural for me to talk about them as what they are. No two people in politics have done more to coarsen our culture with their crude behavior over the last 30 years….and especially in the 90’s when Bill the predator couldn’t keep his hands off the interns and ran the White House like a sleazy frat house. Sorry if the truth enrages you, but the Clintons deserve all the scorn that can be heaped upon them because they have richly earned it!

          2. Independent1 July 1, 2016

            Nice try there LOWLIE!! BUT IT’S YOU THAT’S TRASH!!

            Bill is no different than numerous leaders of our nation have been – SO YOU SUGGESTING that he is trash, is the same thing AS YOU saying Washington, Lincoln, Franklin and numerous other leaders of our nation are trash.

            You’re such an absolutely totally despicable piece of trash YOURSELF that I can’t even begin to describe HOW TOTALLY WORTHLESS YOU AND YOUR FAKE OPINIONS ARE!!!



          3. AgLander July 1, 2016

            You sound angry……are they out of Old Milwaukee down at the corner convenience store to have caused such venom spewing from you?!

          4. Independent1 July 1, 2016

            Now why would I be angry at a piece of trash who supports a political party that actually murders people?? You realize right, that you’re an accomplice to murder by supporting the Devil’s party??

          5. AgLander July 1, 2016

            Even by liberal standards, you sure hate real good!!!

          6. Independent1 July 1, 2016

            Just like God said he hated Cain because of his deceitfulness, I hate everything you and your ilk stand for:

            The fact that you love money above all else, even more than other people’s lives.

            The fact that you love every worldly thing that you can cram into your lives at the expense of the poor and needy.

            The fact that you hate everyone that’s not like you: the poor, the black, those that are Hispanic and Asian and any other ethnicity that aren’t just like you.

            The fact that you’re willing to lie incessantly and distort reality to get your way – and to dominate everything around you by bullying it into submission with your lies and falsehoods and outright sinfulness.

            The fact that you pretend to be Christians and give Christianity a bad name to the masses because what you believe is not what Christ believed at all; but rather, you’re nothing more than poster children for the Devil.

            Yes, I hate you very much – what you stand for- but I don’t hate the majority of what you hate; which is virtually everything in this life and country which are good but which are not exactly TO YOUR OBVIOUSLY MISGUIDED LIKING!!!!!!!!!!

          7. AgLander July 2, 2016

            Psychotic Screed Alert!! Psychotic Screed Alert!!

    2. The lucky one July 1, 2016

      Interesting that you start by lauding Melania. I didn’t know she was running or has the Don chosen her as VP? There is plenty to criticize about Clinton but you choose to focus on gossip. It’s not hard to see why you are a Trumpster.

      1. AgLander July 1, 2016

        Thank you. I’m glad you find my comments interesting. It validates my efforts to get the lemmings to start using their own brains instead of simply accepting “downloads” from the DNC daily updates.

        1. The lucky one July 1, 2016

          No I don’t find your comments interesting. once I’ve read one or two I’ve got the gist of all the others. What’s interesting is that you feel you have to laud his trophy wife instead of him.

          I get that you hate Clinton. For many reasons I think she would be bad for America but you focus on gossip which trivializes any valid criticisms you may put forth, not that I’ve ever seen you do so.

    3. latebloomingrandma July 1, 2016

      Our first First Lady who has posed nude. What a legacy. Glamor maybe, but no class.

  8. The lucky one July 1, 2016

    “Trump has said NAFTA “was a disaster for this country,” and while any experts would agree with regard to free trade’s impact on the American middle class, most agree that for all of its faults, NAFTA expanded America’s economy and lifted global standards of living.” A good example of talking out of both sides of the mouth. Tokars admits NAFTA has had a negative impact (I’d say disastrous) on the middle class but quickly shrugs that off with an ambiguous and unsupported allegation that it has raised “global standards of living.”

    “The argument against free trade is that it incentivizes outsourcing, costing millions of U.S. manufacturing jobs.” No it is not “THE” argument, just an important one of the many arguments against NAFTA.

    “although Democrats are more cautious of new trade deals” LOL Obama is TPP’s biggest supporter and HRC was on board until Sanders’ popularity caused her to pull back. It’s telling that the Dem platform won’t include her pledge to reject it. She’s already poised to revert back to supporting it.

    “Trump also described the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership as unsalvageable in terms of renegotiation, hinting at his intention to withdraw.” If I had any faith at all in Trump’s honesty and integrity, which I don’t, that could be enough to get me to vote for him. The trouble is he is a born liar and way off the mark on nearly every other issue.

    This article is a thinly veiled attempt to smear TPP opponents by associating their opposition with the demagogue Trump.

  9. Box July 1, 2016

    Im reading a fascinating book called, New Deal or Raw Deal, which studies the FDR presidency. I thought I knew something about FDR but this expands the knowledge 1000-fold. Get this book. It details and who, why, what, how of all major FDR policies and appears to be the major platform or blueprint from which all subsequent presidencies were based. It details the fights between the parties (when real parties still existed) using the same words and arguments as today. Difference is, you get to see what actually happened instead of wondering what comes for us in the future.

    Many of you think im a GOP troll and I am not. Lifelong Democrat who woke up and began to question everything and thats how I came to be against Obama, Hillary and the Socialists and populists. But I now am seeing where it came from and why.

    I was always a fan of FDR for wage laws, social security, WPA, etc. but I didnt understand the effect they would have on government and the mess it would make for the country. Its the best book Ive read on the times and how we got here. No matter what party you are, get the book and read it for the moment we are in, the election. It will open your eyes and put Republicans, Democrats and policymaking in a different light than you are used to.

  10. stsintl July 1, 2016

    Trump knows what his policies would do. He is trying to appeal to the under- and un-educated masses who don’t understand or care for any intellectual discussion of his policies. They think they are SELECTING an Amercian Idol and not ELECTING the POTUS. If they are in the majority, he can get elected with all this nonsense. All he wants is to get his name and picture in the history books. He will choose Paul Ryan as his VP [Virtual President] and let him run the country while he smokes Cuba cigars in the Oval Office.

  11. meridaest July 1, 2016

    I can’t believe that we are taking Trump seriously enough to actually argue about any of his positions on any issue including trade. That anyone would seriously consider voting for him is a national tragedy. Many Republicans can’t imagine themselves supporting Clinton because of major policy differences from Democrats but, for the sake of the country, I encourage you to just consider her proven ability to work with people and think before she speaks. We can work with policy differences but there is no cure for Trump.

    1. ivory69690@yahoo.com July 2, 2016

      the saddest part is the brain dead followers . and seeing how there is (its said ) millions of them think of this each one was to give a $1.00 to his the CLOWNS campaign all the money he would have to pull more of his B/S and say the go hard ones $ 5, 10 ,15 or $25 how good he would be doing . but the thing is with all his brain dead followers thy are just like him cheap SOB’s and thy look at it this way why pay for the CLOWN SHOW if we get it free ?

    2. ivory69690@yahoo.com July 2, 2016

      DONNY DUMP in the house could very well be the beging of the end for the country and the world as we know it

  12. ivory69690@yahoo.com July 2, 2016

    Donald Trump’s Candidacy Is The Third Biggest Risk To The Global Economy Why ? because DONNY DUMP’s name is on it and he will try with his EGO to hell to do his and the biggest bankrupt in history with the country and the worlds name on it


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.