Trump foreign policy

[Mister Mister]

  These latest statements from Trump are really pulling at my 8 year hiatus from voting, though I vowed never to do so again. 

 

 

"I do think it's a different world today, and I don't think we should be nation-building anymore," Trump said. "I think it's proven not to work, and we have a different country than we did then. We have $19 trillion in debt. We're sitting, probably, on a bubble. And it's a bubble that if it breaks, it's going to be very nasty. I just think we have to rebuild our country."

 

He added: "I watched as we built schools in Iraq and they're blown up. We build another one, we get blown up. We rebuild it three times and yet we can't build a school in Brooklyn. We have no money for education because we can't build in our own country. At what point do you say, 'Hey, we have to take care of ourselves?' So, I know the outer world exists and I'll be very cognizant of that. But at the same time, our country is disintegrating, large sections of it, especially the inner cities."

 

Almost sounds like it could have come straight out of the mouth of Ron Paul.  I have to say I am sometimes confused by his obvious intelligence in interviews like this, compared with how he talks at his rallies or in the debates...but hey, I guess it's working for him.

[brandon_b]

Thanks for posting this article. Trump's non-interventionist foreign policy sounds very reasonable. He also had this to say about China:

 

 

"China has got unbelievable ambitions," Trump said. "China feels very invincible. We have rebuilt China. They have drained so much money out of our country that they've rebuilt China. Without us, you wouldn't see the airports and the roadways and the bridges. The George Washington Bridge [in New York], that's like a trinket compared to the bridges that they build in China. We don't build anymore. We had our day."

[KallanDaMan]

On the surface Trump looks like the candidate least likely to start WWIII, but protectionist trade barriers tend to strain relations. 

[shirgall]

On the surface Trump looks like the candidate least likely to start WWIII, but protectionist trade barriers tend to strain relations. 

 

It's entirely possible that his early position on trade barriers is a negotiating tactic intended to make ironing out a real deal more reasonable. 

[Guest Gee]

It's entirely possible that his early position on trade barriers is a negotiating tactic intended to make ironing out a real deal more reasonable.

 

I don't know, but can you have free trade with a unfree country?

 

Say in the US crops are subsidised and, owing to free trade agreements, they are dumped on the African market at a price lower than production preventing the devolopment of a sustainable market etc, etc. Generally this is considered pretty bad. Could trade barriers not then be in this case, mitigating the original subsidies? He's not talking about trade barriers on EU or Japan, it's communist China (presumably because of their centrally planned madness distorting markets just as US crop subsidies distort the African farming market) and Mexico (not sure why Mexico, are the socialist? Perhaps because of the remittances? No idea).

 

Totally cherry picked.

[shirgall]

I don't know, but can you have free trade with a unfree country?

 

 

Indeed, the only way to get there is possibly to impose restrictions on trade that are related directly to reciprocal trade restrictions, working conditions, public policies, et al. We've had squabbles like this in the past, for example when Japan was massively subsidizing its technology industry with MITI, but there's not been a lot of this. TPP is big-time horse trading and less principles in comparison.

[Mister Mister]

What about his talks/speeches is confusing? You can say quite a bit about Trump, but I don't find him confusing in the least.

 

  Sorry confusing wasn't the best word.  I just meant that when you hear him at rallies or debates, he talks one way, but in a more serious interview like this, he comes off as way more intelligent.

[Matthew Ed Moran]

To be fair, in interviews he is probably more on point simply because he has to be. At a rally, he is not being repeatedly questioned and framed by some media reporter that he needs to directly defend himself against so as to not look weak or incompetent.

 

Also, the debates are really only important the first few times, and he was pretty intelligent in the early few in my opinion. But it's still not direct interviewing, so he has to rely more on important phrases than a full explication of his views.

 

The rallies are more about connecting with the audience and entertaining them. I don't know any other politicians who can hold a rally like Trump, and I think when politicians are mostly the same all the time it's creepy and disingenuous. People can usually tell when you're trying to put across a false image, and I think Trump's willingness to show different sides of his personality is actually refreshing for a lot of people.

[brandon_b]

Thanks Mike for posting that video about Trump's speech patterns. Really fascinating communication strategies. Always thought he just simplified his language to appeal to widest possible IQ base. Also, found a video with Scott Adams doing a good breakdown of Trump's linguistic skills.