Well it is time to call out those Senators who are against President Trump’s U.S-Mexico-Canada Agreement (the new trade agreement that replaces NAFTA). While the original word out several months ago was that it was going to be problematic, by the lame-stream media and the anti-Trumpers, it has actually been beneficial and while you can’t always get what you want, there has to be some give and take. With that being said, let’s look at the numbers of who voted for and who voted against this trade agreement, which is one of the most favorable for the United States in decades. The Senate voted 89-10 and of course, Nancy “that San Francisco treat” Pelosi is making claims that her fellow Democrats are responsible for the whole thing, which is not a truthful statement but we are talking Senate, not the House (which passed the measure in December), so let’s pull back and see who voted against a very Pro-U.S.A trade agreement.
Those who voted against this agreement are the usual Democrat Senators, Minority Leader Chuck “Chuckie” Schumer of New York, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Cory “I am delusional” Booker of New Jersy, and Kamala “I am better than you” Harris of Califonication. The lesser knowns or more quite voics are Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, and Brian Schatz of Hawaii. The two outsiders outside of the Democrat party include a Republican Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and our Communist parading around as a Democrat or Independent Bernie “I’m a lazy bum” Sanders.
Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania argues, “We have a trade deficit with Mexico.” and he continues, “Every credible and reputable economist I know thinks that doesn’t matter a bit in terms of measuring economic health But that ‘s not the view of the administration. I believe that they set out to renegotiate NAFTA for the purpose of diminishing trade with Mexico.” Why should we care about diminishing trade with Mexico? The Clinton era NAFTA was a bust and hurt American jobs. USMCA requires 75% of automobile parts be manufactured in the US, Canada & Mexico, to avoid tariffs and 40-45% of those parts be made by workers who earn at least $16/hour by 2023. Sounds like to me, Mexico can’t screw us over by paying low wages to outbid the other guy in car parts. Yet Toomey can’t see the benefits of this deal.
Old “I’m a bum” Bernie Sanders is not going to be for anything that doesn’t steal at least half the wages from the workers to fund his communistic ideologies. The rest of the group is just anti-Trump and have an ax to grind against Trump. The truth is, these are the people who hate Trump so much that they don’t want to see him succeed because he is not a career politician, which in most cases means they have no real world experiences and haven’t a clue how the economy really works. Perhaps they need a refresher course in Economics 101. Or in Bernie’s case, he needs to have an open mind to a Capitalist economy that helps the majority, not the minority. If you want to argue that point, think about this: A communistic economy means no one wins but the top dogs. At least a Capitalist economy gives everyone a chance to make money and if they aren’t making enough to get by, they have the opportunity to change their situation, whereas communism doesn’t give you much of anything.
At any rate, in spite of the votes, Trump’s economy is thriving. In spite of the naysayers, we have a lot more growth, the lowest unemployment rate since I was three-years old (1969) and we are getting trade agreements that are more in our favor and not in the other guy’s favor. Just look at the agreement with China. It is going to benefit the agricultural community a lot more than expected. Just give him time, Trump can get it done.
Educated Cowpuncher 