The new meme for the media is that President Trump is reversing himself on issues across the board.
It is so obvious that they have plotted to use this ploy by the same phrase repeated on different networks ad nauseum. The hope is to anger and alienate the Trump voter from the president. Never forget that they want ouster, via impeachment, scandal or something more nefarious.
The GOP and Trump voters should ignore this tactic and use their own eyes and ears to evaluate what he’s doing.
For instance, some are upset that Trump did not officially call China a currency manipulator. It was a term he used in the campaign repeatedly. Yet after Xi Jinping’s visit to Mar-a-lago, Trump appears to have softened his China stance.
But did he?
He has already successfully labeled China a currency manipulator by threatening to do something about it. To avoid that something, China has acted and conceded on several goals Trump wanted. Why would you fulfill a threat if the other person has withdrawn it? It isn’t currently an issue and Trump did it without any kind of belligerent talk, chest thumping or threats.
In return, China has stopped oil and coal deliveries to North Korea, abstained in a vote at the U.N. for the first time, stopped flights from Beijing to Pyongyang and said they were open to talks about halting the NoKo nukes without North Korea involved.
What did we give in return? No concessions that I can see.
Those accomplishments alone – in his first 100 days – are more than Clinton, Bush and Obama did in 24 years.
So should supporters be angry about it?
When Trump was running for president a friend of mine argued that he would be disastrous in dealings with China because he would impose a 35% tariff on goods, meaning that the price of goods here would go up and she and others would no longer be able to pay for them.
I mentioned that Trump had tactics he used in business outlined in the Art of the Deal. You pick a stance on higher ground than you think practical, then negotiate – always to your advantage – from there. Thus, he would not let China take advantage of us, but he would not be unreasonable in achieving his goals either.
She didn’t understand and remained frustrated, angry and fearful.
I never believed Trump would have to go through on that promise because he is too savvy in deal making and could avoid it.
It will be like this in future issues. Why carry out a campaign threat if the issue is satisfactorily handled?