What dont they like about the deal?https://apnews.com/7aa1a218a152482594dcdb420691646b
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump spent more than a year browbeating the leaders of Canada and Mexico into agreeing to a rewrite of North American trade rules. And on Friday, leaders of those two nations are set to sign the pact at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Now, Trump faces what could prove a more formidable foe: His own Congress.
============================================
Good luck to him. This might prove to be interesting to watch it play out.
https://apnews.com/7aa1a218a152482594dcdb420691646b
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump spent more than a year browbeating the leaders of Canada and Mexico into agreeing to a rewrite of North American trade rules. And on Friday, leaders of those two nations are set to sign the pact at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Now, Trump faces what could prove a more formidable foe: His own Congress.
============================================
Good luck to him. This might prove to be interesting to watch it play out.
Shame that the House has ZERO SAY in any treaties we sign onto; they only require SENATE APPROVAL.
:shock: Ooops!!
"many Democrats say they want the new agreement to strengthen its protections for American workers from low-wage Mexican competition. Yet any such changes could raise new objections from Republican free traders who want to limit the ways the pact could restrict corporate practices in North America."Should they resist, they will expose their actual sympathy for Canada and Mexico brow beaten leaders , not for a seemingly better deal for the people of America. Once again, the question will be of the left (as it is on immigration) just whose side are you on, anyway?
Should the Dems choose political suicide, I'm sure Trump would be delighted to assist.
Should they resist, they will expose their actual sympathy for Canada and Mexico brow beaten leaders , not for a seemingly better deal for the people of America. Once again, the question will be of the left (as it is on immigration) just whose side are you on, anyway?
Should the Dems choose political suicide, I'm sure Trump would be delighted to assist.
https://apnews.com/7aa1a218a152482594dcdb420691646b
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump spent more than a year browbeating the leaders of Canada and Mexico into agreeing to a rewrite of North American trade rules. And on Friday, leaders of those two nations are set to sign the pact at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Now, Trump faces what could prove a more formidable foe: His own Congress.
============================================
Good luck to him. This might prove to be interesting to watch it play out.
12:30 a.m.
President Donald Trump says he will shortly be providing formal notice to Congress that he will terminate the North American Free Trade Agreement, giving lawmakers six months to approve the replacement he recently signed.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One while returning to Washington from Argentina, Trump says: “I will be formally terminating NAFTA shortly.”
Seeking to gain leverage with skeptical lawmakers to approve the revised trade pact, Trump says Congress “will have a choice” as it considers the agreement he signed with the leaders of Mexico and Canada on Friday during the Group of 20 summit.
He says they can choose between the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement or “pre-NAFTA, which works very well.”
Trump has made renegotiating NAFTA a centerpiece of his presidency.
https://apnews.com/abd4fccb9a834b74...n=SocialFlow&utm_medium=AP&utm_source=Twitter
https://apnews.com/7aa1a218a152482594dcdb420691646b
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump spent more than a year browbeating the leaders of Canada and Mexico into agreeing to a rewrite of North American trade rules. And on Friday, leaders of those two nations are set to sign the pact at the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Now, Trump faces what could prove a more formidable foe: His own Congress.
============================================
Good luck to him. This might prove to be interesting to watch it play out.
I don't think there'll be any problem with Congress.
Given a choice between the USMCA and whatever agreements were in effect before NAFTA, I'm thinking Congress is going to go with USMCA.
Oh...it's my understanding that the USMCA is a "trade agreement", not a "trade treaty". It is my understanding that a treaty requires a 2/3 majority vote, while an agreement only requires a simple majority. Is this correct?
Should they resist, they will expose their actual sympathy for Canada and Mexico brow beaten leaders , not for a seemingly better deal for the people of America. Once again, the question will be of the left (as it is on immigration) just whose side are you on, anyway?
Should the Dems choose political suicide, I'm sure Trump would be delighted to assist.
It normal these days where partisanship reigns along with loyalty to political party to triumph over what may be good for the nation. Neither major party gives anything proposed or offered by the other a thought. Being offered or proposed by the other party is enough to be against it no matter the merits of it.
I don't know a thing about this new NAFTA, good, bad or indifferent. But I know the democrats will oppose it only because Trump put it together. Not whether or not it would end being good or bad for the nation. I don't think they care about that one iota. There is no hope for this country as long as our elected officials in Washington, both parties, only care about their political party, what's good for their party over what is good for the nation.
Screw you all. You hyper partisan's are the problem.
An executive agreement requires no Senatorial approval and is not legally binding.
Okay. If you say so.
So...is the USMCA a trade treaty, a trade agreement or an executive agreement?
Depending on the answer, Congress doesn't matter, Congress needs a simple majority vote or Congress needs 2/3 majority vote.
Given that Trump says this will go to Congress, it's evident that this is not an executive agreement.
Concur. If the agreement is even marginally better than the previous one it’ll pass easily. Pelosi and other Dem leaders understand the current optics in D.C. and around the country. Obstructing a clear win would be counterproductive to their messaging of thoughtful cooperation. Only Trump and his minions don’t seem to get playing to a single group is a losing strategy.It's my guess that this will get through congress without much trouble.
Concur. If the agreement is even marginally better than the previous one it’ll pass easily. Pelosi and other Dem leaders understand the current optics in D.C. and around the country. Obstructing a clear win would be counterproductive to their messaging of thoughtful cooperation. Only Trump and his minions don’t seem to get playing to a single group is a losing strategy.
Nonsense.
The Dem's are not the Godawful Trumpsters.
What dont they like about the deal?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Shame that the House has ZERO SAY in any treaties we sign onto; they only require SENATE APPROVAL.
:shock: Ooops!!
Agree. Especially your view on MBS and Trump’s handling of Kashoggi’s murder. I believe Trump’s acceptance of the Saudis explanation makes us look weak and more interested in commerce than basic human decency.There is simply nothing in the NEW NAFTA that is objectionable really. It is in a word NAFTA 0.000001.
Making a big political to-do about this deal would be much like using a stinking lousy $14B in arms deals with Saudi and making that the pretext for doing absolutely nothing in response to MBS's murder of a journalist and a US resident. Who cares about exiting a $14B arms deal. Its not worth our time to "debate" a stinking $14B in arms. Just because bombastic Donald calls it a $450B does not make it so. Saudi does not even have the money to cobble together a $100B arms deal and they are not going to reshape their US based military hardware for Chinese or Russia hardware for what they can buy.
Same thing with this trade deal. There is not enough here to argue about. There will be some political posturing and it will pass. The issue was always whether Canada would climb aboard. Now that they have, if it were not for the incessant need for Congressman to posture, it would likely sail through.
The overarching context of this deal and everything Donald is that he does virtually nothing from the WH Executive for the American People and everything for himself. Everybody else is just along for the ride. First President I can remember that does not have a shred of a Public Servant in him. He simply uses his office for his own gain. Everything else is Politics, PR nonsense, bluster and rabble rousing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?