General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'm curious: If Joe Biden can improve relations with China, and get an actual beneficial trade deal
with China buying our farmers crops again, would that improve our standing with rural voters?
In my mind, I dont see why we can also be a party that includes rural voters. I dont understand the deep loyalty rural voters have to the GOP. I really dont get it.
I think Trump has left an opening for Democrats to improve its standing with rural voters because he has fucked up so royally.
I bring this up because the patches of dirt in Wyoming, the Dakotas, and the other flyover states send more people to the Senate than the Democratic Party does.
RockRaven
(14,966 posts)Trade War giving him the leverage to make China negotiate.
People can rationalize damn near anything. Facts don't matter as much as emotions and "gut feelings" etc.
In It to Win It
(8,248 posts)...and in the end it would actually benefit people.
RockRaven
(14,966 posts)I'm just saying don't expect rural areas to give him any credit for it.
There will be no reward for doing what you think is right, except knowing that you did what you thought was right.
In It to Win It
(8,248 posts)marylandblue
(12,344 posts)You called them "patches of dirt" and 'flyover country." Trump greatly benefitted from your condescension and used it as part of his politics of greivance. Now they don't want crap from you. Sorry.
"Flyover country" should be banned.
In It to Win It
(8,248 posts)Some people do see the trade issue with China is apart of a values belief, and Americas position on trade worldwide as apart of a set of values.
...and Im not calling the states or people themselves patches of dirt. I was kinda being literal. Im saying the actual patches of dirt between each town in these states have more Senate representation than the Democratic Party.
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)And you called it flyover country. It's not just about your choice of words, it's an attitude that a lot of "coastal elites" convey and Trump was very effective in turning this attitude against us. We aren't getting them back with some trade deal that may add a few cents to their bottom line. If we want them back, we need to give them some respect.
This seems obvious to me, but it is heretical to many Democrats. They know it too. Don't shoot the messenger.
underpants
(182,791 posts)Hate meaning mainly racism but with some sexism, intolerance, and generally being an asshole thrown in.
He was so over the top they could say Well I dont like HOW he says it.... that bullshit. They dont care how he says it, they like it. He cost them farms and everyone thousands of dollars with his dumbass tariffs. They dont care. They get to wink and nod at each other in public because Trump says what they want to hear.
Glamrock
(11,799 posts)You should write for The Onion, In It!
unblock
(52,209 posts)and Biden was just taking credit for his "work"
Because all they do is lie lie lie.
MontanaFarmer
(630 posts)It won't bring them all back, but some. Commodity prices are shitty from both poor trade deals under trump and decades of shitty ag policy that frankly has been written by agribusiness and pushed by both parties. A more meaningful step would be to push policies that increase food security and commodity prices. If the Biden administration and rural democrats frame it right, and execute it right, there are opportunities to both improve farmers' bottom line and help in the fight against climate change. I'll be in this fight, trying to help craft policy and steer the messaging as we head into the next farm bill.
JI7
(89,249 posts)but under Trump China has been free to do as they want and have more power and influence around the world.
So it will be even more difficult.
In It to Win It
(8,248 posts)The TPP required a coalition of countries.
Unfortunately, China is too big to go at it alone. Although, Im sure its difficult, I think Biden is capable of leading a coalition of countries that can actually limit Chinas influence and bad economic practices.
MontanaFarmer
(630 posts)It wasn't perfect, multilateral trade deals rarely are, but Obama was smart enough to see China's influence in the region needed to be checked. Trump tore all that up because 1) he's a fucking vindictive asshole and 2) the only "deals" he'd ever made were bilateral, so i guess he automatically assumed that bilateral deals are better and that he, master negotiator, could make a good one. We're still paying the price.
Agree.
moondust
(19,979 posts)the free socialist money bribes won't go on forever?
Maybe depends on what China has done to replace the U.S. as major supplier of soybeans, etc. Is somebody else meeting China's demand now?
Ask Trump's Ambassador to China and former Iowa Governor Terry Branstad--if you can find him. (He resigned as ambassador last month to work on Trump's re-election campaign. )