General Discussion

pampango

(24,692 posts)

26. As I said, specifics matter (for better or worse) but 'comprehensive' is not 'bad'.

Sat Apr 25, 2015, 07:33 AM

Apr 2015

You are right. The republican party today is not the one of the 1930's and 1940's anyway. (I'm not sure about it being so different from the 1980's.)

While they were/are both pro-corporate, the earlier version did it with high tariffs protecting the domestic markets for their corporate sponsors while modern ones do the exact opposite.

I wonder if FDR would have lowered tariffs in the 1930's and come up with the UN, World Bank, IMF and International Trade Organization in the 1940's if the republican party had not been opposed to all of them. (At least their fringe is still opposed to all of them.) Did he - would he have - really believed in internationalism no matter what or were his actions more a reaction against the policies he inherited from his republican predecessors? I have always thought he acted out of conviction but have not studied him enough to know that for sure.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Republicans are the enemy- except on trade issues [View all] cali Apr 2015 OP

I'm happy to agree with the Republicans whenever they're right. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2015 #1

I disagree PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #2

If Republicans get to ,,,,, Cryptoad Apr 2015 #25

I agree PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #32

Republican states that refuse Medicaid expansion have already legalized murder. onecaliberal Apr 2015 #51

Lulz Jesus Malverde Apr 2015 #6

......actually they're almost always right............. SamKnause Apr 2015 #14

I don't think you've followed me. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2015 #22

Thanks for your reply and input. SamKnause Apr 2015 #24

He's saying they're right on Erich Bloodaxe BSN Apr 2015 #54

Thanks for the explanation. SamKnause Apr 2015 #55

Please note that I explicitly said that I *didn't* think what you're accusing me of saying. N.T Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2015 #57

I have heard Republicans PowerToThePeople Apr 2015 #31

Yes because Bipartisanship has served us so well. Katashi_itto Apr 2015 #36

I'm not sure where that came from - did you skimread? N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Apr 2015 #37

No I didn't. Your mendacity was not lost on me. Katashi_itto Apr 2015 #38

Agree with every word you wrote. cheapdate Apr 2015 #45

Well said. nt tridim Apr 2015 #53

Particularly the tea party - except on trade issues. pampango Apr 2015 #3

Thanks cali...nt Jesus Malverde Apr 2015 #4

My opposition to the TPP has a lot to do with the fact that it deals with SO MUCH more than trade. stillwaiting Apr 2015 #5

exactly cali Apr 2015 #7

As did FDR's International Trade Organization. Democrats used to support that concept. pampango Apr 2015 #13

The times are so different cali Apr 2015 #15

I can't argue with "Things are different now. History (and FDR) are not that relevant." n/t pampango Apr 2015 #19

The leaked chapters are BAD. stillwaiting Apr 2015 #17

As I said, specifics matter (for better or worse) but 'comprehensive' is not 'bad'. pampango Apr 2015 #26

And I wonder if FDR would support the World Bank, IMF, and International Trade Organization stillwaiting Apr 2015 #27

He probably would not be surprised that the republican base opposes them and always has. pampango Apr 2015 #56

One thing seems sure, that there will be huge payoffs to the supporters of TPP! The only TV...... dmosh42 Apr 2015 #8

Kicked and recommended a whole bunch! Enthusiast Apr 2015 #9

K&R SamKnause Apr 2015 #10

I simply don't get why.... Novara Apr 2015 #11

I don't understand your comment on China, couldn't another trade deal of those same nations HereSince1628 Apr 2015 #16

one of the arguments I hear over and over is that we must do this before China rurallib Apr 2015 #29

I really don't understand it. There's less there there than in the there we know of in TPP. HereSince1628 Apr 2015 #34

Obama is doing the bidding... sendero Apr 2015 #18

So this is the Domino Theory AGAIN aspirant Apr 2015 #20

I suspect that you haven't heard ONE SINGLE EXPLANATION ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #30

Why don't you tell me why it's such a good thing? Novara Apr 2015 #42

I can't tell you why it's a good thing (or a bad thing) ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #46

Yet I have heard contradictions to those claims. What's the truth? Novara Apr 2015 #47

Have you read this? ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2015 #49

Yeah, I have, and it doesn't convince me Novara Apr 2015 #50

In reality ... GeorgeGist Apr 2015 #12

To Tell.... Cryptoad Apr 2015 #21

AKA economics AgingAmerican Apr 2015 #23

Well, apparently unless they are staff leaking parts of the draft HereSince1628 Apr 2015 #28

Considering how badly the US has been screwed on recent trade deals rurallib Apr 2015 #33

The very same Republicans that vowed FROM HIS INAUGURATION NIGHT ONWARD bullwinkle428 Apr 2015 #35

Sorry, I'm hearing a peep from them, a big peep, They are for it. Big time. Autumn Apr 2015 #40

Well this is the money shot. zeemike Apr 2015 #44

I'm fucking befuddled. I don't get it. Autumn Apr 2015 #39

You are supposed to vote for the person with the D behind their name LondonReign2 Apr 2015 #43

This is taking on the shape of the classic triangulation that brought us NAFTA myrna minx Apr 2015 #41

Cali fadedrose Apr 2015 #48

This is a prime example of "It's okay if a Democrat does it." alarimer Apr 2015 #52