I just read an article predicting that foreign policy will be the main issue in the 2020 election. To be fair, the left wing "expert" who wrote the piece says that foreign policy will underlie the main issues that will decide the election, not that direct foreign policy will control.
It's a bizarre position. In the last 50 years, foreign policy has never been the controlling issue in a presidential election. The closest we've come was 48 years ago when Richard Nixon beat George McGovern by labeling him as someone who wanted unilateral disarmament in the middle of the Cold War and the hot Vietnam War. Even so, it was more revulsion at McGovern's far left domestic policies and support for disruptive protesters that led to his crushing loss.
Nevertheless, we're told in the article that President Trump has spent much of this year focusing on foreign policy. According to the author Trump divided the world by calling the corona virus the "China virus". (Oh, the horror.) Trump also peremptorily barred travel to the USA from China and from Europe. And let's not forget Trump's "anti-trade" rhetoric and his "anti-NATO" rhetoric. Somehow, working out new and improved trade deals for the USA with a long list of countries is "anti-trade" just like asking NATO countries to honor their treaty obligations by funding their own military forces is "anti-NATO" rhetoric. As I said above, it's bizarre.
Think about it. Here's an so called "expert" who is still upset that Trump cut off travel to the US from China and Europe in the face of the pandemic. That was the original leftist position, and this guy is sticking to it no matter the actual facts. Setting the basis for increased trade is "anti-trade" because Trump did it. Strengthening NATO through increased participation of all NATO countries is "anti-NATO" because again, Trump did it.
I'm sure that somewhere, there must be professors who teach International Relations who are stuck at home because of the virus. They miss the faculty club where they can hobnob with the colleagues who share every one of their opinions to the same extent as if they had all attended the same re-education camp in China and had the views indelibly etched into their brains. They must be sitting at their desks shaking their heads in agreement as they read this nonsense. The truth, though, is that no sane and thinking person would ever accept the claptrap being put forth as "expert" opinion in this article.
Let's be clear. What is going to decide the 2020 election is the answer by the American people to this question: Which candidate do you think will have greater success in restoring the USA to prosperity following the major damage done to the economy by the virus shutdown? If the answer to that question is Trump; he will win. If the answer to that question is Biden, he will win. Sure, there will be some voters who make their selections on other issues, but the deciding block (and it will be huge) will focus one way or another on this question. Foreign policy won't matter -- assuming we are not in a major war. The past won't matter except as it informs the answer the this question. This election, like every single one for the last century will be a decision about the future of America, not about the past.
It's a bizarre position. In the last 50 years, foreign policy has never been the controlling issue in a presidential election. The closest we've come was 48 years ago when Richard Nixon beat George McGovern by labeling him as someone who wanted unilateral disarmament in the middle of the Cold War and the hot Vietnam War. Even so, it was more revulsion at McGovern's far left domestic policies and support for disruptive protesters that led to his crushing loss.
Nevertheless, we're told in the article that President Trump has spent much of this year focusing on foreign policy. According to the author Trump divided the world by calling the corona virus the "China virus". (Oh, the horror.) Trump also peremptorily barred travel to the USA from China and from Europe. And let's not forget Trump's "anti-trade" rhetoric and his "anti-NATO" rhetoric. Somehow, working out new and improved trade deals for the USA with a long list of countries is "anti-trade" just like asking NATO countries to honor their treaty obligations by funding their own military forces is "anti-NATO" rhetoric. As I said above, it's bizarre.
Think about it. Here's an so called "expert" who is still upset that Trump cut off travel to the US from China and Europe in the face of the pandemic. That was the original leftist position, and this guy is sticking to it no matter the actual facts. Setting the basis for increased trade is "anti-trade" because Trump did it. Strengthening NATO through increased participation of all NATO countries is "anti-NATO" because again, Trump did it.
I'm sure that somewhere, there must be professors who teach International Relations who are stuck at home because of the virus. They miss the faculty club where they can hobnob with the colleagues who share every one of their opinions to the same extent as if they had all attended the same re-education camp in China and had the views indelibly etched into their brains. They must be sitting at their desks shaking their heads in agreement as they read this nonsense. The truth, though, is that no sane and thinking person would ever accept the claptrap being put forth as "expert" opinion in this article.
Let's be clear. What is going to decide the 2020 election is the answer by the American people to this question: Which candidate do you think will have greater success in restoring the USA to prosperity following the major damage done to the economy by the virus shutdown? If the answer to that question is Trump; he will win. If the answer to that question is Biden, he will win. Sure, there will be some voters who make their selections on other issues, but the deciding block (and it will be huge) will focus one way or another on this question. Foreign policy won't matter -- assuming we are not in a major war. The past won't matter except as it informs the answer the this question. This election, like every single one for the last century will be a decision about the future of America, not about the past.
No comments:
Post a Comment