Obama on NAFTA: who will he ultimately choose--us or big business?

[yurbud]

Poll question: Obama on NAFTA: who will he ultimately choose--us or big business?

Obama's interview with Fortune where he essentially said his anti-NAFTA statements were campaign bluster could be discouraging unless you consider that it might be big business that's getting snookered, not us.

If elected, once he gets in office, will he take the side of the people or corporations on issues like NAFTA and the general corporate neoliberal agenda that should more properly be called neo-feudalism?

[ErinBerin84]

1. honestly, I didn't think that his comments in Fortune were much different than his past statements

Did I miss the "grand change" that happened in that article? Didn't he essentially say that it needed to be renegotiated so it could work for everyone? I'll try and find the article again, maybe I missed something. Though it is off-putting that a candidate even has to give an interview to "Fortune magazine". And I'm not even suggesting that it might not be campaign bluster all in all, but I don't really think he said anything to that effect in this article.

[BlueJac]

2. It's over for the American worker......

No one will fight the tough fight for us.

[Imperialism Inc.]

3. That he drastically changed what he said is so much spin as far

as I can see.

[NYC_SKP]

4. His stand against the "gas tax holiday" suggests he'll be strategic about it.

Politically strategic? Yes, but more importantly, I think he'll be thinking strategically about the long and short term economic impacts.

Prior presidents supported NAFTA because it was politically expedient AND it delivered short-term economic boosts, seen mostly by businesses and investors, with the long-term negative impacts showing up later and hitting the working class. Shame on you Bill Clinton and anyone who supported NAFTA.

My hopes are that Obama will, as he did with the gas tax, study the reality of the number and choose honesty and make hard choices rather than short term but unsustainable solutions.

He'll have to balance what's good for businesses with what's good for the people over the long run, and I hope he promotes keeping jobs in America and favoring American owned businesses, products, and services.

[Romulox]

5. He surrounded himself with a neo-liberal echo-chamber in the primaries

A hard move to the right in the GE was all too predictable. Obama is a center/right candidate.

[closeupready]

6. Sadly, I do not think he will side with us. But

there are a lot of other things to like about him.

[yurbud]

11. there are things to like, but the neoliberal stuff is impoverishing us almost as fast

as it did South America.

They are like doctors who prescribe smoking for weight loss--it looks like it works but the cure is actually worse than the disease.

[Orsino]

7. He will not be allowed to side with us.

He might, however, use his considerable charisma to find a few worthwhile bones to throw us. I have some hope.

Meanwhile, though, corporate lobbyists are still at large in the halls of Congress, writing legislation for our "representatives," almost literally holding the crayons for them. Judge Obama, in part, by what he does with the tainted legislation (for their will be no other kind) that reaches his desk. Will he have the courage to veto, at least occasionally, the will of the Democratic majority that eagerly supports the corporations?

I have some hope.

[high density]

8. IMO NAFTA is a small problem when compared with offshoring of our technology industry

I'd rather have him focus on our "trade" with China and India before we start focusing on Canada and Mexico.

[Romulox]

9. Translation: *MY* standard of living is threatened by outsourcing IT work

How, pray tell, do you expect laid-off auto workers to pay the high wages American IT workers demand? And, perhaps more to the point, why should they? (Because your Honda payment is due is not a good reason.)

I am actually delighted that so many IT jobs are being outsourced, and that the trend is accelerating. There is no reason why blue collar workers should be asked to shoulder the entire cost of neo-liberal economics.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Romulox]

12. You already said that in post #8.

Well reasoned response, though!

:silly: :hi:

[closeupready]

15. Interesting thing is when NAFTA was being sold, tech workers were all for it.

At least, the ones I knew at the time. Now that they are being targeted for outsourcing, they have a problem with the practice. So while I sympathize with anyone whose job is being outsourced, regardless of how they initially felt about NAFTA, I do understand why those who were initially impacted look askance at tech worker who now say, "no way!"

[NYC_SKP]

17. Yup, and disappearing blue collar jobs were going to be replaced by...

...wonderful jobs in the "information era", we'd just retrain the steelworkers and textile workers and everyone would be happy and working.

And then those information jobs went overseas, too.

Face it folks, the working class was sold out long ago. NAFTA sent manufacturing jobs overseas, immigration cut wages for jobs that can't be outsourced, not many fair paying jobs were left.

Those of us left working, whether we have a medical plan or not, are now paying $$$$ to cover the health costs of everyone without health care.

And here far too many Americans are left with oversized houses filled with shit-crap Chinese products from Wal-Mart and gas guzzling SUVs that are costing more to fill up than food or rent.

The "prosperity" of the 90's was a bubble, a short term effect the boosted the economy but not in a sustainable way.

Groovy.

The shit has hit the fan, some of us saw it coming, now there's going to be hell to pay.

If Obama does the right thing and tells us the truth, people are NOT going to like what they hear. I think he can do it.

[Romulox]

44. DU anecdote: A DU IT worker was griping about having to train his Indian replacement

Knowing the numbers (as well as the fashion in the city the poster hails from,) I asked him: "So, do you drive a Honda, Toyota, or a Subaru?"

"That is different," he responded, "most of my Honda was built in the US!"

"Well," I said, "most of my IT work is done in the US."

That was the end of the thread! :rofl:

[TheFarseer]

37. this is the kind of stuff that isn't helpful

I understand the sentiment, but perhaps now that a majority of workers no matter what field see that their jobs are threatened we can work together to stop this. I hate to see them divide us like this.

[Romulox]

43. Neither is advocating for right wing economic policies on a "progressive" message board

(so long as it isn't my ox being gored, of course!)

"now that a majority of workers no matter what field see that their jobs are threatened we can work together to stop this."


It's too late. An an entire way of life, and an entire region of the country has been decimated.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again: "free trade" hasn't gone too far just because your standard of living is now also threatened. Moreover, even if it were not too late, I will not fight for the jobs of those, like the poster above, who see me, my family, and my part of the country as an acceptable sacrifice to greed and avarice (so long as it isn't his ox being gored, of course.)

Indeed, we newly impoverished workers in the industrial midwest must learn to live with less. One thing that is simple to learn to live without is the labor of our fellow Americans, most of whom continue to support outsourcing to this day...

[amandabeech]

48. I'm in 100% agreement with you.

From a Michigan ex-pat with aging relatives near whom a job cannot be had.

Real family-friendly policies.

I saw NAFTA for what it was right from the get-go and took lots of grief for it, too.

[Johonny]

16. I kinda agree

I don't think most Americans view open trade with Canada as something "destroying America". So I imagine NAFTA isn't totally going away.

[Catherina]

13. Reluctantly I voted "stick to big business"

Obama's a neoliberal.

[Ytzak]

14. Obama will make small changes that are good for the little guy...

He is better than anything the Republican's put up. But money still talks.

[closeupready]

18. I'm hopeful because Obama is more progressive on this issue than

(of course) Bush or Al Gore (who was a fervent NAFTA supporter) or Bill Clinton or Hillary, in whose "celestial choir" speech (and elsewhere), it should have been obvious that she was only going to accelerate this crap.

[eridani]

19. Other

It depends on us, and whether or not enough of us stay active after the election. Pressure from below, folks!

[MJJP21]

20. Sarcozy

I am hoping that Barack will be our Sarcozy in that Sarcozy is an ecomomic nationalist. Sarcozy has said he will deal with trade in a way that if it is good for France he will support it and if not he will walk away. I don't think NAFTA has been bad for all segments of our economy. Clearly some segments have prospered and some have been decimated. What is not being told is that NAFTA has been absolutely devasting to economies south of the border. They have not realized much benefit at all and that is why their is so much crossing the border to our side. If NAFTA was benefitting them they would be staying there. The bottom line is that the US should be seeking "fair trade" not "free trade". When dictatorships outlaw unions and worker rights and determine wage rates, don't have environemental laws, right of redress etc then we should look the other way when they want to trade.

[LWolf]

21. He is a neoliberal.

I don't understand why this is even a question.

[crankychatter]

23. hardly

he's soft on neoliberalism

but FOR it?

you'll have to prove that with more than name dropping a few names from his plethora of advisors

[LWolf]

27. I think it would be more accurate to say

that he's a "softer" neoliberal, than that he's "soft" on neoliberalism. He proves it himself through his platform, voting record, and speeches.

One of the key signatures of neoliberalism is free trade. While Obama says he wants to "amend" NAFTA, he still wants to continue NAFTA.

If you go down a list of neoliberal positions, you will find Obama flirting with most of them.

One Obama supporter told me recently that he "talks right, but will govern left." I don't know where that came from. I interpret that as wishful thinking, in order to excuse his neoliberal leanings.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LWolf]

29. Neoliberalism is based in economics.

I want a president who is not a neoliberal, and who will not continue neoliberal policies and practices.

Fortunately, you don't get to tell me who to vote for, and you sure don't get to tell me to STFU.

My comments have nothing to do with voting. The OP didn't ask who was voting for Obama, but whether or not Obama would side with us or with corporations. Apparently, based on this poll, a majority of DUers agree with me about his neoliberal leanings.

[populistdriven]

22. McCain didn't love America, until he was tortured into it. There are no atheists in foxholes either

Its the general election stupid, lets save these battles for after Obama is in the WH.

[ProSense]

24. Ah, so that's where this nonsense came from

Obama on NAFTA, no change

[crankychatter]

25. it's not either/or - jeezus fuggin keeRIST - nt

[Cha]

26. Here's the Fact Checker on Obama's site via

ProSense's OP..

"Fact Check on Fortune Article Claim that Obama believes ''NAFTA not so bad after all''
June 18, 2008"

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/06/18/fact_check_on_fortune_intervie.php

[Imagevision]

30. Judging by the vote, it appears more DUer's have already written off Obama, interesting...

[BlooInBloo]

31. It's just how DUers are - they're the most fickle and melodramatic WATBs ever....

And always remember: If you don't agree, you're an INHUMAN MONSTER!

:rofl:


EDIT: Subject typo.

EDITEDIT: And also, there are a certain number of Clinton-supporters pretending to support Obama, and are just salivating in the hopes that Obama can be cast as a bad guy.

[AZBlue]

32. I'm really disgusted by DU today. I thought this was a place to support the Dem nominee,

not tear him down.

[LVjinx]

33. Technically, we don't have a nominee until August. Nor do the reps.

Less technically - how does a poll constitute tearing him down? If all the options were anti-Obama, you might have a point. But they aren't.

[Cha]

35. This is where we are ..right now. In The General Election MODE.

"Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party is permitted. When doing so, please keep in mind that most of our members come to this website in order to get a break from the constant attacks in the media against our candidates and our values. Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks that echo the tone or substance of our political opponents are not welcome here."

"You are not permitted to use this message board to work for the defeat of the Democratic Party nominee for any political office. If you wish to work for the defeat of any Democratic candidate in any General Election, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website.


That pretty much covers everything you need to know...

* Constructive criticism of Democrats or the Democratic Party: Permitted.
* Highly inflammatory or divisive attacks against Democrats: Not permitted.
* Using this message board to work for the defeat of any Democratic Party nominee for any political office: Not permitted.

If you follow those rules, you'll be just fine. If you try to find a way around those rules, you take your chances with the moderators. It's that simple."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6344459

There will be no fucking hammering against our candidate.

[AZ Criminal JD]

38. Wooo.. Another tough guy on the internet.

[Cha]

39. Those rules were written by Skinner and yes, he's "tough guy"..

when it comes to getting behind our DEMORCRATIC candidate in the GE, as am I.

[AZ Criminal JD]

40. I know who wrote the rules and I know you have nothing to do with them.

[Cha]

42. Well, I can you are just brilliant but don't have

any real contribution except for sour snarks.

[LWolf]

34. It is.

It's also a place to "provide a resource for the exchange and dissemination of liberal and progressive ideas."

Sometimes those two things contradict each other.

While DU is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, it is definitely a partisan site.

Some Democrats, myself among them, believe that we keep the party strong, healthy, and viable when we hold the party accountable for democratic principles and ideals. That excusing anti-democratic positions enables the complicity that we are currently seeing in Congress. For some of us, it is essential that dissent not be silenced, and that Democratic candidates and reps be held to high standards.

[TheFarseer]

36. We're going to get screwed

We'll just have to wait for their standard of living to rise and ours to drop to the point where it's not advantageous financially to outsource, that's all. Enjoy the ride down, you fucking peasants :grr:

[Overseas]

41. Gosh, who would John Sidney McCain III choose ?

[Straight Shooter]

45. People exist to serve the government. The government exists to serve corporations.

I don't know who originally said that, but I've never forgotten it.

Take everything a politician says with a very large grain of salt. Great expectations create great disappointments.

[Occam Bandage]

46. Other: He'll do what he finds best for the nation as a whole. Business will call it "alarmingly

protectionist." Progressives will call it "a sell-out to Wall Street." In twenty years, history will look kindly upon his decisions.

[PM7nj]

47. Let's say this: He will be 100x better than McCain.

Okay?