Is it really “extreme” to think we should have fair trade policies?
Mrs. Clinton is reinforcing (if not running on) Obama's policies... in that seamless continuum so beneficial to the 1%.
And Obama wants to make the TIPP and TPP part of his "legacy." How better to ensure those big bucks from 6-figure speaking gigs, post-Presidency (as has been role-modeled by the Clintons).
And then there's the odious FACT that Mrs. Clinton gets most of her campaign contributions from banks and corporations that are very much behind these new plans for global hegemonic control by Big Money interests.
These trade agreements don't just send industries out of the U.S. and create a global race to the bottom in employee salaries; nor do they "just" destroy ecosystems like so many DEAD things to exploit for sales. These agreements essentially nullify national LAWS, many of which were hard-won. These laws protect labor rights, public health, and important ecosystems. And NONE of them will matter once insider courts get to determine the extent to which these protections inhibit profit.
Only profits will matter to the newly installed network of pro-corporate global tribunals. No wonder the people in U.K and Germany are out in the streets protesting! No wonder across Latin and South America the environmentalists are doing their utmost to oppose the rape of their natural resources.
This is a global pandemic and TPP and TIPP will codify into law--the rights of trespassers over all (and everyone) else!
The headline sez: "President Trump Fills World Leaders With fear" - I'm sure they are joined by the majority electorate as well, given his percentage of negative is about 70%. The problem is the Dem establishment "alternative" is no alternative at all, but a different threat in so many areas and quite possibly will NOT beat Trump. Clintons negative number is about 55% and climbing, while her positive is under 40% and falling.....accelerating fast.
While the world circles the drain the only positive candidate still with a functional moral compass that would beat Trump easily (unlike Clinton!) is Bernie Sanders!
YOU "World leaders" had better get on the freakin phone and advocate for a candidate that can put us on a more or less even keel and work for a viable future! Its now or never - one way or the other - speak and act now or forever hold your peace!
There is nothing that Hillary Clinton can say or do to be convincing on this issue. So what if she demands that President Obama withdraw the TPP? She doesn't "oppose" the deal out of any deep philosophical understanding. She supposedly has a couple of quibbles with the details. She'll just renegotiate a minor or provision or two if elected and tell us she made it into the greatest deal ever made.
But, let's not make the mistake that Donald Trump is truly better on trade. Yes, he talks about jobs. He wants our jobs back. His vision, however, is for those jobs to be low-paying and low benefits. He'd probably be happy if they were perma-temp jobs. Trump might understand that trade deals laid the foundation for jobs to be shipped overseas, but he doesn't understand that corporate greed is what boxed those jobs up in crates to be shipped. Corporate profits are generally at all time highs. They are so high even The Economist has declared that they are too high. Corporations could manufacture things here. They just don't want to because they can make more money elsewhere. Trump isn't going to address that problem. He wants his business leader firiends to negotiate trade deals so that we "win." Their version of winning isn't mine.
Hillary would give us crumbs and call them a cake. Trump would give us crumbs and call it a souffle. Either way, we're still eating crumbs.
Clinton said she was opposed to the TPP because it was a "distraction".
That is not an objection on the merits.
When, having been elected, she can maintain that it is no longer a distraction, she can take the position that the TPP is the gold standard of trade deals, and claim that she has been consistent all along.
HRC better move fast and convincingly to the LEFT or, should she get the Dem nomination, she will lose the election. If for some reason she wins, she'd then better govern convincingly to the LEFT or she will be residing during a revolution.