Mexico ready to deal

Garmel said:
Is there any proof of this besides news articles? If so, do you have a link?
Click to expand...

Proof? Did you read the letter released by Mexico or is that "Fake News"? Did you see Trump on video stating the exact quote above? McConnel openly stated the Senate was not supportive of Mexico tarriffs and was prepared to vote on legislation "early in the week" should the tariffs have gone into effect. How do you reconcile the facts with Trumps statements?
 
Seattle Husker said:
Proof? Did you read the letter released by Mexico or is that "Fake News"? Did you see Trump on video stating the exact quote above? McConnel openly stated the Senate was not supportive of Mexico tarriffs and was prepared to vote on legislation "early in the week" should the tariffs have gone into effect. How do you reconcile the facts with Trumps statements?
Click to expand...

Did we or did we not get an agreement with Mexico that never would have happened without Trump?
 
Last edited:
Garmel said:
Mexico has to do work on their side or the US will take consequences.
Click to expand...

That's specific? We agree to talk in 45 days if we don't like Mexico's evaluation of their own laws or actions taken to stem immigration? That letter is amiguous. Contrary to Trump's fabrication (read LIE) of it being 1 page of a long and complex agreement, there is no specified actions or penalties. It's a political spin instrument.
 
Seattle Husker said:
That's specific? We agree to talk in 45 days if we don't like Mexico's evaluation of their own laws or actions taken to stem immigration? That letter is amiguous. Contrary to Trump's fabrication (read LIE) of it being 1 page of a long and complex agreement, their is no specified actions or penalties. It's a political spin instrument.
Click to expand...

LOL! Wow, you're really stretching it, especially now that after Trump's actions Mexico has been more helpful of late.
 
Garmel said:
LOL! Wow, you're really stretching it, especially now that after Trump's actions Mexico has been more helpful of late.
Click to expand...

What am I stretching? Page 1 applauded an agreement nobody had seen. Now that the agreement is public the talking point shifted to "but the threat of tariffs got Mexico to act." I didn't argue that. Mexico appears to be taking some actions, some of the same actions tried before which later waned. Remember when the State Department gave Mexico cash to secure it's Southern Border which then saw pictures of clashes at border checkpoints. That effort was shortlived. Remember when Mexico began capturing illegal immigrants from that infamous train and caravans? That too was shortlived.

The argument I'm making is that there is NO new agreement or longterm commitment with Mexico to stem illegal immigration but merely much of the same. Trump (and Pompeo) are claiming something new because they had backed themselves into a corner and Rule #1 in the Trump admin is never admit fault.

The roots of the illegal immigration problem are systemic, starting with failed governments in Central America. Unless you can positively influence that you are simply treating the symptoms.
 
Seattle Husker said:
The argument I'm making is that there is NO new agreement or longterm commitment with Mexico to stem illegal immigration but merely much of the same. Trump (and Pompeo) are claiming something new because they had backed themselves into a corner and Rule #1 in the Trump admin is never admit fault.
Click to expand...
Yes, it is an agreement regardless on how you feel about it. How effective it will be in the long term remains in the air. However, so far so good.
 
Garmel said:
Yes, it is an agreement regardless on how you feel about it. How effective it will be in the long term remains in the air. However, so far so good.
Click to expand...
An agreement to talk. So far so good. Lol!

At what point do you stop defending the indefensible?
 
Garmel said:
Hardly. Keep using the MSM narrative. LOL!
Click to expand...

I'll bite. Give YOUR translation of the ambiguous 1 page "agreement". Move beyond the cliche "MSM" and "Fake News" monikers. Please engage your reading comprehension and analytical skills and outline what was agreed to in your own words.

The agreement is public. We can all read the letter and apply our own critical reasoning skills.

OR you can come forward and say the agreement doesn't matter, regardless of it's efficacy because the Mexican government is taking some measure of action. That position is at least defensible rather than trying to claim up is down and down is up.
 
Last edited:
Seattle Husker said:
I'll bite. Give YOUR translation of the ambiguous 1 page "agreement". Move beyond the cliche "MSM" and "Fake News" monikers. Please engage your reading comprehension and analytical skills and outline what was agreed to in your own words.

The agreement is public. We can all read the letter and apply our own critical reasoning skills.

OR you can come forward and say the agreement doesn't matter, regardless of it's efficacy because the Mexican government is taking some measure of action.
Click to expand...

As I said the 4th and 5th paragraphs tell you what it is. In my mind it tells me that Mexico has to reexamine what they're doing with illegal immigration and that the U.S. will punish them if they don't. Does it leave room for possible further talk? Yes. Is it an agreement? Yes, because both parties signed it and agreed to its terms.
 
Seattle Husker said:
It's more of the infamous 4D Chess! Of course, this new talking point isn't mentioned among the victory laps on page 1 of this thread.

Just once it would me nice to read a mea culpa recognizing you were suckered with the Trump spin and the reality is more WTF.

The reality: Trump had GOP Senators (and Corporate America) ready to quickly override Mexico tariffs and needed a face saving maneuver. The letter has no specific commitments. Let's disregard that DJT stood on the lawn of the White House and proclaimed this single page letter was "1 page of a very long and very complex agreement."

Mexico appears to understand the Trump admins emphasis on immigration. Time will tell but the theatrics are laughable and the defenses posited here are ludicrous.
Click to expand...
Whatever Obama tried to do was laughable.
 
Seattle Husker said:
So the agreement is "lipservice" with the goal being more support for punishing Mexico if/when they fail to make an appreciable dent in the flow of immigrants? Did I paraphrase that correctly?
Click to expand...
I think Mexico’s actions have confirmed that it is more than mere lipservice.
 
mchammer said:
I think Mexico’s actions have confirmed that it is more than mere lipservice.
Click to expand...

What are they doing differently than before? I suggest studying 2014 when Mexico first made it illegal to ride the trains and initially enforced the law.

BTW- lipservice was your word from page 1 of the thread
 
Seattle Husker said:
What are they doing differently than before? I suggest studying 2014 when Mexico first made it illegal to ride the trains and initially enforced the law.

BTW- lipservice was your word from page 1 of the thread
Click to expand...
Why did they backslide? This agreement now makes it harder to backslide.
 
mchammer said:
Why did they backslide? This agreement now makes it harder to backslide.
Click to expand...

Why did they backslide? Priorities change on both sides of the border. This "crisis" will be abandoned for another which will resurface this problem because the root issue wasn't addressed adequately.

Makes it harder in which way? The tariff threats will resurface? Those tariff threats that McConnell said he'd overturn with legislation?
 
Seattle Husker said:
Makes it harder in which way? The tariff threats will resurface? Those tariff threats that McConnell said he'd overturn with legislation?
Click to expand...

McConnell was just talking. He knows that if he and the other senators tried that they would be out of office in the next election.
 
Garmel said:
McConnell was just talking. He knows that if he and the other senators tried that they would be out of office in the next election.
Click to expand...

Right. I think the economy and corporate $$ is more important to them than Trump's support which is why the "agreement" was manufactured. Trump wasn't willing to call their bluff and the GOP leadership knows they couldn't slit their own throats by trashing the only thing they have going for themselves in 2020, the economy.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Right. I think the economy and corporate $$ is more important to them than Trump's support which is why the "agreement" was manufactured. Trump wasn't willing to call their bluff and the GOP leadership knows they couldn't slit their own throats by trashing the only thing they have going for themselves in 2020, the economy.
Click to expand...
You are referring to the Trump economy, of course.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Right. I think the economy and corporate $$ is more important to them than Trump's support which is why the "agreement" was manufactured. Trump wasn't willing to call their bluff and the GOP leadership knows they couldn't slit their own throats by trashing the only thing they have going for themselves in 2020, the economy.
Click to expand...

Nope. Being reelected is the most important thing to a career politician. There's no way in hell he could get enough senators to go along with it.
 
Garmel said:
Nope. Being reelected is the most important thing to a career politician. There's no way in hell he could get enough senators to go along with it.
Click to expand...

And the economy will have more bearing on their reelection than any support from Trump. Disrupting supply chains for American manufacturing would be devastating to the economy. Look no further than New Balance's statement last week against the tarrifs. 14 plants in America that woud have been impacted because there is no American supplier for components of the shoes they produce.
 
Last edited:
Seattle Husker said:
And the economy will have more bearing on their reelection than any support from Trump. Disrupting supply chains for American manufacturing would be devastating to the economy. Look no further than New Balance's statement last week against the tarrifs. 14 plants in America that woud have been impacted because there is no American supplier for components of the shoes they produce.
Click to expand...

At the same time it causes more businesses to come back to America and provides more work here. It's not a zero sum game.
 
Garmel said:
Nope. They have to get votes from Trumps' supporters or they're gone. It's that simple.
Click to expand...

Even Trump won't be getting those votes if the economy falters. His margin of error is pretty small as it is. Trump knows this too which is why the tariff threat with Mexico is hollow. If it wasn't, he would have received actual commitments.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Even Trump won't be getting those votes if the economy falters. His margin of error is pretty small as it is. Trump knows this too which is why the tariff threat with Mexico is hollow. If it wasn't, he would have received actual commitments.
Click to expand...

Tariffs of 5% to a 3rd world country are not going to destroy the economy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top