Often, political candidates have to convince the potential undecided of their candidacy as well as the dedication to follow through on the plans they put forth during the prospective campaign. By the time the undecided voter has been won over, the base and any crossover votes would have already been tallied to get across the victory line.
The eyes remain on the candidate as they anticipate the pending political agenda they were elected to implement. Even in a landslide victory, mandate in tow, there are challenges from the opposition party but yet proposalsare still put forward to appease those whom support got you elected. The candidate, now office holder, has to be able to say, “I proposed legislation supporting…” or “I put forward a plan to…, even if they knew at the time there was absolutely no possible way in the world that it would ever be discussed, let alone voted on.
That form of politics just comes with the territory within the framework of election politics. At the end of the day, your base of support will always believe that you had every intention to get it done; that support, will always speak on your behalf through the campaign and show confidence in your words, right? Well, right?
Not so. GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney has taken a hard line against trade with the Chinese. He has come further right of the political trade arguments than anyone ever has in recent history. So far, that it has even began to concern his major corporate donors and supporters who believe his policy promises would endanger the American economy.
Romney’s position has left many wondering what his policies would actually do to aide in the nation’s economic recovery and more so, what is this hard line approach the result of considering trade with China, although requires reform, does not require gutting.
Mr. Romney says his plans would Immediately pump up the American unemployment rates, spur American consumerism (not sure what that means with regard to trade considering global economics is here to stay), and cause corporations and investors to look to the markets again.
Problem is, even republicans don’t believe that. Furthermore, many of them are publicly attacking Romney’s China plans as barbaric and dangerous. Even further, many conservatives can even believe Mr. Romney will ever propose them once, if ever, in The White House. Considering what they believe Romney knows about the trade markets and how altering the supply of goods and services will affect an already damaged economy, they believe Team Romney is just taking this approach as election politics only.
Whether or not that is true, the Chinese have been observing the language Romney has been throwing around and they have had enough of it. As early as last week, the Chinese media began attacking Mr. Romney as a hypocrite who made a great many riches from his investments and outsourcing of job in China, (Romney’s Hypocrisy: Romney cashed out $1.5 million in investments before deciding to run for president).
No one, regardless of party believes China is operating on an even plain with the U.S. imports and exports which is evident when you look at the amount of imports in comparison to the number of exports. Say it another way, there are more automobiles coming into the U.S. than there are Cadillacs and Chevys leaving bound for China and the Asian sectors. The President has been making strides to close the trade gaps, the record supports that, but no one, not even Romney’s biggest supporters believe he will live up to his policy promises.
What does that say to independents looking on as they move to cementing their vote for the GOP candidate? What does imply with regard to the political ambition of Mr. Romney and Paul Ryan, the Vice Presidential candidate? Until recently, Ryan has not supported the tough language until filling the bottom of the ticket. We believe the answer lies within the question itself when you read between the lines. That’s my story and um sticking to it.