Would Hillary have won Ohio if they knew the truth?
"You know, I have been a critic of NAFTA from the very beginning... I was part of the administration"
Apparently not only did Hillary support NAFTA, she lobbied to get it signed originally? I'm not sure how you spin your way out of such a bald-faced lie.
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
I'm from Ohio. The GM plant my father retired from is gone. I have friends, family that no longer have jobs, others living in fear that theirs is next. That being said, the reason the plants leave the country is not primarily labor. In fact, everytime a union's contract expired, the workers, for the last twenty years, took pay cuts instead of raises so their plant would remain competitive and stay open. But the plants left anyway? Why? Taxes. Not just federal, but state and local governments chased the plants away. Gov. Taft, a republican raised corporate taxes. Manufacturers voted with their feet. It's that simple. GM is virtually bankrupt. They are trying to survive. GM stupidly kept building SUV's banking the company on the idea that gasoline was going to remain at $1.50 a gallon forever.
Democrats only solution is more of what drove the companies away in the first place. Yeah the republicans got us into this mess. That is true. Because they acted like democrats. More of the same is not the answer. Lower taxes, and a business friendly enviroment is what's going to bring jobs back to Ohio, not higher taxes.
- wowincaLv 51 decade ago
Actually if everyone knew THE TRUTH about NAFTA this issue would die. Well here is an article to check out and consider. I will include two relevant paragraphs here but invite you to read the entire article.
February 26, 2008
By Rich Lowry
For Barack Obama, hope can triumph over anything, except for open trade with a neighboring country with an economy 1/20th the size of ours. Then, all is despair.
Obama's culprit is Mexico, our third-largest trading partner. It is trade deals like NAFTA -- the 1993 accord eliminating tariffs among the U.S., Mexico, and Canada -- that "ship jobs overseas and force parents to compete with teenagers for minimum wage at Wal-Mart," Obama intones. Feel inspired yet?
In his book The Audacity of Hope, Obama maintains a studied ambivalence about NAFTA. He didn't emphasize populist broadsides against the deal until it became imperative for him to win down-scale white voters in states like Wisconsin and Ohio. On the merits, it's an odd time to demonize NAFTA. U.S. manufacturing went through a deep recession from 2000 to 2003, shedding 3 million jobs. It has recovered since, and 2006 was "a record year for output, revenues, profits, profit rates and return on investment," Daniel Ikenson of the Cato Institute writes.
- SwordfishLv 61 decade ago
America is in a very precarious plight; recession, war in Iraq, high gas prices, Presidential Acts that contradicts the US Constitution, housing foreclosures, and job lay-offs. Yet Hillary doesn't have a plan to change the direction of the country; for the betterment. She has and will say anything to get back into the White House. No Ohioans wouldn't vote for her knowing she had a meeting with Canadians to defend the NAFTA instituted by her husband Bill Clinton. Lastly I believe she only won marginally because of the Republicans wanting to face her in the General Election; rather than losing to Obama.
- GretlLv 61 decade ago
You know, at that time, NAFTA could have been seen as a good idea for the economy. Now we see what it has done. It takes a long time to see the outcome of a change. It also incorporated free trade with Canada. We cannot completely end NAFTA now, because it has benefited some states, while it has devastated others.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Both Clinton and Obama are lying when they say they are against NAFTA.
We will not withdraw from NAFTA; NAFTA will not be re-negotiated; NAFTA is here to stay in its current form.
Suggesting otherwise is the worst sort of pandering to unsophisticated voters on the part of Clinton and Obama.
- soulguy85Lv 61 decade ago
It blew me away that she won both Texas and Ohio. All the feminazis must be turning out in groves. I just don't get it. Or is it that the majority of Democrats fear a white woman less than a black man. Really, I just don't know what people see in the likes of this power hungry stir-up the pot slick my hair back Obama basher.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Ross Perot warned everyone about NAFTA, no one listened. See where that got us. All the jobs went to Mexico.
- lordkelvinLv 71 decade ago
Probably... people know what they are getting with Hillary... Obama, however, is only just now being vetted... as more is reveled about him and his polocies and views his popularity can only go down... So... in fact knowing the "truth" she would have probably won Ohio by a *larger* margin.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Sadly most of the United States is uneducated and choose not to research their own candidates.
- x_tedee_bear_xLv 51 decade ago
Would Obama have won the states he did if all this Wright thing woulda come out say in late Dec early Jan....too many ifs. Besides is that all ya have on her, keep diggin.