Will Obama keep his campaign promise and renegotiate NAFTA?

What do you think? To me, it's looking like he won't.

Right after he said publicly during the campaign that he would, he send his foreign policy people to secretly assure that he would not. This was the message: JUST KIDDING!

Word got out and the press reported on this lie at the time. Guess you missed it.

as per his campaign promise?

:rofl:

You're kidding, right?

to me, Obama's anti-trade rhetoric was his least credible. He seemed obviously to be a free trader.

I'm sure spreading the negative assumption that Obama won't renegotiate isn't going to help make that assumption a reality. Right?
The Chamber of Commerce understands that spreading rumors about Obama taking a more conservative position on trade is a good way to make their desire a reality. Why do so many on the left have such a hard time understanding how that works?


http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/87459-obamas-trade-policy-opportunity

Indeed, creating a new trade policy will determine the success of much of the Obama administration’s domestic agenda given that today’s agreements extend far beyond tariffs and quotas to set parameters for numerous non-trade polices. Trade-pact investment and procurement rules will affect whether the billions being invested in the Green Economy will translate into American jobs. Trade-pact service sector rules define the policy space available to re-regulate finance and reform health insurance. Trade-pact rules implicate efforts to combat climate chaos.

The large agribusiness firms and job-offshoring multinationals who claim Obama’s trade agenda is stuck were the few beneficiaries of the 1990s pacts like the North American Free Trade Agreement and World Trade Organization. They oppose establishment of an Obama trade policy. They seek continuation of the status quo, starting with adoption of Bush’s leftover NAFTA-style pacts with Colombia, Korea and Panama. To revive this failed model — most recently rebuffed when a majority of House Democrats opposed Bush’s Peru agreement that mirrors the remaining three — would be a grievous policy and political mistake.

While I wait for you to provide proof, here are some]facts about this issue:

:eyes:

Here are the facts:

Obama has nothing to renegotiate NAFTA even though he said he would. It is not even mentioned anymore. Of course he would deny having given the Canadians a wink on the subject. What would you expect a candidate to do? Admit it? People on this site aren't as dumb as you think they are.

The rest of your reply is baseless polemic, which doesn't disprove the facts I offered via named sources:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=277955&mesg_id=278157

Maybe you haven't noticed, but President Obama has been busy since the inauguration.

:sarcasm:

Funny that the outrage here by the usual Obama critics doesn't reflect the opinions of union leadership, who to a one support President Obama's agenda.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/business/21nafta.html It is a year old but nothing has changed since them. If we are at 7 years and 9 months of an Obama administration you will be saying the same thing. Or better yet you will be saying Obama was re-elected by the American people knowing he did nothing with NAFTA and therefore they agree with that decision. Pretty pathetic and insulting to Obama that you think he can only concentrate on one thing at a time. There are about 2000 employees who work at the WH in policy making positions. I think the President could find one of them to work on NAFTA.

Funny how union leadership have no such complaints about President Obama, eh? :eyes:

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

... complaining about every minute of it. :eyes:

AS much as I dislike NAFTA, now is not the time.

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

:eyes:

Ha ha ha ha ha. Ha.

In other words, no.