China

>”It’s economically productive for the 1% to maintain a trade relationship with China. The financial incentives don’t help any Americans, and in fact, most of us are hurt by this relationship...”

So true, since its inception with GHW, its execution and realization through Clinton and then once fully engaged the timid, supplicant responses from GW and BO, China has contributed to the stagnation of the blue collar worker on America with the full complicity of Democrats, Republicans and most of Industry and even unions who didn’t oppose their cozy politicians. They all only saw starry dollar signs...

That’s where we are now. People have had enough. That’s why they put up with the guy no one likes because he’s willing to sever that codependent relationship.

Now, if you ask any pol running for the nomination who the greatest threat to America is... it’s not going to be China...

The guy "no one likes" isn't innocent of China-worship. Guiltier than most. On Jinping: "He is a great leader who very much has the respect of his people. He is also a good man in a 'tough business.'"

Misrepresenting him as "willing to sever that codependent relationship" is harmful. He's just as complicit if not more than most politicians, and most of his actions involving China have been inconsistent and self-serving.

> On Jinping: "He is a great leader who very much has the respect of his people. He is also a good man in a 'tough business.'"

Praising him doesn't mean he likes him or he'll make of him his friend. It's more of a respect thing. He respects the man for working on the interest of his country.

"Good man" implies moral endorsement, and Jinping isn't working in the "interest of his country," he's working in the interest of Han Chinese. "Hitler was a great man!" is a totally appropriate thing to say using the logic you're applying.