Please spell it out. Are the Canuks saying that NAFTA is beneficial to
them?
I'm almost positive that I remember specific objections to NAFTA being
dismissed as technical detals that could be revisited later. In effect, we
were told that there could, and probably would, be limited renegotiation.
That's if my memory's correct; it's been 15+ years. Maybe it's a case of
"always get it in writing," but it seems to me that the people that accuse
Obama and Clinton of demagogery are forgetting the arguments that they
made, or the assurances they gave us, 15 years ago.
Mom, the NDP are in favor of revising NAFTA but the ruling Tories are not.
The main opposition Liberals are somewhere in between the two positions.
The underlying political truth here is that neither Clinton's nor Obama's
rhetoric this week is to be taken as genuine. Blue collar workers in
places like Ohio are tired of being dicked around and this "memo" dust-up
whether it's contrived or not serves as a reminder that they are indeed
being dicked around. It's the reason I think Hillary will show well today.
Not that her actual position on this is any better than Obama's but the
blowback over this will hit Obama hardest.