NY Times Seems Upset That Donald Trump Puts America First And Foremost, Regardless Of Others

Regardless of any criticism one might have of Donald Trump, and I have quite a few criticism, the man has consistently put America first, even at the expense of others. He’s been unapologetically an America First candidate, and he’ll let you know about it on a constant basis. Bernie Sanders makes you know he cares about Socialism. Hillary makes you know she cares about …… well, Hillary. Donald? America First. This has seemingly given the NY Times a sad

In Donald Trump’s Worldview, America Comes First, and Everybody Else Pays

….

In Mr. Trump’s worldview, the United States has become a diluted power, and the main mechanism by which he would re-establish its central role in the world is economic bargaining. He approached almost every current international conflict through the prism of a negotiation, even when he was imprecise about the strategic goals he sought. He again faulted the Obama administration’s handling of the negotiations with Iran last year — “It would have been so much better if they had walked away a few times,” he said — but offered only one new idea about how he would change its content: Ban Iran’s trade with North Korea.

Mr. Trump struck similar themes when he discussed the future of NATO, which he called “unfair, economically, to us,” and said he was open to an alternative organization focused on counterterrorism. He argued that the best way to halt China’s placement of military airfields and antiaircraft batteries on reclaimed islands in the South China Sea was to threaten its access to American markets.

“We have tremendous economic power over China,” he argued. “And that’s the power of trade.” He did not mention Beijing’s ability for economic.

I’m not comparing Trump to Ronald Reagan, but, let’s not forget that what seemed a military buildup to combat the Soviet Union was in fact an economic war, forcing the USSR to go bankrupt, to spend themselves into oblivion. There’s obviously more too it than that, but the economics were a major part.

Mr. Trump’s views, as he explained them, fit nowhere into the recent history of the Republican Party: He is not in the internationalist camp of President George Bush, nor does he favor President George W. Bush’s call to make it the United States’ mission to spread democracy around the world. He agreed with a suggestion that his ideas might be summed up as “America First.”

“Not isolationist, but I am America First,” he said. “I like the expression.” He said he was willing to reconsider traditional American alliances if partners were not willing to pay, in cash or troop commitments, for the presence of American forces around the world. “We will not be ripped off anymore,” he said.

Is it any wonder Trump is doing so well at the polls, when combined with his supposed outsider status, anti-illegal alien ideas, and refusal to be politically correct?

Mr. Trump explained his thoughts in concrete and easily digestible terms, but they appeared to reflect little consideration for potential consequences. Much the same way he treats political rivals and interviewers, he personalized how he would engage foreign nations, suggesting his approach would depend partly on “how friendly they’ve been toward us,” not just on national interests or alliances.

Trump has perhaps hit on something most politicians have forgotten here in the United States: we need to be looking at things in a way that helps America first. Ann Althouse thinks the article shows the NY Times treating Trump with respect, and, she could be correct: Maggie Haberman, one of the writers, is generally very good, but, one does get the idea that the NY Times itself is Very Concerned with Trump’s belief in America First. Althouse highlights a few comments

Here’s one of the most up-voted comments over there: “We can quibble about details, but this approach is long overdue. Why even have a country if its citizens are not the primary concern of those in power?” And: “Have to agree that it’s time to play hardball with Saudi Arabia.” And:

You can head over to read the “and”. The full transcript of the interview is here. Perhaps it is high time to put America, and the average American, rather than allies, enemies, and the American political class, first.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

8 Responses to “NY Times Seems Upset That Donald Trump Puts America First And Foremost, Regardless Of Others”

  1. The Neon Madman says:

    “Perhaps it is high time to put America, and the average American, rather than allies, enemies, and the American political class, first.”

    Actually, it is long past time to do so.

  2. Jeffery says:

    Is it any wonder Trump is doing so well at the polls, when combined with his supposed outsider status, anti-illegal alien ideas, and refusal to be politically correct?

    from the most recent poll-of-polls from RealClearPolitics:

    Clinton 50%… Trump 39%
    Sanders 55%… Trump 37%

    The worst and least popular Democratic candidate in decades, characterized by the media as a liar and a criminal, leads Trump, who according to you “is doing so well at the polls”. Trump fares even worse against the largely unknown Democratic Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders. Trump is popular with many lesser educated, white, male Republican voters, which have come to dominate the GOP lately. Normal Republicans will hold their noses and vote for Trump if he wins the nomination.

    If Trump is nominated, the Republicans will lose, and will likely also lose the Senate. (This assumes that the Republicans do not “steal” the presidential election between their vaunted “suppress out the vote” and “we own the computers” efforts – but Nate Silver demonstrated in 2012 that the GOP efforts had little effect on buggering the true vote.)

  3. In the GOP polls, Jeff. I’ve already stated multiple times that he is, at least at this time, a disaster for the general. Work on your short term memory.

  4. Jl says:

    Jeffery, using typical liberal “logic”, thinks requiring all people to have an ID to vote is “stealing or suppressing” the vote. Funny that requiring all that drive to have drivers ID isn’t suppressing blacks ability to drive, but then you have to realize that liberals are the true racists, as they think blacks need special treatment. You can’t fix stupid.

  5. david7134 says:

    All Republican contenders are going to appear bad in the general poll (except the nut Kasich). That is the process. Trump will beat Clinton in a heads on contest, especially as she will be in jail. If she is not in jail then the rule of law will be out the window and so the country.

  6. Jeffery says:

    j, using typical right-wing extremist “logic”, doesn’t understand the difference between rights and privileges. In fact, it’s clear that requiring picture IDs for voting reduces voter participation, and solves a non-existent problem. But then, that’s the goal of Repuglican “Suppress the Vote” efforts. Conservatives and Republicans are repulsive beings.

    dave is a true believer who thinks Trump can win the general election. Let’s see. Women vote in greater numbers than men and women hate Trump even more than they hate Rafael Cruz. Trump is the favorite of uneducated, racist, white men, which we’ve always known cuts a large swath through conservatism. You’re whistling past the graveyard. But I’m on your side. I support Trump too!

  7. john says:

    Yeah Teach and stop selling all those Chinese phones put America FIRST !!
    AMERICA FIRST !!! and allegiance oaths and the full arm out salute. That’s what we need
    Hey wasn’t that the name of the pro Nazi group that Trump’s father probably belonged to?
    If I thought he needed my vote in the GOP primary I would vote for Trump too!!
    Teach does your use of the phrase “average American” preclude those Americans that do not fit into that slot? Do you mean white male Americans?
    What about those Americans who are not in the “average” slot?
    More than half the kids in US public schools live in households that are poor, not average. Do they deserve more help/assistance?
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/majority-of-us-public-school-students-are-in-poverty/2015/01/15/df7171d0-9ce9-11e4-a7ee-526210d665b4_story.html
    Who do you think will help them more, Trump or Sanders?

  8. gitarcarver says:

    More than half the kids in US public schools live in households that are poor, not average.

    Statistics are not john’s strongest skills.

    BTW john, did you actually read the article you cited?

    The Southern Education Foundation reports that 51 percent of students in pre-kindergarten through 12th grade in the 2012-2013 school year were eligible for the federal program that provides free and reduced-price lunches.

    The study is for lunch programs and for some reason the WaPo extrapolates that to mean people at or below the poverty level.

    Yet the free lunch program takes the Federal poverty income level and multiplies it by 1.3 for free lunches and 1.85 for reduced lunches to determine eligibility. That means for a family of 4, reduced lunches are available to families making $44,863 or less. For free lunches, the figure is $31,525.

    The fact of the matter is that because someone is receiving free or reduced lunches does not mean they are at or even near the “poverty level” as you and the article claim.

    Next time you try delving into math or statistics, may I suggest that you get a 2nd grader to help you?

    Who do you think will help them more, Trump or Sanders?

    Probably neither, john. Trump and Sanders hold many of the same beliefs. They wish to penalize successful people and control markets.

Bad Behavior has blocked 6401 access attempts in the last 7 days.