Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbles
Was reading this article about the deal, and they brought up a good point. That Trump railed against using incentives to keep companies on the campaign trail and then has to resort to them right away. To me that's what opens Trump up for criticism. Just another example of saying one thing and doing another. Unfortunately the narrative in 4 years with the blue collar voters that turned this election will be about the 1000 jobs he saved, not about the 1000 that were lost or the bribe that took place to keep them.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...medium=twitter |
On the flipside Trump also campaigned on Reagan-style trickle down economics. Give the companies a tax break so that the money trickle down to workers. So it would all depend on what's the definition of a bribe.
Some have made a persuasive case that the average voter does not actually hate or resent the rich, or care that much about seeing them knocked down, but instead hates the upper middle/professional class. And that the Trump revolt was never a rejection of the 1% but rather a rejection of doctors, lawyers, accountants, upper middle management, professors, and virtually anyone that has expertise. If that's right, then very few of his supporters are going to be bothered by his making Companies and their CEOs richer.