• doodledup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 hours ago

    He never actually meant it. Why does nobody get it? It’s a distraction. Stop fuelling it. This headline is exactly what Trump wants.

    • m0darn@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Anchoring is legitimately a negotiation technique where you start with an absurd demand to set the framing of the haggling.

      Ie now the idea of expanded sea port security integration doesn’t seem like a crazy thing to exchange for elimination of tariffs.

      But guess what, expanded sea port security integration would drastically reduce our ability to economically pivot in the face of future tariff threats. Ie if expanded sea port security integration means the USA can prevent us from using our sea ports.

    • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      You don’t know that, and Project 2025 states that foreign affairs must be subject to national interests. The GOP is prioritizing access to strategic minerals as a long term goal. DT has stated the annex desire repeatedly and consistently.

      At the least, the economic assault is not a distraction, and it is obviously the initial stage in an escalation. People are already affected, and pissed.