Posted on 01/29/2019 4:24:11 PM PST by Mariner
Republicans have turned on globalism, under the protectionist trade policies of President Trump. That’s the wrong move, according to John Delaney, a former business owner and Democratic member of Congress who was one of the first to declare he’s running for president in 2020.
“The United States has to engage globally,” Delaney tells Yahoo Finance in the video above. “Nationalism and isolationism are the wrong answer to every question.”
Delaney, who made millions founding and running two financial services companies before running successfully for Congress in 2012, positions himself as a moderate among more extremist candidates, in both parties. “I'm running on unity and common purpose,” he says. “Solving problems and getting things done and working towards doing some big things to prepare our country for the future.”
Unlike some other candidates, Delaney promises to put price tags on all his policy proposals. “Every time I say I'm going to do something, I tell people exactly how I'm going to pay for it,” he says.
While Delaney doesn’t favor a “Medicare for all” system that would put the government in charge of everybody’s health care, he backs basic government coverage for everybody, with traditional insurers offering supplemental coverage for people who want more, and are willing to pay for it themselves. Money for this program would come from eliminating the tax breaks for employer-provided insurance and other subsidies, eliminating the Affordable Care Act (which would no longer be needed) and improving Medicaid. Above certain income levels, patients would be responsible for co-pays.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Both Schultz and this Delaney fella are looking for that open, "moderate" ground.
Is Geraldine Ferraro’s predecessor still alive?
I guess that was James Delaney, and no.
What Perot did to the republicans - Delaney will do to the democrats.
Why bother?
Mulaney wants government healthcare for everybody. He's no "moderate".
He’s been running quietly for several years. Hard to imagine him drawing serious votes in the early primaries.
“nationalism” and “isolationism” are not the same thing.
“Nationalism and isolationism are the wrong answer to every question.”
Well Mr.Delaney, its not really about that is it?
Its really all about maintaining the sovereignty of our country and the God given inalienable rights and individual freedoms they guarantee. We really are not very keen on having a bunch of unelected foreign anti-American, marxist, socialist, communistic bureaucrats sucking the wealth out of this nation in an ill advised, satanically driven attempt to merge us into a New World Order global government.
So, Mr Delaney, its seems that its you sir that has the wrong answer to the question.
Delaney is a con man who happens to be from my hometown of Wood-Ridge, NJ. He’s dressed up as a moderate but he’s got the same old tired talking points that the Progs use every day. He’s for Open Borders, raising taxes, Pro-Choice, universal health care, gun control etc. He also has no chance in hell of even getting a delegate let alone winning. He is perhaps the worst of all Progressives in that he was a successful businessman who wants to import his socialistic ideas to the country in contrast to everything that helped him be a successful businessman.
Delaney is a Free Traitor™. But what is shocking is that I've heard this same talk form about 50% of the Freepers that post regularly at Free Republic. No difference in them at all.
The truth is worth repeating.
"The United States has to engage globally," Delaney tells Yahoo Finance in the video above. "Nationalism and isolationism are the wrong answer to every question."
This dope is flat-out wrong on this.
Not only does the United States NOT have to "engage globally" (whatever the hell that means) ... but we violate our first obligation to ourselves whenever we "engage" outside our borders against the interests of our own citizens.
This jackass isn't even asking the right questions.
So you are now pro tariff?
I was waiting for the word “moderate” to describe this clown...
The one thing the MSM loves to HIDE is how far left their stories are...
1. It depends on the product or raw material.
2. It depends on the trading partner(s) the tariff applies to.
Do you have a specific tariff in mind?
In fact, I've long been an advocate of applying tariffs "across the board" by trading partner rather than by product or raw material.
A 20% tariff on every import from China, for example, is a much better option than a 50% tariff on steel, a 40% tariff on aluminum, and smaller tariffs (or no tariffs) on everything else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.