I wouldn't say that.  Free trade was the biggest driver of US economic expansion between WW2 and today. 

Outside which, protectionism and tarrifs end up getting protectionism and tariffs against you.   Protectionism and Tariffs really only work if your a small country nobody cares enough about to counter tariff against.

25% of US economic activity is trade... and that's low.

Our trade deficits come soley from China and Oil... nothing actually related to free trade.

The President cannot "enforce" anything.  The President's power mostly lies within his power to say no.  AKA his veto power.

For a capable politician, that should be enough to make the congress life very difficult if they aren't inclined towards the presidential policies. Yes, even on the systems who follow Mostesquieu's original ideas of a strong legislative to hold back executive power. 

For a capable politician.

A veto can be overridden.  It may rarely happen, but if the President is being unreasonable with His/Her power, it'll happen more often.  The point is that you can't really do whatever you want as President.  Once you are President, there are a lot of other things that will stand in your way of making things happen.  People over estimate the power the President has.

Obama has no clue what he's doing. In this video, he criticized Bush for "taking out a credit card from the bank of China" and "driving up our national debt." In Bush's 8 years of Presidency, Bush racked up a phenomenal $4 trillion in debt. That was the record.

That was the record. Obama has no racked up $7 trillion in debt in just 4 years. God knows what will happen when he is re-elected - god help us.

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyLmru6no4U

Obama is clueless as hell, as was Bush - but they are anti-American so they can get away with it. Someone who wants to SAVE America has no chance at the Presidency. Here are some ways to help save the American economy

- Tariffs

Tariffs ensure that the home country has the best advantage over outside competitors. Everything is made in China now - even American flags. Tariffs keep the jobs at home. Free trade just allows companies to ship jobs out of the country and use a cheaper labor force to produce goods then sell them here.

- Protectionism

Protectionism is important because America has run five straight record trade  deficits and has caused 3 million manufacturing jobs to be lost, with thousands of factories gone. Nations rise on economic nationalism, then they descend on free trade. If you run a trade deficit year after year like America is the nation will eventually go bust and other countries who have had a trade surplus year after year will have bought everything of value in America with their surplus cash at knockdown prices. China now holds over a trillion dollars in U.S. bonds and about 1.5 billion in USD.

- End illegal immigration

The stereotype of an illegal immigrant is someone who works in agriculture. No longer is that stereotype true - illegals now work in blue collar type jobs such as an electrician, a construction worker, a plumber, in the factories America does have, etc. etc. then they dominate the hospitality industry in many U.S. states. In fact, only 3% of illegals work in agriculture! California has a crumbling economy because of this issue. If we put a halt to illegal immigration and enforce laws, our economy will slowly spring back up.

There are other ways as well - raise taxes, cut spending, rebuild our infrastracture, etc. etc. but these 3 are HUGE and require immediate attention!

What do you guys think?

Tariffs ensure that we pay more for our the goods and services that we purchase.  It makes companies in the United States more competitive than companies outside of the U.S., for goods sold in the U.S.  The problem is that all consumers who purchase the goods made in the U.S. will have to pay  more for their goods.  Jobs will be created in the U.S., but the resources that our country used to produce these goods could have been better used for something that our country is more competitive at making.  We should produce that which we are most competant at producing, and if other countries produce something better than us, we should not focus on such goods, but rather, on those things that we produce best.  To artificially try to make our industries more competitive is actually to stifle our economy as a whole.

Tariffs are a subset of protectionism, and the same arguments seem to apply to protectionism as applied to tariffs.  For when we are protecting our home industries, we are effectively preventing competition from outside nations.  Since our economy is not subject to competition, we will lose competitiveness abroad, seeing as our companies will have no incentive to compete, being shielded by the government from that which spurs innovation, that is, the competitive process itself.  Therefore, by seeking to protect our industries, we are lowering our standards, and will be outperformed by the rest of the world.

As for enforcing illegal immigration laws to fix our economy, I don't think you have any idea what you are saying.  For you see, when we allow illegal immigrants into our country to work, they will work those jobs only that the market sees them as more fit for working than U.S.Americans, and so will help our economy to increase efficiency and production.  Therefore, allowing illegal immigrants into our country is a boon for local industry.  Now the problem that arises is this - U.S.Americans do not want to have jobs stolen from them from within their own country.  For the welfare of the constituents of this country it may be best that we enforce immigration laws.  With stricter enforcement of these laws, the companies who choose to employ Americans will have to adapt to what is actually available in America, and so actual Americans will benefit by way of more jobs.  But of course, those Americans who CAN compete in an economy where illegal immigration is not stopped, or immigration procedures are loosened, benefit from illegal immigration, as goods are produced and sold more cheaply.  Therefore, an increase in immigration from other nations is good for the most competitive Americans and bad for the least competitive Americans, while a decrease is  bad for the most competitive Americans and good for the least.  Now you may choose which ones you prefer.

Cause they don't have greedy companies shipping jobs overseas by the millions and millions of illegal immigrants. Canada is far better ran than America. Normally I'd actually be against tariffs, but this is a situation in which we need them the most.

So greed is only an American characteristic? Riiiight.

Canada is in a much better situation because their structure for businesses is vastly superior to ours. Businesses have less incentive to move overseas. Not because of tariffs, but the regulatory and tax environment makes it much cheaper and easier to do business there. America is (also) exporting jobs there - we're doing something seriously wrong if the Canadians can make a car cheaper than we can.

Again, what tariffs will do is that every country will respond in kind. Our exporters will suffer severely. Some companies will come back, but their goods will be incredibly expensive to buy. How do you think the average person will handle PCs being $2,000 again, while the iPhone is $1,000 and a pair of cheap, generic shoes are $50 instead of $10?

That is exactly what tariffs will do. Tariffs don't fix the endemic problems inside of an economy, let me give you two examples:

1) The US can produce a widget for $1,000 per unit. China can produce it for $500. We dislike the fact that China can produce a widget for $500, so we levy a 100% tariff on widgets. In response, China levies a 100% tariff on American-made bumpers, which we can make for $500 and sell to China.

In this scenario, the average person has to pay 100% more for a widget, but we gain the widget-maker's job. We however, lose a bumper-makers job, because of China's tariff. Therefore, the net effect is that widgets cost more, and no jobs are created.

2) Brazil employs a very similar scheme with electronics in the real world. They levy a 100%+ tax on all assembled goods that go into their country. What is the result? An Xbox 360 costs $800 to buy. How many jobs did that create? None. They still don't have Xbox manufacturing. Instead, they make Sega Genesis' in country. In Brazil's case, the tariffs don't promote indigenous designs, they simply discourage consumers from buying products.

Instead, the smart thing to do in scenario 1 is to figure out how to make widgets cheaper than China - through regulations, research, and investment. This is what happens in countries that take a serious look at tax reforms, like Canada. As it stands, America has one of the highest corporate taxes worldwide. It discourages jobs from coming here. If we drop the rate, we bring jobs back from China and from other countries. That is key. Trade doesn't exist in a vaccum. Therefore, if we make it easier to build factories here, we bring jobs from everywhere.

So greed is only an American characteristic? Riiiight.

Canada is in a much better situation because their structure for businesses is vastly superior to ours. Businesses have less incentive to move overseas. Not because of tariffs, but the regulatory and tax environment makes it much cheaper and easier to do business there. America is (also) exporting jobs there - we're doing something seriously wrong if the Canadians can make a car cheaper than we can.

Again, what tariffs will do is that every country will respond in kind. Our exporters will suffer severely. Some companies will come back, but their goods will be incredibly expensive to buy. How do you think the average person will handle PCs being $2,000 again, while the iPhone is $1,000 and a pair of cheap, generic shoes are $50 instead of $10?

That is exactly what tariffs will do. Tariffs don't fix the endemic problems inside of an economy, let me give you two examples:

1) The US can produce a widget for $1,000 per unit. China can produce it for $500. We dislike the fact that China can produce a widget for $500, so we levy a 100% tariff on widgets. In response, China levies a 100% tariff on American-made bumpers, which we can make for $500 and sell to China.

In this scenario, the average person has to pay 100% more for a widget, but we gain the widget-maker's job. We however, lose a bumper-makers job, because of China's tariff. Therefore, the net effect is that widgets cost more, and no jobs are created.

2) Brazil employs a very similar scheme with electronics in the real world. They levy a 100%+ tax on all assembled goods that go into their country. What is the result? An Xbox 360 costs $800 to buy. How many jobs did that create? None. They still don't have Xbox manufacturing. Instead, they make Sega Genesis' in country. In Brazil's case, the tariffs don't promote indigenous designs, they simply discourage consumers from buying products.

Instead, the smart thing to do in scenario 1 is to figure out how to make widgets cheaper than China - through regulations, research, and investment. This is what happens in countries that take a serious look at tax reforms, like Canada. As it stands, America has one of the highest corporate taxes worldwide. It discourages jobs from coming here. If we drop the rate, we bring jobs back from China and from other countries. That is key. Trade doesn't exist in a vaccum. Therefore, if we make it easier to build factories here, we bring jobs from everywhere.

Part of the reason why i think a VAT would be better in lieu of a corporate tax. So long as the VAT rate hit slightly lower than existing corporate tax rates, but also caught everyone willing to do business in America in the net, likely increasing net revenue and not imposing the taxation burden on the corporations directly