I have to point out that this "debacle" has been largely positive as it allowed American companies to diversify their supply chains out of China. These tariffs are the reason countries like India are stepping up their manufacturing game, allowing China to monopolize industrial production has been terrible for all countries, not just the USA. 

Why would you want to allow one country to withhold all the manufacturing power of our most used devices? That's a recipe for disaster, the whole world was willingly allowing Beijing to become their sole provider of their most used goods because of greed, something had to be done about it.

It's good for the tariffs to continue and for other countries with cheap labor to step up so that the competition for manufacturing is resuscitated, and you can't just simply say "it would've happened anyway" because as far as most politicians are concerned, it was a non-issue to continue to concede to China because they wanted that sweet cheap access to their sweatshops. 

Make no mistake, China was hit by the trade war and it's not over, if they want tariffs to be lifted they have to make more concessions in Phase two, and time isn't on their side as other countries will slowly replicate their successful formula, which would be the best case scenario because competition is good.

Not to mention, so far the consumers haven't been negatively affected by these tariffs despite the extreme and the continuous warnings issued by mainstream media outlets. So the longer phase two takes, the more diversified supply chains will become which is better for everyone. 

I have to point out that this "debacle" has been largely positive as it allowed American companies to diversify their supply chains out of China. These tariffs are the reason countries like India are stepping up their manufacturing game, allowing China to monopolize industrial production has been terrible for all countries, not just the USA. 

Why would you want to allow one country to withhold all the manufacturing power of our most used devices? That's a recipe for disaster, the whole world was willingly allowing Beijing to become their sole provider of their most used goods because of greed, something had to be done about it.

It's good for the tariffs to continue and for other countries with cheap labor to step up so that the competition for manufacturing is resuscitated, and you can't just simply say "it would've happened anyway" because as far as most politicians are concerned, it was a non-issue to continue to concede to China because they wanted that sweet cheap access to their sweatshops. 

Make no mistake, China was hit by the trade war and it's not over, if they want tariffs to be lifted they have to make more concessions in Phase two, and time isn't on their side as other countries will slowly replicate their successful formula, which would be the best case scenario because competition is good.

Not to mention, so far the consumers haven't been negatively affected by these tariffs despite the extreme and the continuous warnings issued by mainstream media outlets. So the longer phase two takes, the more diversified supply chains will become which is better for everyone. 

>You've got and Englishman and a Chinaman arguing and neither speaks the other language.

It's pretty clear you still have no clue what you're talking about.  Coherence has nothing to do with simply not understanding what is being said.  

I can read what Trump is saying in his answer above.  That doesn't mean it follows any kind of logic structure.  It doesn't mean he doesn't go off on tangents.  

>How much Musk history is available vs Trump history? 

You only need a few minutes of each to understand their intelligence or lack thereof.  Musk has plenty of negative coverage.  Trump has plenty of positive coverage if you go back far enough.  

Like usual, you're trying to argue through examples that you think are relevant, but they just show that you don't understand what issues are being brought up.  

Trump isn't speaking Chinese.  He's speaking English.  The problem is he's jumping from thought to thought mid-sentence.  Here's his most famous example.  

Doesn't finish his thought about having Nuclear, even though that could be made into a couple of paragraphs worth of sentences.

He interjected that thought about how he has good genes because of his Uncle.   And he interjects that thought with partisanship.  Interjecting that thought with some very incomplete thoughts about his uncle.  Interjecting again about how he has to give his credentials.  

Almost looks like he's returning to his thoughts about the nuclear, only to interject about the prisoners.  

This single sentence has like 40 different sentence fragments.  

>You've got and Englishman and a Chinaman arguing and neither speaks the other language.

It's pretty clear you still have no clue what you're talking about.  Coherence has nothing to do with simply not understanding what is being said.  

I can read what Trump is saying in his answer above.  That doesn't mean it follows any kind of logic structure.  It doesn't mean he doesn't go off on tangents.  

>How much Musk history is available vs Trump history? 

You only need a few minutes of each to understand their intelligence or lack thereof.  Musk has plenty of negative coverage.  Trump has plenty of positive coverage if you go back far enough.  

Like usual, you're trying to argue through examples that you think are relevant, but they just show that you don't understand what issues are being brought up.  

Trump isn't speaking Chinese.  He's speaking English.  The problem is he's jumping from thought to thought mid-sentence.  Here's his most famous example.  

Doesn't finish his thought about having Nuclear, even though that could be made into a couple of paragraphs worth of sentences.

He interjected that thought about how he has good genes because of his Uncle.   And he interjects that thought with partisanship.  Interjecting that thought with some very incomplete thoughts about his uncle.  Interjecting again about how he has to give his credentials.  

Almost looks like he's returning to his thoughts about the nuclear, only to interject about the prisoners.  

This single sentence has like 40 different sentence fragments.  

It's shocking how few people accept this fact as reality. I don't know a lot about Elon's ethics or morals, all I know is that he's clearly brilliant. And Dutch. And a billionaire. Listening to him talk, reading about what he says and does, and knowing his impact on the world, it's clear he's smart. He might not always have the most tact and he can sometimes go a little too far into theoretical possibility for the average person, but he's clearly a genius. 

With Trump it's like he doesn't know anything about anything but is convinced he knows everything and has somehow managed to convince people of this. He can't form a coherent sentence (Something most people learn to do before the age of 5), lies about everything, and is wrong about everything else. Yet, becuase he speaks with confidence and a lack of self-awareness, he has a devoted following. Confidence speaks louder than intelligence with his followers. 

At least Elon has an excuse. English is his second language and he speaks it volumes better than trump and has the brain to back it up. I genuinely do not know how anyone could possibly compare the two.