3 ms·

Interesting that it's perfectly legal for foreign nations to pressure folks into voting one way or another by punishing them for voting in a particular presiden

Interesting that it's perfectly legal for foreign nations to pressure folks into voting one way or another by punishing them for voting in a particular president (and possibly hurting his/his party's chances of re-election), but it's not if they run ads to try and pursuade voters. It's almost like indirect election influencing vs direct election influencing (Russia in 2016). Somehow one is bad, but the other isn't.

hangonhn 8y ago
I think it's a question of enforcement. You can enforce direct influence in the US because it usually happens on US soil or via US companies but indirect influence via tariffs is nearly impossible since foreign countries largely get to impose rules about what happens in their own country and this is what tariffs are.
john00088876 8y ago
It’s completely fair to target them since they’re responsible for choosing the administration who initiated this, and it’s totally clear what’s going on. Very different than dishonest manipulation of people’s ideas through fabrications. Targeted consequences to actions as a retaliation are very different to secret manipulation ahead of an election.
chillwaves 8y ago
The difference is when a US candidate works with a foreign power to win. You really don't see the distinction? Foreign governments do lobby our government, and register for the privilege. This is not the same as Trump Jr conspiring with Russians in Trump tower.
jcranmer 8y ago
It's not about targeting people because they voted for Trump. It's about targeting a small, export-focused segment of the economy that has outsized political power. Agricultural sectors of the economy tend to fit this billet in pretty much every country, which is why agricultural tariffs are the thorniest parts of trade agreements.
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  To be fair, targeting small republican states can be effective, while targeting democrat states would be totally ineffective considering they would vote against the president anyways.
s2g 8y ago
All's fair in love and [trade] war.

hangonhn 8y ago

I think it's a question of enforcement. You can enforce direct influence in the US because it usually happens on US soil or via US companies but indirect influence via tariffs is nearly impossible since foreign countries largely get to impose rules about what happens in their own country and this is what tariffs are.

john00088876 8y ago

It’s completely fair to target them since they’re responsible for choosing the administration who initiated this, and it’s totally clear what’s going on. Very different than dishonest manipulation of people’s ideas through fabrications. Targeted consequences to actions as a retaliation are very different to secret manipulation ahead of an election.

chillwaves 8y ago

The difference is when a US candidate works with a foreign power to win. You really don't see the distinction? Foreign governments do lobby our government, and register for the privilege. This is not the same as Trump Jr conspiring with Russians in Trump tower.

jcranmer 8y ago

It's not about targeting people because they voted for Trump. It's about targeting a small, export-focused segment of the economy that has outsized political power. Agricultural sectors of the economy tend to fit this billet in pretty much every country, which is why agricultural tariffs are the thorniest parts of trade agreements.

seanmcdirmid 8y ago
To be fair, targeting small republican states can be effective, while targeting democrat states would be totally ineffective considering they would vote against the president anyways.

s2g 8y ago

All's fair in love and [trade] war.