As the 2016 U.S. presidential election comes to an end, one thing is certain: both Trump and Clinton will use their unique rhetorical styles to win American votes by attacking China.
The two candidates may not agree on much, but they do agree on one thing: that China has robbed millions of American jobs and policies need to be put into place to bring jobs back to the states.
The US presidential candidates love to talk viciously on China and trade. Clinton is intimately associated with the Obama administration’s 2011 pivot to Asia – a strategy designed to counter growing Chinese influence in the region; while Trump talks continuously about bringing manufacturing jobs back from China to the US.
Thus, how will both candidates actually behave in office? Trump’s aggressive rhetorical style can make him seem tough, but talking tough and being tough are two entirely different playing fields.
Voters must ask themselves “Would either candidate really make big changes in US policies towards China if elected to the presidency?”
Trump can talk tough..
The Trump campaign has prided itself on its slogan, ” Make America Great Again.” Trump is very adamant that trade with China is something that has made America less great than it could be.
In the video above, Trump outlines a seven point plan to bring jobs back to the states. Trump claims he will declare China as a currency manipulator if elected into office. He also threatens that he will stop China from stealing American intellectual property. Lastly, Trump claims that he will put an end to unfair competition by making China live up to the same kinds of labor and environmental standards that US firms have to meet. Ultimately, Trump uses the symbolic world view as a rhetoric strategy when discussing trade with China. He is advocating change by implementing harsh trade restrictions on China in order to bring back jobs to the states. Manufacturing workers may be fond of this idea, but Trump must present a practical plan to gain the rest of the American vote.
Clinton in the middle?
Clinton also talk tough about China, but her statements are less extreme than those of Trump. She has not broadcasted a position on China being a currency manipulator. Rather, she has talked about denying China market economy status under US law, a position that isn’t enjoyable in trade law anywhere in the world. In short, Clinton claims to be hard on trade with China if elected into presidency. However, her approach is less intense and more stable than Trump. If Clinton continues to use this as a rhetorical strategy, she can win votes on her rhetoric of trade policy between the US and China.
Both candidates are talking a big game when it comes to China and tomorrow’s debate will most likely only reiterate the things we have each heard them said a million times. For Trump, I think it would be an effective rhetorical strategy to dig a little deeper into his plans for trade with China if elected, thus providing himself with a little bit more depth and allowing him to seem more presidental.