Chris Collins started a company that sends it's work to China so it can get lower prices. If you ask Chris how they get those prices, he'll tell you: "China cheats." We need to bring jobs back home, not send them to countries that cheat American workers.
This is a TV commercial from the Romney campaign. It is one of the first of the campaign focusing on foreign affairs and international relations - this one China. It's approach is to frame the issue as unfair trade practices and theft of trade secrets and intellectual property as job killers, saying President Obama had opportunities to engage China on these issues but passed up the opportunity seven times, costing 2 million jobs. The contrary position by the Obama campaign is that Obama has pursued a smart policy of constructive engagement with China to reduce tensions. What do you think? Which approach would be more effective for the United States?
As campaign discourse pivots back to the economy, the Obama campaign is out with a new ad challenging Mitt Romney on China, accusing the former Massachusetts governor of outsourcing jobs and rebutting his claims that he would stand up to the nation.
In the run-up to the November 6, 2012 presidential election, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are duking it out in in the swing states with massive ad campaigns—many focusing on China. Which candidate will be the most "tough on China"? Who is more responsible for letting US jobs slip overseas? What's behind the hardball rhetoric? And what China policies would really be best for America?