[duxup]

He already could have taken a victory lap and done effectively nothing with the first offer from China. He chose to double down.

I'd say there is no plan and it is just the randomness of a capricious old man.

That's a glib take I admit, but I really think that all indications are we're dealing with a very glib president.

[imchillyb]

I don't believe that you are considering that President Trump is a master negotiator. It's what he's known for in the business world.

His hard-nosed deals bring profits for his investors, and massive revenue streams.

Call him whatever you will, and demean him to the world, it still won't change facts; he's an extraordinarily profitable businessman, with extreme revenue returns.

::shrug:: The proof is in the pudding so to speak. Our President's actions will prove themselves, one way or another.

[duxup]

I don't see much to indicate what you're saying is accurate.

His own waffling and capriciousness have sunk even his own initiates in congress with his own party members. Leaks from the white house, members of his own party, even his own people who have publicly stated he is very impulsive (some are less generous of that).

[seren]

> he's an extraordinarily profitable businessman, with extreme revenue returns.

This is a genuine question : how do you know the profitability of Donald Trump's investments or companies ?

From my understanding, he has always worked for his private company/holding/organization, and thus there is no yearly or quarterly public reports. Did I miss something ? Maybe there is some joint venture with transparent reports ?

[inflatableDodo]

There is either no plan, or there is a plan to utterly trash the US and it is working.

[duxup]

I'm not sure it is possible to distinguish one or another considering the way things have played out / information available.

But as for any intent to "trash the US", at least as far as a trade fight goes I'm not convinced that any other trade fight plays out any differently. Personally I would do things differently, but the results may be the same.

[inflatableDodo]

Not having the trade fight plays out differently.

edit - I thought I'd respond to this bit as well -

>I'm not sure it is possible to distinguish one or another

When the President of the US is comparing China with the head of the Federal Reserve, in order to claim that the Federal Reserve is a domestic enemy, while systematically poisoning relations with any country that hosts a US military base, Denmark/Greenland being just the latest example, then I think it is possible to distinguish the two. Someone being random tends not to travel in a specific direction unless it is the path of least resistance.