I think it's normal and understandable to show some protectionism to a certain level. I think it certainly was attractive to some industry workers like those in the coal industry with everything that Trump promised them during the 2016 campaign. However, some of those protectionist measures have been bit overzealous. For instance, that 292% tax the Department of Commerce imposed on Bombardier in Canada to sell their planes. Luckily for us, today, a judge put the kibbosh on that so that means Bombardier can go forward as a few airlines like Delta Airlines will probably place massive orders for the C-Series in the relative future. There's also the news of an agreement between Hydro-Québec here and the State of Massachussets to export some electricity to for about a million households in Massachussets. The line is supposed to stretch underground on 350 km through the state of New Hampshire but of course, while the state of Massachussets have assured Hydro-Québec that there shouldn't be any problem with the state of New Hampshire, what's not to say that the Trump admin will decide that it would be better to get that electricity from another nearby state instead.I'm no fan of economic protectionism either. Do you think that's where the opposition is? I would be surprised if that's true but like I said I really don't understand the objection.
Those are measures like that that I find really overbearing from the Trump administration. Sure, Canada signed a deal with 10 other countries this week including China to cover their asses in case the NAFTA trade talks fall through but there's gotta be a point where the Trump administration cannot expect ALL the other countries to do the compromising. It has to be a win-win for everyone involved and right now, my perception is that Trump wants a win for one country and one country only: the United States.