Choosing a certain type of economic theory or having certain sectors of the economy do better than others is 100% politics. I don’t think there is an economic theory where everybody benefits equally around the same time without any downsides.

> Why is this a “political” angle? If you believe its for a long term gain, then you believe in a certain economic theory that others may not believe. What does politics hace anything to do with that?

It's a political angle because it's to the responsible politicians' advantage to push that economic theory. I think the claim is not necessarily that economists who believe this theory are acting politically, but that their voices may be amplified by politicians for, let us say, less than scientific reasons.

Let's assume that Trump actually has a point in divesting from China (which, I think, he has - his disastrous approach to it aside).

The Democrats could never do anything against China that imposes short-term economical pain because their own voters would immediately punish them for it and the entire media from left to far-right would put them under fire. Even marginal economical pain has immediate political consequences - I'd argue that Harris' loss was mostly due to rising and unanswered problems about exploding cost of living, chiefly eggs.

The Republicans however? They still have the same constraint from the left to center media and voters - but crucially, their own voter base is so darn high on their own supply (and their media has long since sworn fealty to even the most crackpot people), they are willing to endure anything because their President told them to.

It's "Only Nixon could go to China" all over again, and frankly it's disgusting.