Politics & Power Quote by Stephen F. Lynch

A neat piece of political jujitsu: Lynch frames trade not as a zero-sum cage match but as a system that can be designed to make everyone better off, then condemns the current approach for failing even its most cynical promise. The pivot is the word “instead.” It carries the insinuation that a sensible, mutual-gain policy is the obvious default, and that what we have now is a choice - one made by identifiable decision-makers, not an inevitability of globalization.

The intent is coalition-building. By naming “American businesses and workers” in the same breath, Lynch tries to fuse interests that are often pitted against each other: employers seeking market access and labor seeking job security and wage leverage. He then widens the circle to “trade partners,” signaling that stability abroad is a domestic interest, not an act of charity. It’s an argument tailored for an era of supply chains and shared shocks, where punishing another country often ricochets back through prices, inputs, and retaliation.

The subtext is a rejection of performative toughness. Calling the policy “flawed” sounds technocratic, but the accusation “hurts all parties” is moral theater: if everyone is losing, then the policy isn’t merely imperfect, it’s incompetent or ideologically driven. Contextually, this fits the post-NAFTA, post-China-WTO political hangover and the more recent tariff-heavy turn in U.S. politics - a moment when “protecting workers” and “winning trade” became slogans, and Lynch is arguing that the scoreboard is rigged against reality.