On the front page of my morning paper is this headline on an Associated Press article: Trump tariffs may imperil a delicate global economic rebound"

“Tariffs threaten to strangle the global golden goose,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics. “The global economy is on the same page for the first time in over a decade. This threatens to derail it.”

During Obama's eight years of the slowest economic recovery in seventy years I do not recall the AP or other media outlets fret about the largest economy in the World stifling global economic growth.

As Obama stacked regulation upon regulation, it was similar to adding tariffs to whatever the regulations applied to -- and the media cheered.

Obamacare also added many new taxes and mandates and each added costs (equivalent to tariffs) to the product. As prices went up, businesses had less money to hire more people and people had less money left over to buy other products or services or to invest and save -- and not once do I recall the media worrying about the taxes and regulations slowing down the economy.

The biggest quasi-tariff of all -- and the most potential destruction to the global economy -- was the Paris Climate Accord. It sought to raise the price of fossil fuels and other energy costs. It was going to require trillions to pretend that government could establish policies that would reduce temperatures by around one degree, manage sea levels throughout the world and reduce storms. Does anyone actually believe the government can control the climate and temperatures forever when they couldn't even keep their promise that you could keep your Doctor and policy if you liked them and that Obamacare would lower costs?

But if Trump raises the cost of vehicles by under $40 and beer by less than one cent a can, that will imperil the economy.

Why doesn't Zandi go out and say that Trump's reductions in regulations and taxes have helped the World economy. Trump essentially has reduced many of the additional costs (functional tariffs) that Obama added.Where is the credit to Trump?

Of course we were told that if Trump was elected, the economy would collapse. The media even continually lied to the public that the middle class wouldn't benefit from the tax cuts, but now a small tariff will destroy the economy that is growing faster than at any time during Obama's eight years.

If anyone wants to know who Mark Zandi is, he has been a go-to economist by Obama and the media for a long time. He did not want Trump to be elected and said he would destroy the economy.

Headline during 2016 election:

Too nice’ economist says Donald Trump would kill 3.5 million jobs

From the article:

The fair-minded Mark Zandi says Trump’s policies would undermine the economy “The economy will be significantly weaker if Mr. Trump’s economic proposals are adopted,” Zandi and three colleagues write. “[If] all his stated policies become law, the economy suffers a lengthy recession and is smaller at the end of his four-year term than when he took office. By the end of his presidency, there are close to 3.5 million fewer jobs and the unemployment rate rises to as high as 7%, compared with below 5% today. During Mr. Trump’s presidency, the average American household’s after-inflation income will stagnate, and stock prices and real house values will decline.”

Since Zandi has been so far off on his previous predictions, why is he used as a source? It is similar to using Paul Krugman as a source.

A trade deficit actually reduces economic growth, so wouldn't it be a good idea to try to reduce the U.S. massive deficit -- which is Trump's goal.

The media has been out to destroy Trump before and after the election, no matter how well the economy performs. Therefore we should not trust the AP or Mark Zandi, a supposed nonpartisan expert, when they make predictions.