Why didn't Trump hammer Biden on his support for the Iraq War the way he did Clinton?

[Motorcity]

Because the Obama administration, which Biden is linked to, pulled out of Iraq. Obama criticized Clinton for her support of the Iraq war. Iraq was not an issue for Biden

Plus, Trump has been president for 4 years. He was the incumbent. He has to run on his record more than attacking his opponent. Calling Biden out on Iraq would suggest the US is still dealing with the consquences of Iraq, which would make Trump look bad and incapable of fixing it.

[Motorcity]

I was wondering about this too. This also goes for Biden’s vote for NAFTA, his support for the TPP after Hillary turned against it, his anti-gun record, his role in stopping Robert Bork from being confirmed to the SCOTUS, etc.

If Trump had gone populist again, he would have won in a landslide. Trump's campaign was downright AWFUL but he still barely lost.

How could Trump have gone populist? He went right and conservative as President so now one would belive him

[Motorcity]

I was wondering about this too. This also goes for Biden’s vote for NAFTA, his support for the TPP after Hillary turned against it, his anti-gun record, his role in stopping Robert Bork from being confirmed to the SCOTUS, etc.

If Trump had gone populist again, he would have won in a landslide. Trump's campaign was downright AWFUL but he still barely lost.

How could Trump have gone populist? He went right and conservative as President so now one would belive him

Pulled out of the TPP, renegotiated NAFTA

Neither of which are known by most Americans nor would be noticed in 2-4 years

Trump slashed social spending like foodstamps and education. Tried to cut Obamacare without replacment. Made things harder for Unions. Didn't bother with infrastructure or minmum wage. He promsied he would leave entiltments alone and guess what, he proposed budgets to cut them

These things are much more noticable and the opposite of populist.

Hence Trump running a more tradational Republican campaign in 2020. Being "tough on crime" and good for the economy

[Motorcity]

I was wondering about this too. This also goes for Biden’s vote for NAFTA, his support for the TPP after Hillary turned against it, his anti-gun record, his role in stopping Robert Bork from being confirmed to the SCOTUS, etc.

If Trump had gone populist again, he would have won in a landslide. Trump's campaign was downright AWFUL but he still barely lost.

How could Trump have gone populist? He went right and conservative as President so now one would belive him

He could still hammer Biden on wars, trade, wall street and more.

How? No one thought Biden was going to start any wars or get into any free trade agreements. Biden was part of the Obama team that took us out of Iraq. Plus literally everyone in the country thought that trade was Trump's greatest strenght and no Democrat would run on the TPP lol

And the previous few years were the best ever for Wall Street. No one in the country thought Trump was tough even thoiugh he promised that in 2016

[Motorcity]

I was wondering about this too. This also goes for Biden’s vote for NAFTA, his support for the TPP after Hillary turned against it, his anti-gun record, his role in stopping Robert Bork from being confirmed to the SCOTUS, etc.

If Trump had gone populist again, he would have won in a landslide. Trump's campaign was downright AWFUL but he still barely lost.

How could Trump have gone populist? He went right and conservative as President so now one would belive him

He could still hammer Biden on wars, trade, wall street and more.

How? No one thought Biden was going to start any wars or get into any free trade agreements. Biden was part of the Obama team that took us out of Iraq. Plus literally everyone in the country thought that trade was Trump's greatest strenght and no Democrat would run on the TPP lol

And the previous few years were the best ever for Wall Street. No one in the country thought Trump was tough even thoiugh he promised that in 2016

Trump can talk about how Biden supported the War on Terror or how he continues to support NAFTA and the TPP.

Let me explain this to you, respectfully

2020 was not 2016. The difference was Trump was the incumbent. He had to run a different campaign because he wasn't the insurgent anymore. Its a different playbook. Trump could have done somethings better and it may have cost him the election.

The OP asked why Trump did not attack Biden on certain issues. As me and other posters have explained, Trump was the incumbent so he could not say anything that would suggest he was incapable of handling it

1. Iraq: Trump attacking Biden on Iraq would suggest Iraq was still an issue and Trump was incapable of handling it. Plus, Iraq is no longer an issue for most Americans and hasn't been since 2008. Even if it was, Biden was instrumental in bringing US troops home. Thats more recent than his 2003 vote to invade. The Iraq vote could have hurt him in the primaries, but it didn't. People just didn't care anymoe

2. Trade: Biden supports the USMCA. Attacking him would mean attacking Trump's own plan. Historically, Biden has been a friend to labor. He did vote for NAFTA, but voted against other deals. Most Americans don't know what the TPP because its dead. And since its universally recongized that trade was Trump's greatest asset in 2016, every Democrat has moved away from tree trade deals. People see that. No one really thought that Biden was going to push for more trade deals, not anyone who would vote Democrat.

3. Wall Street Its laughable someone would think Trump would attack Biden on Wall Street. Trump gave Wall Street the best years ever plus a huge tax cut.


These reasons are why Trump focused on "tough on crime". "

He would maintain law and order, he said. Biden would raise taxes. Biden is a trojan horse for the far left. Biden would slow down econimc recovery."

Had Trump focused on these things he might have won. But he decided to act like a child at the first debate and attack Biden's health and family, costing him the election.