I agree trade deals often have major problems, but "ship(ping) American jobs overseas" isn't one of them. For one thing, jobs don't belong to any particular nationality of people. They are offerings of employers, and non-bigoted people support filling them on the basis of merit, not on the basis of nationality, race, gender, sexual orientation, or other such characteristics. Where these jobs are offered typically depends on the business climate in a region, which is largely determined by levels of taxation and regulation. Johnson has a concrete plan to reduce taxation and regulation by cutting government spending by 20%. Has Donald Trump even offered a figure by which he's willing to cut spending? If so, I haven't heard it. Which probably means his policies would result in fewer jobs being offered in the U.S. than would Gary Johnson's.
You say it's too early to say Trump is doomed to defeat; I say it's too early to say Johnson is doomed to defeat. We should all work to get him in the debates – not only so that there will be a candidate on stage of whom most people don't have a negative opinion and who will be way more pro-freedom than either of the other two, but to help end the 2-party cartel's rigged and undemocratic system. Allowing all candidates who are qualified and on enough state ballots to be elected president in the debates is simply the right and fair approach.
Now Johnson has reportedly polled higher than either Trump or Clinton among the youngest voters, which bodes well for the future:
Trump's supporters, meanwhile, are more likely to skew elderly.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))