>>Boeing stock dropped dramatically after the tweet. Is that how the President-elect of the United States should behave? Should he work to harm the businesses of people who object to his policies? This is third-world kleptocracy kind of behavior.

A kleptocrat would jail the CEO and seize the company. Trump is no kleptocrat, but nor is he the usual conservative punching bag. If CEOs want to attack Trump, they know what to expect.

Also worth reviewing what Trump actually tweeted: "Boeing is building a brand new 747 Air Force One for future presidents, but costs are out of control, more than $4 billion. Cancel order!"

Also worth reviewing the CEO's comments, which were that Trump's anti-Trade rhetoric creates risks for the likes of Boeing, the US's largest earner of export $. It's a compelling critique (with which I agree, fwiw) but why as public posturing rather than in a face-to-face with Trump or even a big business delegation appealing to his ego by seeking an audience? A lot of ordinary people love the anti-trade argument and they're going to listen to Trump, not somebody criticizing Trump. Sorry but this definitely is one he needs to figure out himself and then explain to the US public who may learn to appreciate a president who changes his mind when his facts change.

FWW, what do you think of the TPP that isn't liked by HRC or Trump? How would you expect paticipating/not participating to affect the US?

Also, even if Trump's tweet is what prompted the *temporary* fall in Boeing shares (they're now back at the pre-Tweet price) it wasn't Trump who pushed down the share price. Investors did that, concerned at an apparent exchange initiated by the company's CEO, not Trump. It's a false narrative that Trump has to be a punching bag or else he's a kleptocrat damaging American business.

I agree that Obama wasn't in the habit of reacting like this, but then nor were CEOs of big American corporations in the habit of slanging off at him.