I don't think these are the kind of items the parent was referring to. Does it really matter if your shoes were manufactured locally?
Lack of local manufacturing isn't really important in a world of global commerce, but when governments start using their manufacturing as a weapon in dimplomatic disputes it becomes important.
Also, clothing and shoes (mentioned in the comment I responded to) are easy to produce without massive capital outlay, and the raw materials are readily available from several countries. I think the local manufacturing argument makes more sense with regard to items that are seen as critical, and which would be impractical to obtain from elsewhere - such as motherboards, processors and the like.
Whilst raw materials could be easily available, there is a ramp-up time to move any industry locally, both in terms of creating the manufacturing infrastructure, and in terms of acquiring the skills needed locally.
This is the basic reasoning of every "national security" argument about having domestic production.
The parent is merely stating that basic necessities are also important for the well-being of the nation, it's not just about the IC for ballistic missiles or the 3G circuits that allows Trump to always be on twitter.
I don't think it matters for many items, such as clothing and shoes, because they are cheap to make and readily available from several countries. So even if China randomly decided that they wouldn't ship any clothes to the US anymore (which would hurt them just as much, so is unlikely), you can just as easily obtain them from Bangladesh or Vietnam, or indeed make them yourself.