Here’s what I’ve noticed.
I bought a Dodge and they went and used my money to buy a chunk of Mitsubishi. I bought a Ford and they went a bought a chunk of Mazda.
I bought a Toyota and they built an assembly plant in Kentucky.
So - from an employment point of view, if I want my car dollars used to keep as many Americans working as possible, what “nationality” car should I buy?
Just buy a car that was assembled in the USA. It keeps americans employed.
Which employs more United States citizens? Hard to tell without counting noses at the plants.
My Dodge truck was assembled in Mexico, but the drivetrain components were largely built in the US, plus Canada, Germany, and I’m sure seveal other countries sourced parts. Which employs more people? Watching robots mill out engine parts, or watching robots place engines on vehicle frames?
The industry has gone completely global to the point that about the only component that has a distinct origin is the brand name.
You have to look at more than just who employs more American workers.
What country does the car company pay most of its income taxes to? Where do the high-paid executives spend their money? In short, the country of ownership certainly matters at least as much (possibly more) as the country where the Japanese-built engine gets bolted into the Mexican-made frame (which used Japanese steel).
Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. The amount of U.S. produced components, and the place of vehicle assembly, varies from model to model - or even submodel - for many manufacturers. For American and Japanese cars, just picking a nation, or even a make, often leaves a wide range of possibilities as to how much American labor and material was used.
Well, buying a European car nowadays certainly keeps your mechanic and service departments gainfully employed. 
Your best bet to employ Americans may be public transit.
Buy a Honda, Toyota, Ford, GM, or Chrysler, and keep my neighbours employed. 
You also have to figure out where the parts for the parts, and the parts for the tools that make the parts come from down the supply chain. Second, third and fourth tier suppliers are a huge portion of the economic impact of auto manufacturing.
You can start by checking the vehicle’s VIN number, if it starts with a 1 its final assembly was in the USA. (2- Canada, 3- Mexico, J- Japan). That won’t tell you about the vehicle’s parts, though, and the car dealer will lie if you ask him.
Don’t forget the marketing angle. Which company spends the most money on advertising? Buy a Ford truck and Mike Rowe gets paid…
Around here, that will primarily benefit people in the Czech Republic, Italy and Canada, where our newer electric trolley buses, light-rail vehicles and the LRV control system were sourced from.
Yes, the drivers are locals, but the equipment is almost entirely from elsewhere because there really aren’t any American companies serving the needs of metropolitan transit agencies. (That’s a subject for another thread entirely!)
The Czech-built buses, for example, get final assembly here in SF, but only about 50 people are employed to do the twiddly little bits like bolting in the seats, signs and wheelchair lift.
Burn! 
I read the title and honestly thought it meant that a manager with a Honda parked outside the office will attract more eager recruits than one with a Ford or Chevrolet :smack: