Why Donald Trump Could be a Major Challenge for the British Government

[Chomper Higgot]

19 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

You've changed your tune since Brexit. 😆

 

No surprise though...

It’s one of the observations I’m making about you.

 

The will of people seems not to matter to you anymore.

 

Where as I have consistently argued that a democratic vote can be overturned by a following democratic vote, you’ve now gone down the path of an elected MP and leader of an opposition party assisting a foreign leader against the democratically elected British Government.

 

Its a surprising turn from someone who’s spent so much time banging on about ‘will of the people’ , ‘sovereignty’, ‘freedom from foreign interference’ and claims of being a ‘patriot’.

 

 

Edited 9 hours ago by Chomper Higgot

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The will of people seems not to matter to you anymore.

 

You're the one supporting/defending foreign interference by a Labour government in US elections.

 

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. 😄

 

When we voted Brexit you wanted a second vote because the margin wasn't clear enough, not enough people voted etc. But now only 20% of the people voted for Labour there are no such complaints. Highly amusing.  

[riclag]

On 11/7/2024 at 7:38 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

How much is he giving Ukraine while old people may freeze to death in the UK?

Hear hear! 

[Eloquent pilgrim]

27 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The will of people seems not to matter to you anymore.

 

 

Well, it certainly doesn’t seem to matter to you, because you don’t seem to have any idea what it means or how it can be defined.

 

You called a vote by 20% of the eligible electorate the will of the people. Risible; and to extend that, the UK has a population of over 68 million, not all, for various reasons eligible to vote. So if you take Labours votes at the election (9,708,816) the 20% is nearer 14% …. will of the people ?…. hilarious and embarrassing in equal measure.

 

 

 

[John Drake]

I can understand why Trump's attitude towards the UK could mean trouble for the British. But the UK really doesn't matter much to the US. Frankly, as an American, I'm more interested in strengthening ties with the Philippines and Japan and reinforcing American positions in Okinawa, Guam, and South Korea. Whatever Starmer thinks is irrelevant for Americans. Trump shouldn't even bother to invite him to the US or even meet with him. He's small potatoes. 

[NanLaew]

On 11/7/2024 at 7:36 AM, JonnyF said:

 

The UK and the US have always had a special relationship.

 

Lammy has potentially damaged it with his inane comments about Trump. Farage could help repair that. 

 

Farage could what now?

 

I know what Nigel can do, he can change the toilet rolls at Mar-a-Lago.

Edited 8 hours ago by NanLaew

[Chomper Higgot]

59 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

You're the one supporting/defending foreign interference by a Labour government in US elections.

 

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. 😄

 

When we voted Brexit you wanted a second vote because the margin wasn't clear enough, not enough people voted etc. But now only 20% of the people voted for Labour there are no such complaints. Highly amusing.  

You’re the one engaging in a ridiculous false equivalence.

 

Volunteering to help an election campaign is not the same thing as a sitting g MP and leader of an opposition party acting together with a foreign leader against the elected British Government.

 

Lets have no more ‘sovereignty’, ‘will if the people’, ‘anti-Brit’ allegations or claims to be ‘a patriot’ from you Jonny.

 

A second democratic vote is democracy in action, calling for a sitting MP and leader of an opposition party to assist a foreign leader against the democratically elected British Government is treachery.

 

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Chomper Higgot

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’re the one engaging in a ridiculous false equivalence.

 

Volunteering to help an election campaign is not the same thing as a sitting g MP and leader of an opposition party acting together with a foreign leader against the elected British Government.

 

Lets have no more ‘sovereignty’, ‘will if the people’, ‘anti-Brit’ allegations or claims to be ‘a patriot’ from you Jonny.

 

A second democratic vote is democracy in action, calling for a sitting MP and leader of an opposition party to assist a foreign leader against the democratically elected British Government is treachery.

 

 

 

No. Calling for a second vote because you didn't like the result of the first one is not Democratic. 

 

A President of the US (Obama) trying to interfere in Britain leaving the EU is deeply inappropriate.

 

Starmer keeping a foreign secretary who has routinely thrown deeply offensive insults at the US President is not in the best interests of the country. 

 

Labour's head of operations sending a team to campaign for the Democrats in the US elections is at best inflammatory and at worst illegal. 

 

You support all 4. 😆

[Chomper Higgot]

36 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

No. Calling for a second vote because you didn't like the result of the first one is not Democratic. 

 

A President of the US (Obama) trying to interfere in Britain leaving the EU is deeply inappropriate.

 

Starmer keeping a foreign secretary who has routinely thrown deeply offensive insults at the US President is not in the best interests of the country. 

 

Labour's head of operations sending a team to campaign for the Democrats in the US elections is at best inflammatory and at worst illegal. 

 

You support all 4. 😆

Democratic votes are not democratic.

 

What utter nonsense Jonny.

 

So who’s your second choice for Farage to help interfere in British domestic politics if Trump turns him down?

 

[candide]

As UK left the EU, it has a weak negotiating power against the U.S. It is an aggravating factor.

[brewsterbudgen]

14 minutes ago, candide said:

As UK left the EU, it has a weak negotiating power against the U.S. It is an aggravating factor.

Yes, another Brexit 'bonus'! 

[Eloquent pilgrim]

17 minutes ago, candide said:

As UK left the EU, it has a weak negotiating power against the U.S. It is an aggravating factor.

 

 

Weak negotiating power in what respect; please explain 

 

 

[RayC]

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Nonsense.

 

In what way is the following 'nonsense'? What is factually incorrect about the statement?

 

"The EU has preferential trade agreements with 70 nations, and seeks to extend that number. If Trump is true to his word, all imports to the US, irrespective of their origin, will attract tariffs."

 

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Yes and thank goodness we did. A simple trade deal was the better option since it freed us up to make our own deals with other countries without having to follow the EU's lead. 

 

And 8 years after the referendum result and approaching 5 years after we formally left the EU, what have we got to show for it? Three new deals - Japan, Australia, NZ (deals on terms where the latter two nations can't believe their luck) - but nothing with the US, India or China and no indication that there is likely to be any deals in the foreseeable future.

 

Instead - if we want to continue exporting to our biggest market (the EU) - we now have to effectively implement new and revised EU regulations without having any input into the development of these laws as we had previously. As an added bonus, exporters to the EU have to deal with 'red tape' that never formally existed.

 

Yes, everything's been peachy since we left.

[candide]

7 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

 

Weak negotiating power in what respect; please explain 

 

 

When  you are small or medium sized you have a lower negotiating power than when you are big.

 

For example, if Trump imposes tariffs on the EU, and the EU retaliates in a similar way  it will significantly impact the U.S. economy. If UK imposes tariffs on U.S. imports, it will not be significant.

Edited 3 hours ago by candide

[nauseus]

On 11/7/2024 at 7:39 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

and possibly the most despised PM since Thatcher.

 

Blair.

[nauseus]

7 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

The UK/US special relationship is built around two pillars, shared common values and more specifically sharing intelligence resources.

 

I am not sure that the UK has much in common with Mr Trump's likely administration, and as @Walker88 pointed out yesterday, confidence in sharing intelligence resources went by the board with Mr Trump's antics storing classified documents in the Khazi at Mar-A-Largo!

 

You can believe that rubbish if you want but don't assume that we all do.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

18 minutes ago, candide said:

When  you are small or medium sized you have a lower negotiating power than when you are big.

 

For example, if Trump imposes tariffs on the EU, and the EU retaliates in a similar way  it will significantly impact the U.S. economy. If UK imposes tariffs on U.S. imports, it will not be significant.

 

Ah, so the UK are free to make whatever independent trade deal they can negotiate with the USA; rather than have to accept whatever trade deal the EU negotiates with them, which, by default, will be for the benefit of Germany and France, to the detriment of the rest of the member states ….. thanks.

 

 

[nauseus]

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Every citizen had the opportunity to vote, the expressed will of the people resulted in a Labour Government.

 

There is no democratic process in which a sitting MP acts to assist a foreign Government against the elected Government.

 

Though some here think such treachery is desirable.

Which sitting MP acted to assist a foreign Government against the elected Government?

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’re the one engaging in a ridiculous false equivalence.

 

Volunteering to help an election campaign is not the same thing as a sitting g MP and leader of an opposition party acting together with a foreign leader against the elected British Government.

 

Lets have no more ‘sovereignty’, ‘will if the people’, ‘anti-Brit’ allegations or claims to be ‘a patriot’ from you Jonny.

 

A second democratic vote is democracy in action, calling for a sitting MP and leader of an opposition party to assist a foreign leader against the democratically elected British Government is treachery.

 

 

 

We really need that bored emoji.😫

Edited 3 hours ago by nauseus

[nauseus]

51 minutes ago, candide said:

As UK left the EU, it has a weak negotiating power against the U.S. It is an aggravating factor.

 We really need that bored emoji.😫

[nauseus]

32 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

In what way is the following 'nonsense'? What is factually incorrect about the statement?

 

"The EU has preferential trade agreements with 70 nations, and seeks to extend that number. If Trump is true to his word, all imports to the US, irrespective of their origin, will attract tariffs."

 

 

And 8 years after the referendum result and approaching 5 years after we formally left the EU, what have we got to show for it? Three new deals - Japan, Australia, NZ (deals on terms where the latter two nations can't believe their luck) - but nothing with the US, India or China and no indication that there is likely to be any deals in the foreseeable future.

 

Instead - if we want to continue exporting to our biggest market (the EU) - we now have to effectively implement new and revised EU regulations without having any input into the development of these laws as we had previously. As an added bonus, exporters to the EU have to deal with 'red tape' that never formally existed.

 

Yes, everything's been peachy since we left.

 We really need that bored emoji.😫

[riclag]

3 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

No. Calling for a second vote because you didn't like the result of the first one is not Democratic. 

 

A President of the US (Obama) trying to interfere in Britain leaving the EU is deeply inappropriate.

 

Starmer keeping a foreign secretary who has routinely thrown deeply offensive insults at the US President is not in the best interests of the country. 

 

Labour's head of operations sending a team to campaign for the Democrats in the US elections is at best inflammatory and at worst illegal. 

 

You support all 4. 😆

 

“Labour's head of operations sending a team to campaign for the Democrats in the US elections is at best inflammatory and at worst illegal”.

 

Last time a  Trump hating Brit tried to influence a  Election!

Christopher Steele!

[candide]

6 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

Ah, so the UK are free to make whatever independent trade deal they can negotiate with the USA; rather than have to accept whatever trade deal the EU negotiates with them, which, by default, will be for the benefit of Germany and France, to the detriment of the rest of the member states ….. thanks.

 

 

An imaginary trade deal?

 

On top of it, you are completely misinformed. UK strongly benefited from trade deals made by the EU. In particular, one key point of these agreements was to give access to the EU market for products in exchange for the partner giving access to its market for EU services.

 

BTW, how are post-Brexit trade deals negotiated by UK with Japan or NZ better than the trade deals negotiated by the EU with the same countries? Please tell us?

[nauseus]

1 minute ago, candide said:

An imaginary trade deal?

 

On top of it, you are completely misinformed. UK strongly benefited from trade deals made by the EU. In particular, one key point of these agreements was to give access to the EU market for products in exchange for the partner giving access to its market for EU services.

 

BTW, how are post-Brexit trade deals negotiated by UK with Japan or NZ better than the trade deals negotiated by the EU with the same countries? Please tell us?

[candide]

6 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 We really need that bored emoji.😫

Exactly! Your posts would often deserve it! 😃

[RayC]

4 hours ago, John Drake said:

I can understand why Trump's attitude towards the UK could mean trouble for the British. But the UK really doesn't matter much to the US. Frankly, as an American, I'm more interested in strengthening ties with the Philippines and Japan and reinforcing American positions in Okinawa, Guam, and South Korea. Whatever Starmer thinks is irrelevant for Americans. Trump shouldn't even bother to invite him to the US or even meet with him. He's small potatoes. 

 

"But the UK really doesn't matter much to the US." Ouch! That hurts.

 

Nevertheless, thank you for posting your opinion, which I imagine is held by a sizeable number of your compatriots and, more importantly, seemingly by a succession of US governments (whatever their colour).

 

The UK has a rich cultural, economic and social history and has much to be proud of, but the belief that by acting on its' own in the 21st century, it has any real influence or power in the world is imo delusional.

 

Europe as a whole is a fading force. Imo it can only slow the inevitable decline, and continue to be important, if it acts and moves as one entity. For that reason alone, Brexit was a disaster for the UK and a sizeable body blow for Europe as a whole.

[RayC]

8 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 We really need that bored emoji.😫

 

You'll just have to bear the pain. The facts often hurt.

[Baht Simpson]

On 11/7/2024 at 7:32 AM, jippytum said:

I hope Trump and Farage wipe the floor with Starmer our UK minister of sleaze. 

He can't attack Starmer personally, he can only punish the U.K., so you're wishing ill on the people of your own country. Why would you do that?

[brewsterbudgen]

51 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

Blair.

 

Truss.

[nauseus]

15 minutes ago, candide said:

Exactly! Your posts would often deserve it! 😃

 

As sharp as ever.