Reports in the press this morning that trump is to be offered a second Royal Visit to this country.
I do hope this is not true. Sucking up to this odious creep just demeans this country and achieves nothing. Can no one stand up and call him out for what he is.? Have we really sunk this low?
|
|
I have nothing but contempt for this appalling individual and for the naivety of the US electorate, but the fact remains that he and his bunch of unqualified, inexperienced officials will wield huge influence in the world. Sadly, therefore, we must do business with this criminal, holding our noses in the process.
Last edited by: James Loveless on Sat 28 Dec 24 at 08:33
|
I don’t know if he can,but I suspect he will try to get the presidency on a permanent basis,
For either himself or one of his cronies or family,lord help us.
|
we must do business with this criminal, holding our noses in the process.
Like we've always done
|
|
Relax, so we have picked up a turd on our shoes, might as well try and polish it a bit. It will be cleaned off in 4 years.
|
Lets be honest, we've had worse here.
|
|
really? we have voted in some doozies, but Worse than Trump?
|
>> really? we have voted in some doozies, but Worse than Trump?
Boris and Truss are as near as we get but Bojo while undoubtedly a narcissist was less malevolent.
Truss is an open question as she screwed up from the get go and our system meant getting her out was pretty quick.
|
|
Truss was simply out of her depth,
|
>> Truss was simply out of her depth,
Sure, but reading Anthony Seldon's book on her she was showing other characteristics too.
|
>> really? we have voted in some doozies, but Worse than Trump?
>>
I meant heads of state from murderous regimes such as Saudi Arabia, China etc. visiting us officially.
Last edited by: zippy on Sat 28 Dec 24 at 12:26
|
>> I meant heads of state from murderous regimes such as Saudi Arabia, China etc. visiting
>> us officially.
Ah right, my misunderstoodment.
Robert Mugabe must be top of the list. makes Trumpo look benevolent.
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 28 Dec 24 at 12:42
|
>> Robert Mugabe must be top of the list. makes Trumpo look benevolent.
Ceaușescu took the biscuit I think but there's more to it than benevolence v brutality.
|
Trump will be one of the 5 most important and influential people on the planet - obvious competitors for top spot may include Xi Jinping and Elon Musk + ???? He may actually be effective as a leader, despite a flawed personality - the US public obviously think so!.
The global community works when leaders subordinate personal opinion in pursuit of the achievable. Despite his flaws, it would be madness to give him the cold shoulder politically.
Perhaps the Democrats were instrumental in his electoral success by running an obviously failing Joe Biden and making a mess of their campaign.
The UK has a choice - grin and bear it for 4 years, or slide steadily down the global importance league - there will be many who will happily play to his narcissistic tendencies.
|
As they say "a day is a long time in politics'... 4 years will be an eternity!
|
>> As they say "a day is a long time in politics'... 4 years will be
>> an eternity!
Gawd! I've just given SWMBO a new eternity ring as a Christmas present (the previous no longer fitted and couldn't be adjusted).
Have I signed up for two eternities?
|
>>
>> Have I signed up for two eternities?
>>
Yes!
|
|
....but don't panic; it'll feel exactly the same as one.
|
"The UK has a choice - grin and bear it for 4 years, or slide steadily down the global importance league - there will be many who will happily play to his narcissistic tendencies."
D you really tnink that sucking up to Trump will have any effect on Britain's standing in the world? Rather the opposite I would have thought. And why are we so obsessed with our "Global importance" anyway?
I would have thought living in a country that has a clear idea of what it believes to be right and wrong and is not afraid to say so is preferable to toadying to this most unpleasant man in the vain hope that a few crumbs drop form his table.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sat 28 Dec 24 at 21:02
|
>>
>>
>> D you really tnink that sucking up to Trump will have any effect on Britain's
>> standing in the world? Rather the opposite I would have thought. And why are we
>> so obsessed with our "Global importance" anyway?
>>
>>
It isn't "Sucking up", but maintaining a relationship with the worlds largest superpower and one of our most important allies. Who America elects as there president is none of our business, we have to be pragmatic and just get on with it, just as we do in our dealings with every other country, many of whose leaders make Trump look like an exceptionally woke liberal.
|
"t isn't "Sucking up", but maintaining a relationship with the worlds largest superpower and one of our most important allies. Who America elects as there president is none of our business, we have to be pragmatic and just get on with it, just as we do in our dealings with every other country, many of whose leaders make Trump look like an exceptionally woke liberal."
I agree that we have to get on wtht it. We have no other choice. We need to maintain a civilised and civilised relationship wiht the United states as we do with all countries.
What we don't have to do do is offer a second state visit, the first time this will have ever happened, to this deplorable man to salve his ego and cravenly hope that he will somehow bestow favours upon us in recognition. He won't.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sat 28 Dec 24 at 21:31
|
Diplomacy is a fine art, an old art, one of the oldest in the first world. It's a long game, its a two faced game, played with rules honed over many years. A game played when Americans still lived in Teepees and followed the Bison. It's a game Trump has no idea about. There is a very good reason the Commonwealth & Foreign office back entrance faces no 10, and the MOD is round the corner and down the street.
The Royal family is a major tool in the game, always has been, always will be. Trump is too narcisistic and vain to realise he is being grifted, get it done early, 4 years will be less painful for us than some in his sights because of it.
The long game, diplomacy. Only Us and the French can do it well. One of the reasons we despise and admire each other.
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 28 Dec 24 at 21:59
|
Only Us and the French can do it well. One of the reasons we despise and admire each other.
Yes the first World War was triumph for French and British Diplomacy, as was the Suez crisis come to that.
|
>>
>>
>> What we don't have to do do is offer a second state visit, the first
>> time this will have ever happened, to this deplorable man to salve his ego and
>> cravenly hope that he will somehow bestow favours upon us in recognition. He won't.
>>
It is the norm for the newly elected president of the US to be offered a state visit. And despite having held the office before that is exactly what he is, having spent a term out of power. We have not faced this situation before so there is no precedent, the only other US leader who returned to power after losing office was Grover Cleveland and that was in 1892.
|
"It is the norm for the newly elected president of the US to be offered a state visit. "
Absolutely it is not.
There have only been three State Visits by US presidents since the late Queen's accession
Namely:
George W Bush 2003
Barack Obama 2011
Trump 2019
Is Trump really deserving of two?
|
>>
>> Is Trump really deserving of two?
>>
No, but his ego is, IYSWIM.
|
>> There have only been three State Visits by US presidents since the late Queen's accession
>>
>> Namely:
>>
>> George W Bush 2003
>> Barack Obama 2011
>> Trump 2019
According to the US Reagan had a state visit in 1982.
Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon and Carter all had visits to the UK, including meeting the Queen. Why those are 'informal' rather than being 'State' is, I suspect, a matter of history and protocol.
|
Not all visits by Heads of State are deemed to be State Visits. Reagan certainly visited but was not accorded this honour. Technically a State Visit will include a Royal banquet.
Let’s just leave him to his Big Mac, fries and ketchup at Mar a Lago.
|
>> Not all visits by Heads of State are deemed to be State Visits. Reagan certainly
>> visited but was not accorded this honour. Technically a State Visit will include a Royal
>> banquet.
Some records differ:
www.rct.uk/collection/2004363/president-ronald-reagan-visits-britain-on-state-visit-1982
www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/video/state-visit-united-kingdom-president-reagan-prime-minister-margaret-thatcher-enter-0
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 29 Dec 24 at 11:26
|
Some records differ:
only the incorrect ones :-)
Here is the listing of Presidential visits published by the United States Embassy to the UK.
uk.usembassy.gov/our-relationship/visits-of-presidents-of-the-united-states-to-the-united-kingdom/
You will see that only the three visits I mentined are described as State visits. Reagan's visit was simply a meeting.
And here is the the Royal website which confirms the same thing.
www.royal.uk/state-visit-president-united-states-america-and-mrs-trump
I think they should know who they had to dinner!
|
>> They are Americans, therefore easily confused.
>> history.state.gov/departmenthistory/travels/president/reagan-ronald
>>
It is not clear what constitutes a "State Visit". Quick Google provides no explicit definition.
- meeting the King/Queen as Head of State seems to be a given
- the invitation can be from either K/Q or PM - or someone acting on their instructions
- they may stay in a royal residence - or may not
- a state banquet is not an essential part of a state visit - but adds to the evidence
The "Royal" website puts the Royal family at the centre of events - involved in making the invitation, welcoming, banquet etc etc.
No wonder lists of state visits differ - invitees want to "big up" the occasion - good for the ego and public perceptions, the Royals want to make it "exclusive" to maximise diplomatic value.
|
>> D you really tnink that sucking up to Trump will have any effect on Britain's
>> standing in the world? Rather the opposite I would have thought.
There is a fundamental difference between "sucking up" and engaging with courtesy and respect.
Failure may compromise any possible trade deals, NATO relationships, support for other policies the UK may choose to pursue.
>>And why are we so obsessed with our "Global importance" anyway?
The UK could continue its inexorable decline to the middle ranking middle income - not necessarily bad but better if it is an explicit policy, not the result of complacency or stupidity.
>> I would have thought living in a country that has a clear idea of what
>> it believes to be right and wrong and is not afraid to say so is
>> preferable to toadying to this most unpleasant man in the vain hope that a few
>> crumbs drop form his table.,
A worthy aspiration but more is achieved through courtesy than courting conflict. Particularly where differences exist, it is better to keep communications lines open, develop a common sense of common purpose, resolve differences, build trust etc etc.
It is not "toadying" - it is best practice.
|
“A worthy aspiration but more is achieved through courtesy than courting conflict“
I am nor proposing courting conflict, I am however suggesting that we do not grant the unique honour of a second state visit to this man. We have not done so for any other US president and have generally retained a good relationship with the country. What makes him so special in you eyes that we should grant him this unique honour?
Cosying up to and flattering this man is demeaning to this country and is highly unlikely to bring the rewards you hope for. Trump does not care about the fortunes of U.K. or indeed anyone or anywhere other than himself. I would have thought that that was transparently obvious by now.
|
>> There is a fundamental difference between "sucking up" and engaging with courtesy and respect.
The point is, Trump thinks he is being feted, hugely respected, elevated to the ranks of Royalty.
Everyone else realises he is being soft soaped.
That is Diplomacy. Wonderfully two faced. Specially when you lump him in the same category with Mugabe, Ceaușescu
|
It is not "toadying" - it is best practice.
I believe it called diplomacy. Unfortunately this current government don't seem to have anyone with the character and personality suitable to bestow the title of Diplomat upon.
|
>>
>> Ah right, my misunderstoodment.
Your misunderstoodment is totally understood as my post could be seen as ambiguous.
;-D
|
The question is, what do we achieve by sticking two fingers up to Trump?
Probably better at least to observe the normal civilities. King Charles's job is not to be political, so nothing is lost, not moral ground sacrificed, by him entertaining the Orange One.
If our political leaders are to meet him and if they think it is in our interest (or otherwise) to tell him where he is going wrong then they can do so (or not) in private.
Scaramucci I think says that whilst he is a nightmare, he can be flattered into changing his behaviour. I'm not sure that he can be coerced by being insulted.
|
Whatever else we might think of the Royals this is where they come into their own. Or at least the late Queen did.
They can sail along being “friend” to all while keeping their own opinions to themselves. This works with the general populace too as most think, whatever their political views, that the monarch is on their side. Even republicans gave the Queen a lot of slack.
I am ambivalent to many aspects of the monarchy but when it comes to managing our relationships with the oddballs they are a strong card to play.
|
I mean, would the world really have been better off with a senile Biden?
I’m pretty certain Putin would never have invaded Ukraine had Trump been in the White House. He just wouldn’t have been able to predict the action.
And it’s all because Obama backed Hilary Clinton; literally the least electable candidate imaginable. What was he thinking of.
And I reckon Musk will get bored before Easter.
|
>> I mean, would the world really have been better off with a senile Biden?
Without getting into a debate about Biden's capacity he wasn't the candidate.
|
|
No but he was going to be the candidate until the last minute. Desiree’s the Democrat’s chances in my view. In politics you don’t give your opponents an excuse!
|
The Democrats were forced into selecting an alternative at a late stage when it became abundantly clear publicly Biden was already very obviously failing both physically and mentally.
It opened the path for to a Trump victory. The Democrats are responsible for the outcome - foolishly making Biden their candidate when he was evidently incapable of lasting a full term.
On a personal level I think Trump unpleasant, but judging POTUS in terms of UK behavioural norms is mistaken. The US and the UK are two nations separated by a common language. There is an obvious attraction to "cowboy" stereotypes of "tell it like it is", "action not words" etc.
What we in the UK think is unimportant - the reality is that unless he is shown appropriate respect as the democratically elected leader of a country with a GDP 8 times that of the UK, we will be the losers.
|
“What we in the UK think is unimportant - the reality is that unless he is shown appropriate respect as the democratically elected leader of a country with a GDP 8 times that of the UK, we will be the losers.”
There is ever difference between respect for the office and grovelling. Trump shows no respect for this country and our politicians. Our relationship should be formal and polite but no more.
If we are talking of respect perhaps we should consider self respect.
|
>> The Democrats were forced into selecting an alternative at a late stage when it became
>> abundantly clear publicly Biden was already very obviously failing both physically and mentally.
The Democrats should have offered Biden the pistol and whisky solution by late 2023. If they'd had a proper Primary run rather than a coronation they might have done better but then again the polls were so far out that it's anybody's guess.
|
|
The polls weren't really out, biden was in for a drubbing. They ignored it until they couldn't. Stupidity.
|
>> The polls weren't really out, biden was in for a drubbing. They ignored it until
>> they couldn't. Stupidity.
I agree with the ignored it bit.
Am I wrong about the polls up to election day and Harris v Trump?
|
>> Am I wrong about the polls up to election day and Harris v Trump?
>>
The ones i saw showed biden losing badly and then harris losing by a lesser margin.
|
The ones I saw (a composite of all the polls) had Biden badly behind, and a Harris kick to be neck and neck.
At the end of the day, illegal immigration and the economy won it for Trump.
|
>> No but he was going to be the candidate until the last minute. Desiree’s the
>> Democrat’s chances in my view. In politics you don’t give your opponents an excuse!
>>
I presume I meant ‘destroyed’. Apologies for that.
|
I saw this yesterday and could not believe my eyes - but then, nothing Trump does should surprise anyone any more.
It shows a vaguely menacing, shifty-looking individual with no hint of warmth. It's probably a lot more revealing than he realises. I guess it's meant to be his "power-mode", but someone who has to try this hard is really demonstrating their insecurity.
God only knows what he'll get up to, post-inauguration, after we've had all the "alternative facts" and doctored photos about the crowd size.
Looking at this guy really makes me sick.
|
If this were a photo of a parent, one might guess that it was one that didn't spare the rod.
There is no ounce of compassion in that image.
|
I think it's hilarious, it's a pantomime villain poster
"Appearing with non gender specific snow white, and the 7 alternately sized non gender specific peoples
|
As an image it's probably a little more honest than most political portraits.
Typically the subject is shown as a smiling, nice to know person, kind to children and pets - almost always a deliberately skewed representation of reality.
Trump was elected on the back of an intent to get things done - MAGA. His expression reflects that determination - however repugnant some may find it.
|
>>
>> Trump was elected on the back of an intent to get things done - MAGA Trump elected.
>> His expression reflects that determination - however repugnant some may find it.
>>
|
Yep. Son of an immigrant, married to an immigrant, vows to rid the USA of immigrants.
You couldn't make it up.
(Of course he means the wrong type of immigrants.)
|
|
Its the same photo one as the one on the Sex Offenders Register.
|
www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-launches-own-meme-coin-cryptocurrency/
How about some trump crypto currency? $6bn market capitalisation already in one day from launch.
|
Renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America? Taking back the Panama canal? Two genders only? Massive repatriation of immigrants (I think illegal). Significant trade tariffs on imported goods.
Some fairly extreme stuff on its way in the US if Trump's speech is to be believed...
|
I seriously wonder if there is any way back to functioning democracy, now that conversations on social media are curated by the tyrants themselves (noting that both Musk and Zuckerberg now appear to have been captured by Trump.)
It's very worrying that 18-24 year-olds appear to be very Trumpy. An age group which historically has tended to left wing views.
Of course it's hard to distinguish Trump's actual intentions from what he says. But he is mad, bad and probably dangerous, of that I have no doubt.
|
|
I think he can write whatever speech he likes, governing and getting laws passed is somewhat harder.
|
A different perspective - although were I to have had a vote I don't think he would not have been my choice.
The west - Europe and the US are in decline. They have simply become sclerotic. On a social level we could decide that this is desirable - less stress, keep everybody happy etc. If so, understandably a Trump victory is a threat to the comfortable and stable.
We lack clear leadership, want to pander to all views. Most evident progress since the UK election is establishing countless reviews and enquiries, many of which will not report for several years. Claims of a Labour growth plan have zero credibility.
The evidence of public enquiries is equally dire - both Tory and Labour are equally culpable - Post Office, contaminated blood, Iraq, Hillsborough to name but a handful. This is just unacceptable - a waste of public money and opportunity.
So the different perspective - Trump is set on making radical changes rapidly. Some I agree with, some I don't. But at least he is a potential mould breaker when the alternative was 4 more years of the completely unremarkable.
|
The last 4 years have arguably been very successful, using Trump's own favourite measure the stock market. The main failure has been to allow the huge deficit to grow even bigger. Trump actually changed very little 17-20. He is in a stronger position now unless some Republicans suddenly grow backbones.
Unremarkable is good, as long as you are doing ok. Lots of Americans aren't,not least because healthcare is a massive issue that Trump is unlikely to fix.
I don't know about sclerotic. The US is thoroughly decadent, and we aren't much better.
On the subject of pendulums, they can really only swing back if the pendulum is still there.
Is it good per se to be a mould breaker? Hitler certainly was. Mussolini made the trains run on time, except that he didn't, he just said he did. Trump, I think, is more Mussolini than Hitler. Driven by vanity rather than ideals.
|
For the life of me, I dont see why we had to have hours and hours of live coverage of his inauguration spread over two main TV channels.
At the expense of "the bidding room" as well.
|
>> For the life of me, I dont see why we had to have hours and
>> hours of live coverage of his inauguration spread over two main TV channels.
Thankfully I missed it.
Somebody has helpfully gleaned the pith of his speech, of which there was just over a minute's worth.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cn015gq57keo
Can a sane man appear to be insane, or does that make him insane anyway?
|
>>
>> Two genders only? Massive repatriation of immigrants (I think illegal). Significant trade tariffs on imported
>> goods.
>>
>>
>>
Mass repatriation of ILLEGAL immigrants. The majority of the population in any country you care to name would be behind that, and I doubt if multiple gender classifications garner much support either.
The reason large parts of the world are swinging towards the right is that they feel their legitimate concerns are being met from professional politicians who have never experienced life outside of that sphere with nothing but a patronising pat on the head, and an accusation of some sort of "Ism" if they don't shut up and listen to those who know best.
Why do you think we got Brexit?
|
“Why do you think we got Brexit?
Lies and general ignorance?
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Mon 20 Jan 25 at 19:47
|
>>
>>
>> Lies and general ignorance?
>>
Neither side cared too much about the truth, and as for ignorance, is that everybody with a different political view to you? People living on run down estates and doing menial jobs will have an entirely different take on life to you, especially when they hear employers singing the praises of immigrant workers who will work twice as hard for half the money. Not something that will effect a middle class professional, of course.
|
"Neither side cared too much about the truth"
1) I'm not talking about "sides". The ignorance of the population as a whole when it comes to basic uderstanding of arithmetic, statistics and how the economy works is astounding. That is compounded by an underlying fear in all humans of outsiders or foreigners
2) Because of the above it is easy for politiicans using the media both traditional and social to distort facts, lie, and manipulate large sections of the popuation to gain power and influence.
That is why Americans have Trump.
That is why we had Brexit Boris Johnson and Liz Truss
This why the French have Marine Le Pen
That is why the Germans have the AFD
|
RO'R explained exactly why we have all those things. It was entirely predictable and you are making the same mistake.
Our most serious question now is how far the pendulum is going to swing in the other direction.
|
>> Mass repatriation of ILLEGAL immigrants. The majority of the population in any country you care
>> to name would be behind that, and I doubt if multiple gender classifications garner much
>> support either.
>>
>> The reason large parts of the world are swinging towards the right is that they
>> feel their legitimate concerns are being met from professional politicians who have never experienced life
>> outside of that sphere with nothing but a patronising pat on the head, and an
>> accusation of some sort of "Ism" if they don't shut up and listen to those
>> who know best.
>>
>> Why do you think we got Brexit?
Agree totally
|
Interesting to see where the Trump-Musk relationship will go with Trump shouting 'drill, drill, drill' implying an increase in oil production to maybe 'fuel' the resurrection of the US ICE car industry and how that will sit with the Tesla owner hoping for the exact opposite.
Also a prediction - Trump and wife have just lunched their own crypto currency, how long before he dictates that 'something' within Government has to be bought/sold only using some form of crypto?
|
Seen somewhere that an organisation he owns has made $43billion on paper already from these $Trump coins!
Though if they sold their holding, the value would likely plummet.
Last edited by: zippy on Tue 21 Jan 25 at 00:46
|
Did he? or didn't he?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cpdxzjw9p47o
He always sounds a bit out of it when he talks to me.
|
>> Seen somewhere that an organisation he owns has made $43billion on paper already from these
>> $Trump coins!
>>
>> Though if they sold their holding, the value would likely plummet.
Does this show anything except what an emperor's clothes job cryptocurrency is? (Yes I know that by extension fiat currency is 'worse' but it does seem to be reasonably predictable in a stable economy).
Apparently $TRUMP200 million has been created, and there are to be a further 800 million $TRUMPs issued over the next 3 years.
A bizarre situation in which the PotUS 'prints' some tokens, and people can buy them from him, thereby putting money in his bank account? And what they get for their money is...a token. Is this legal? In any way ethical?
Does anyone here understand this? How is it different from me creating some secure digital tokens and selling them?
I do understand that they are only worth the trust people put in them, and like GBP in that respect. But how many cryptocurrencies will the world support? And it's bizarre that they basically circulate and are traded almost only for owners to try and make pots of government-issued money. Shirley, until they are principally used to buy and sell actual stuff, their value is not established at all?
Yes a lot of money has been made and none of it by me. People also got rich buying South Sea stock. How is this different?
|
Trump - James Loveless
