I think what might be very interesting in the event of a UK/US trade deal is US companies in Ireland decamping to the UK especially now that Ireland's tax advantage has been hugely eroded by the ECJ.
There's potentially a big chunk of growth that we can grab very quickly with a trade deal.
As I said, not happening under Starmer, he will put closer agreement with Ireland and the rest of the EU and if necessary cross European tariffs on US imports ahead of any trade deal with Trump
The exit polls did not ask about media consumption, so we need to look for indirect clues. NBC asked the question in April when President Joe Biden was still in the race, and the results were dramatic. Among people who got their news from “newspapers,” Biden was winning 70-21. Among people who got their news from “YouTube/Google,” Trump led 55-39.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
A trade deal may be the only way to avoid the tariffs. US healthcare companies can already bid for NHS contracts so I don't think that's a barrier and Trump has previously said he thinks NICE should be replicated for Medicare and Medicaid to stop big pharma from ripping off the federal government so that probably won't be a barrier either.
Remember though, the trade deal only exists so long as you stay in Trump and Elon's good books.
What if Trump and Elon got pissy and the UK's support of OneWeb?
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
A trade deal may be the only way to avoid the tariffs. US healthcare companies can already bid for NHS contracts so I don't think that's a barrier and Trump has previously said he thinks NICE should be replicated for Medicare and Medicaid to stop big pharma from ripping off the federal government so that probably won't be a barrier either.
In US health care, something to watch is whether Trump tries to push through what he was blocked by Congress & the Senate from doing last time... repeal the laws preventing negotiating prices for bulk buying pharmaceuticals in the US.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
Tories and Reform may well agree with you.
Starmer doesn't, hence as the Telegraph reports today his team are wargaming sanctions on US imports as his Labour government throws in its lot with the EU, Communist China and Lula's populist left Brazil in the coming trade war with Trump's US
Labour's progress in Scotland will come to a screeching halt if whisky gets slapped with a 200% tariff in the US.
And those who like Jack Daniels and Jim Beam might want to stock up.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
A trade deal may be the only way to avoid the tariffs. US healthcare companies can already bid for NHS contracts so I don't think that's a barrier and Trump has previously said he thinks NICE should be replicated for Medicare and Medicaid to stop big pharma from ripping off the federal government so that probably won't be a barrier either.
Remember though, the trade deal only exists so long as you stay in Trump and Elon's good books.
What if Trump and Elon got pissy and the UK's support of OneWeb?
I think let's see what Trump asks for, there's a cost of doing business. If the cost is too high then we live with the tariffs for 4 years and hope that MAGA loses in 2028.
I think what might be very interesting in the event of a UK/US trade deal is US companies in Ireland decamping to the UK especially now that Ireland's tax advantage has been hugely eroded by the ECJ.
There's potentially a big chunk of growth that we can grab very quickly with a trade deal.
As I said, not happening under Starmer, he will put closer agreement with Ireland and the rest of the EU and if necessary cross European tariffs on US imports ahead of any trade deal with Trump
Depends which Starmer we get. If we get the Starmer who won the Labour leadership, then turfed out the left, and studiously avoided the culture war during the GE campaign, then I can see kinda see it.
It all rests on what Trump does with Ukraine. If he hands them over to Putin, Starmer can't follow and he will align with the EU.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
I disagree entirely. We neither need nor should want a trade deal with the US beyond what we already have - which curenlty means a substantial trade surplus with the US. We know from experience (both our own and the experience of others) that a trade deal with the US is a poisoned challice and we should waste no time nor effort in pursuing one.
Our trade surplus comes from services exports to the US so I don't see how anything changes there. If anything we could do even better if there was equivalence in regulations agreed between both sides for data, tech, finance, AI etc... as we'd remove a big barrier for services exports and more US companies would be able to utilise the lower salary structure of the UK to hire loads of £60-150k roles.
On goods I'm not sure it will make a huge amount of difference, the public isn't really ready to accept US food. In the margins I think some premium US imports could do well but people who want parmesan will still buy Italian parmesan, people who want to make bread are still going to get the £1.20 1.5KG bread flour made from UK grain and it's not as though US agriculture is very competitive now, as we've all been discussing food prices are very high in the US so the structural advantage that US agriculture had last time this was being discussed has all but gone.
Ummm:
Project 2025 specifically called out services imports (specifically referring to offshore call centers), so you may the optimistic.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
I disagree entirely. We neither need nor should want a trade deal with the US beyond what we already have - which curenlty means a substantial trade surplus with the US. We know from experience (both our own and the experience of others) that a trade deal with the US is a poisoned challice and we should waste no time nor effort in pursuing one.
Our trade surplus comes from services exports to the US so I don't see how anything changes there. If anything we could do even better if there was equivalence in regulations agreed between both sides for data, tech, finance, AI etc... as we'd remove a big barrier for services exports and more US companies would be able to utilise the lower salary structure of the UK to hire loads of £60-150k roles.
On goods I'm not sure it will make a huge amount of difference, the public isn't really ready to accept US food. In the margins I think some premium US imports could do well but people who want parmesan will still buy Italian parmesan, people who want to make bread are still going to get the £1.20 1.5KG bread flour made from UK grain and it's not as though US agriculture is very competitive now, as we've all been discussing food prices are very high in the US so the structural advantage that US agriculture had last time this was being discussed has all but gone.
It will be exactly like it has been for Mexico and Canada. All disputes will be decided by a US court which will always side with the US. Stuff we don't agree with? Tough shit. Under an FTA with the US we will be forced to conform to what US companies want.
The venerable Smithson Junior has written a fair bit on this and we would be as well to listen to him.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
A trade deal may be the only way to avoid the tariffs. US healthcare companies can already bid for NHS contracts so I don't think that's a barrier and Trump has previously said he thinks NICE should be replicated for Medicare and Medicaid to stop big pharma from ripping off the federal government so that probably won't be a barrier either.
Remember though, the trade deal only exists so long as you stay in Trump and Elon's good books.
What if Trump and Elon got pissy and the UK's support of OneWeb?
SpaceX have a very good relationship with OneWeb. When OneWeb was stuffed by Russia stealing their satellites (which were supposed to be launched in Russia), SpaceX stepped in and launched the replacements at a cheaper price than the Russians had been charging and did so very rapidly.
SpaceX are actively bidding to launch any future tranche of satellites for OneWeb.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
A trade deal may be the only way to avoid the tariffs. US healthcare companies can already bid for NHS contracts so I don't think that's a barrier and Trump has previously said he thinks NICE should be replicated for Medicare and Medicaid to stop big pharma from ripping off the federal government so that probably won't be a barrier either.
Remember though, the trade deal only exists so long as you stay in Trump and Elon's good books.
What if Trump and Elon got pissy and the UK's support of OneWeb?
I think let's see what Trump asks for, there's a cost of doing business. If the cost is too high then we live with the tariffs for 4 years and hope that MAGA loses in 2028.
We benefit from a rules based international order.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
Tories and Reform may well agree with you.
Starmer doesn't, hence as the Telegraph reports today his team are wargaming sanctions on US imports as his Labour government throws in its lot with the EU, Communist China and Lula's populist left Brazil in the coming trade war with Trump's US
Labour's progress in Scotland will come to a screeching halt if whisky gets slapped with a 200% tariff in the US.
And those who like Jack Daniels and Jim Beam might want to stock up.
Whisky comes from rural Scotland which is all Tory and SNP and LD mainly, Labour's base is in urban central belt Scotland. Labour doesn't care much about rural Scotland anymore than it does largely Tory and LD rural England and rural Wales
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
I think what might be very interesting in the event of a UK/US trade deal is US companies in Ireland decamping to the UK especially now that Ireland's tax advantage has been hugely eroded by the ECJ.
There's potentially a big chunk of growth that we can grab very quickly with a trade deal.
As I said, not happening under Starmer, he will put closer agreement with Ireland and the rest of the EU and if necessary cross European tariffs on US imports ahead of any trade deal with Trump
Depends which Starmer we get. If we get the Starmer who won the Labour leadership, then turfed out the left, and studiously avoided the culture war during the GE campaign, then I can see kinda see it.
It all rests on what Trump does with Ukraine. If he hands them over to Putin, Starmer can't follow and he will align with the EU.
'Ministers are “wargaming” imposing tariffs on American goods in retaliation for protectionist measures threatened by Donald Trump. The president-elect has said he will impose a flat tariff of 10-20 per cent on all goods imported into the United States under an “America First” trade policy that has caused panic in European capitals, as well as a 60 per cent tariff on imports from China.
Economists have warned that Mr Trump’s proposed tariffs and any consequent trade war could do significant damage to the UK economy, pushing up inflation and interest rates.
Officials at the Department for Business and Trade are now understood to be commissioning advice and forecasts on a range of economic scenarios that could emerge under a Trump presidency.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
A trade deal may be the only way to avoid the tariffs. US healthcare companies can already bid for NHS contracts so I don't think that's a barrier and Trump has previously said he thinks NICE should be replicated for Medicare and Medicaid to stop big pharma from ripping off the federal government so that probably won't be a barrier either.
Remember though, the trade deal only exists so long as you stay in Trump and Elon's good books.
What if Trump and Elon got pissy and the UK's support of OneWeb?
Doesn't he put their satellites in orbit these days, since OneWeb can't have the russians do it any more?
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Genuinely someone who plays a lot of golf probably is a good idea.
If we gift him a set of golf clubs that used to belong to a historic royal he will love it too.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
The odd thing about UK/US trade is that both sides' statistics show a trade surplus.
In which case both sides have good reason not to meddle.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
I disagree entirely. We neither need nor should want a trade deal with the US beyond what we already have - which curenlty means a substantial trade surplus with the US. We know from experience (both our own and the experience of others) that a trade deal with the US is a poisoned challice and we should waste no time nor effort in pursuing one.
I think we wait and see what crap he comes out with, before deciding a response.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
The odd thing about UK/US trade is that both sides' statistics show a trade surplus.
I think what might be very interesting in the event of a UK/US trade deal is US companies in Ireland decamping to the UK especially now that Ireland's tax advantage has been hugely eroded by the ECJ.
There's potentially a big chunk of growth that we can grab very quickly with a trade deal.
As I said, not happening under Starmer, he will put closer agreement with Ireland and the rest of the EU and if necessary cross European tariffs on US imports ahead of any trade deal with Trump
Depends which Starmer we get. If we get the Starmer who won the Labour leadership, then turfed out the left, and studiously avoided the culture war during the GE campaign, then I can see kinda see it.
It all rests on what Trump does with Ukraine. If he hands them over to Putin, Starmer can't follow and he will align with the EU.
'Ministers are “wargaming” imposing tariffs on American goods in retaliation for protectionist measures threatened by Donald Trump. The president-elect has said he will impose a flat tariff of 10-20 per cent on all goods imported into the United States under an “America First” trade policy that has caused panic in European capitals, as well as a 60 per cent tariff on imports from China.
Economists have warned that Mr Trump’s proposed tariffs and any consequent trade war could do significant damage to the UK economy, pushing up inflation and interest rates.
Officials at the Department for Business and Trade are now understood to be commissioning advice and forecasts on a range of economic scenarios that could emerge under a Trump presidency.
I think what might be very interesting in the event of a UK/US trade deal is US companies in Ireland decamping to the UK especially now that Ireland's tax advantage has been hugely eroded by the ECJ.
There's potentially a big chunk of growth that we can grab very quickly with a trade deal.
As I said, not happening under Starmer, he will put closer agreement with Ireland and the rest of the EU and if necessary cross European tariffs on US imports ahead of any trade deal with Trump
Depends which Starmer we get. If we get the Starmer who won the Labour leadership, then turfed out the left, and studiously avoided the culture war during the GE campaign, then I can see kinda see it.
It all rests on what Trump does with Ukraine. If he hands them over to Putin, Starmer can't follow and he will align with the EU.
'Ministers are “wargaming” imposing tariffs on American goods in retaliation for protectionist measures threatened by Donald Trump. The president-elect has said he will impose a flat tariff of 10-20 per cent on all goods imported into the United States under an “America First” trade policy that has caused panic in European capitals, as well as a 60 per cent tariff on imports from China.
Economists have warned that Mr Trump’s proposed tariffs and any consequent trade war could do significant damage to the UK economy, pushing up inflation and interest rates.
Officials at the Department for Business and Trade are now understood to be commissioning advice and forecasts on a range of economic scenarios that could emerge under a Trump presidency.
The exit polls did not ask about media consumption, so we need to look for indirect clues. NBC asked the question in April when President Joe Biden was still in the race, and the results were dramatic. Among people who got their news from “newspapers,” Biden was winning 70-21. Among people who got their news from “YouTube/Google,” Trump led 55-39.
Before he dropped our, Biden’s internal polling was showing Trump winning 400 EVs. Which is a good measure of his hubris in not doing so before the primaries.
I think what might be very interesting in the event of a UK/US trade deal is US companies in Ireland decamping to the UK especially now that Ireland's tax advantage has been hugely eroded by the ECJ.
There's potentially a big chunk of growth that we can grab very quickly with a trade deal.
As I said, not happening under Starmer, he will put closer agreement with Ireland and the rest of the EU and if necessary cross European tariffs on US imports ahead of any trade deal with Trump
Depends which Starmer we get. If we get the Starmer who won the Labour leadership, then turfed out the left, and studiously avoided the culture war during the GE campaign, then I can see kinda see it.
It all rests on what Trump does with Ukraine. If he hands them over to Putin, Starmer can't follow and he will align with the EU.
'Ministers are “wargaming” imposing tariffs on American goods in retaliation for protectionist measures threatened by Donald Trump. The president-elect has said he will impose a flat tariff of 10-20 per cent on all goods imported into the United States under an “America First” trade policy that has caused panic in European capitals, as well as a 60 per cent tariff on imports from China.
Economists have warned that Mr Trump’s proposed tariffs and any consequent trade war could do significant damage to the UK economy, pushing up inflation and interest rates.
Officials at the Department for Business and Trade are now understood to be commissioning advice and forecasts on a range of economic scenarios that could emerge under a Trump presidency.
Imposing extra taxes on travel to the USA would be better.
Tariffs on imports might hit business and the poor, more expensive Florida holidays will not.
Trump is also imposing tariffs which will hit US poor and middle income earners, inevitably if so it will be tat for tat on every nation he imposes them on.
That will also hit his voters this time. According to NBC's exit poll while Harris won voters earning under $30, 000, Trump won most voters earning from $30,000 - $99,999 with Harris winning higher earning voters earning $100,000-$199,999 and over $200,000 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/exit-polls
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
I disagree entirely. We neither need nor should want a trade deal with the US beyond what we already have - which curenlty means a substantial trade surplus with the US. We know from experience (both our own and the experience of others) that a trade deal with the US is a poisoned challice and we should waste no time nor effort in pursuing one.
I think we wait and see what crap he comes out with, before deciding a response.
This isn't just about Trump. A free trade deal with the US is a bad idea under any President.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
A trade deal may be the only way to avoid the tariffs. US healthcare companies can already bid for NHS contracts so I don't think that's a barrier and Trump has previously said he thinks NICE should be replicated for Medicare and Medicaid to stop big pharma from ripping off the federal government so that probably won't be a barrier either.
Remember though, the trade deal only exists so long as you stay in Trump and Elon's good books.
What if Trump and Elon got pissy and the UK's support of OneWeb?
Doesn't he put their satellites in orbit these days, since OneWeb can't have the russians do it any more?
Yes - and a low price. And more importantly, rapidly. With every other launch company on the planet, you need to book a launch years in advance. The replacement OneWeb data were launched almost immediately after they were built.
Because of reusability, SpaceX just need to build another upper stage per launch. And they are already making 1 every 3 days.
In an amusing twist, because SpaceX fill their launch schedule with Starlink launches, then substitute paying customers loads instead, in effect, SpaceX cancelled Starlink launches to launch OneWeb. They gave their rivals priority over their own sats….
The exit polls did not ask about media consumption, so we need to look for indirect clues. NBC asked the question in April when President Joe Biden was still in the race, and the results were dramatic. Among people who got their news from “newspapers,” Biden was winning 70-21. Among people who got their news from “YouTube/Google,” Trump led 55-39.
Before he dropped our, Biden’s internal polling was showing Trump winning 400 EVs. Which is a good measure of his hubris in not doing so before the primaries.
Arguably, his biggest error of judgment.
Aided and abetted by his cabinet and possibly senior Dems.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
UK trade with the US is pretty good already and a trade deal takes years going through Congress. The obvious sticking points before were US Agriculture and the NHS. Has anything changed? The priority is avoiding tariffs.
The odd thing about UK/US trade is that both sides' statistics show a trade surplus.
In which case both sides have good reason not to meddle.
One side will soon have an absence of good reason, however.
The exit polls did not ask about media consumption, so we need to look for indirect clues. NBC asked the question in April when President Joe Biden was still in the race, and the results were dramatic. Among people who got their news from “newspapers,” Biden was winning 70-21. Among people who got their news from “YouTube/Google,” Trump led 55-39.
Before he dropped our, Biden’s internal polling was showing Trump winning 400 EVs. Which is a good measure of his hubris in not doing so before the primaries.
Arguably, his biggest error of judgment.
Biden did actually beat Trump in 2020 and if he did not have dementia may well have done again, though costs of living still gave Trump the edge.
Harris was simply too woke and elitist coastal liberal for middle America. As I posted earlier this election was the first election the Democratic presidential candidate won most voters earning over $100,000 a year ever but also the first election the Republican candidate won most voters earning $30,000-$50,000 since Reagan and Bush 1988 and there are more of the latter than the former once you add those earning $50k to $100k Trump also won
Musk will share Dominic Cummings' fate if he keeps overshadowing the boss.
It does seem quite possible that the bromance between Trump and Musk will be short-lived, given the volatility of the two characters. Affairs that are very passionate to start with often end in tears.
Musk will share Dominic Cummings' fate if he keeps overshadowing the boss.
It does seem quite possible that the bromance between Trump and Musk will be short-lived, given the volatility of the two characters. Affairs that are very passionate to start with often end in tears.
Interestingly, no one has mentioned their previous falling out.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
I disagree entirely. We neither need nor should want a trade deal with the US beyond what we already have - which curenlty means a substantial trade surplus with the US. We know from experience (both our own and the experience of others) that a trade deal with the US is a poisoned challice and we should waste no time nor effort in pursuing one.
I think we wait and see what crap he comes out with, before deciding a response.
This isn't just about Trump. A free trade deal with the US is a bad idea under any President.
I think what might be very interesting in the event of a UK/US trade deal is US companies in Ireland decamping to the UK especially now that Ireland's tax advantage has been hugely eroded by the ECJ.
There's potentially a big chunk of growth that we can grab very quickly with a trade deal.
As I said, not happening under Starmer, he will put closer agreement with Ireland and the rest of the EU and if necessary cross European tariffs on US imports ahead of any trade deal with Trump
Depends which Starmer we get. If we get the Starmer who won the Labour leadership, then turfed out the left, and studiously avoided the culture war during the GE campaign, then I can see kinda see it.
It all rests on what Trump does with Ukraine. If he hands them over to Putin, Starmer can't follow and he will align with the EU.
'Ministers are “wargaming” imposing tariffs on American goods in retaliation for protectionist measures threatened by Donald Trump. The president-elect has said he will impose a flat tariff of 10-20 per cent on all goods imported into the United States under an “America First” trade policy that has caused panic in European capitals, as well as a 60 per cent tariff on imports from China.
Economists have warned that Mr Trump’s proposed tariffs and any consequent trade war could do significant damage to the UK economy, pushing up inflation and interest rates.
Officials at the Department for Business and Trade are now understood to be commissioning advice and forecasts on a range of economic scenarios that could emerge under a Trump presidency.
2) Biden appoints a dynamic Attorney General instead of Merrick Garland
3) Biden nominates Harris to replace Breyer on Scotus
4) Biden announces he will not run for re-election early in 2023
Biden did what he did because of inner beliefs and rapidly increasing senility. For your alternatehistory to work, he would have to be a totally different person.
Fantastic final word on the poppy debate from the Guardian’s letter page. But as a warning it does contain a spoiler for a 103-year-old novel.
"In The Unpleasantness At The Bellona Club by Dorothy L. Sayers, Lord Peter Whimsey is able to date the murder of Gen Fentiman to 10 November and not, as first thought, Armistice Day, as the general was not wearing a poppy, which, of course, he would have been on 11 November. If, in 1921, a patriotic soldier who fought in the Great War wore his poppy on, and only on, 11 November, perhaps our public figures could do the same a hundred years later without being bullied and shamed.
Musk will share Dominic Cummings' fate if he keeps overshadowing the boss.
It does seem quite possible that the bromance between Trump and Musk will be short-lived, given the volatility of the two characters. Affairs that are very passionate to start with often end in tears.
Interestingly, no one has mentioned their previous falling out.
Remind me...
(When the fall-out happens, who wins? Trump is in the big chair, but Vance and co will presumably be happy to 25th Amendment him if he causes too much trouble.)
I think what might be very interesting in the event of a UK/US trade deal is US companies in Ireland decamping to the UK especially now that Ireland's tax advantage has been hugely eroded by the ECJ.
There's potentially a big chunk of growth that we can grab very quickly with a trade deal.
As I said, not happening under Starmer, he will put closer agreement with Ireland and the rest of the EU and if necessary cross European tariffs on US imports ahead of any trade deal with Trump
Depends which Starmer we get. If we get the Starmer who won the Labour leadership, then turfed out the left, and studiously avoided the culture war during the GE campaign, then I can see kinda see it.
It all rests on what Trump does with Ukraine. If he hands them over to Putin, Starmer can't follow and he will align with the EU.
'Ministers are “wargaming” imposing tariffs on American goods in retaliation for protectionist measures threatened by Donald Trump. The president-elect has said he will impose a flat tariff of 10-20 per cent on all goods imported into the United States under an “America First” trade policy that has caused panic in European capitals, as well as a 60 per cent tariff on imports from China.
Economists have warned that Mr Trump’s proposed tariffs and any consequent trade war could do significant damage to the UK economy, pushing up inflation and interest rates.
Officials at the Department for Business and Trade are now understood to be commissioning advice and forecasts on a range of economic scenarios that could emerge under a Trump presidency.
Got brexit done though didn't he ? Sometimes you just need to do something brave and different
Brave, different, unconstitutional in hiding the AG's advice from the Cabinet, and unlawful.
Indeed, it's a violation of the ministerial code, it was designed to ensure we didn't get a repeat of the Iraq war legal advice.
yeah maybe not upsetting the status quo is the important thing but then Saddam Hussein may still be in power (or Uday ) and Brexit still not done ( ie ignoring the largest turnout vote in many a year for Brexit)
One of the main obstacles to Brexit getting done during May's premiership was Boris Johnson.
Otoh, Johnson's comprehensive Brexit trade deal with the US will protect us from Trump's tarriffs.
Right?
It looks increasingly likely that Trump and Farage are laying a trap for Sir Keir. The UK will be offered exemptions from the tariffs only if we concede to various unacceptable demands - essentially that Farage will become Trump's viceroy of Britain with Sir Keir as little more than his puppet. When Sir Keir, rightly, refuses the economy will tank and Reform will win the next election anyway. That'll be the plan. And who's going to stop it?
As I posted last thread Starmer's government is already wargaming sanctions on US imports in response to tariffs imposed by Trump's administration.Though China, the EU and Brazil will be doing the same.
The Tories and Farage will want him to push a deal with the US but it seems Starmer will ignore them and take a gamble that with the EU and China alongside him he can resist Maga America First.
Of course the next UK general election will not be until the final year of Trump's administration in 2028 in which case the Democrats might be back in charge of Congress after the 2026 midterms or if 5 years and a full term maybe even after a Democrat has returned to the White House too
These things might have been easier to negotiate if Lammy could keep his gob shut about personal opinions about Trump and 100 labour mps did not go to the US to try and interfere in a foreign election
100 staff not MPs!!!!
And they went as volunteers. That happens all the time.
they did not back the winning side though and that is to the detriment of the UK - idiots for doing it in the first place
At the moment I suspect Trump would more likely do a trade deal with Modi's India or Netanyahu's Israel or Milei's Argentina before Starmer's UK
No I don't think so, the Trump team would very much like to cement Brexit in the UK and a favourable trade deal does that as then rejoining the EU has a very high price attached as we would lose the US trade deal. Starmer doesn't enter into the equation IMO, the US under Trump would very much like to drive a wedge between the UK and EU regardless of who the PM is, it is a very high risk double edged sword because there's potential for a really good trade deal to be done but it's going to be like trying to ride a tiger with Trump in charge and a US/UK trade deal also has great potential to piss off the EU and could make any rapprochement less likely.
In pure economic terms a US trade deal should be out priority as it would exempt us from tariffs and allow for our producers to export to a huge market that's bigger than the EU with favourable terms and where our national reputation is really high so receptiveness to UK exports is higher than in lots of EU countries.
I disagree entirely. We neither need nor should want a trade deal with the US beyond what we already have - which curenlty means a substantial trade surplus with the US. We know from experience (both our own and the experience of others) that a trade deal with the US is a poisoned challice and we should waste no time nor effort in pursuing one.
Our trade surplus comes from services exports to the US so I don't see how anything changes there. If anything we could do even better if there was equivalence in regulations agreed between both sides for data, tech, finance, AI etc... as we'd remove a big barrier for services exports and more US companies would be able to utilise the lower salary structure of the UK to hire loads of £60-150k roles.
On goods I'm not sure it will make a huge amount of difference, the public isn't really ready to accept US food. In the margins I think some premium US imports could do well but people who want parmesan will still buy Italian parmesan, people who want to make bread are still going to get the £1.20 1.5KG bread flour made from UK grain and it's not as though US agriculture is very competitive now, as we've all been discussing food prices are very high in the US so the structural advantage that US agriculture had last time this was being discussed has all but gone.
It will be exactly like it has been for Mexico and Canada. All disputes will be decided by a US court which will always side with the US. Stuff we don't agree with? Tough shit. Under an FTA with the US we will be forced to conform to what US companies want.
The venerable Smithson Junior has written a fair bit on this and we would be as well to listen to him.
This is what's decisive for me, and we have the US-UK extradition treaty to show precisely how it works.
I don't have a problem with people choosing to buy crap US food, as well as the good stuff; I do with heavily stacking the deck.
Let the scum show themselves up for what they are.
This is despicable. But that doesn't mean it should be illegal. Lots of things fall into that gap.
Yup. I would absolutely fight for their right to continue be utterly obnoxious turds if that is their wish. Free speech isn't just for speech you like.
Fantastic final word on the poppy debate from the Guardian’s letter page. But as a warning it does contain a spoiler for a 103-year-old novel.
"In The Unpleasantness At The Bellona Club by Dorothy L. Sayers, Lord Peter Whimsey is able to date the murder of Gen Fentiman to 10 November and not, as first thought, Armistice Day, as the general was not wearing a poppy, which, of course, he would have been on 11 November. If, in 1921, a patriotic soldier who fought in the Great War wore his poppy on, and only on, 11 November, perhaps our public figures could do the same a hundred years later without being bullied and shamed.
Also worth recalling that back in Lord Peter's day the government decided to abandon the Two-Minute Silence on Armistice Day in favour of a national remembrance event on the closest Sunday instead. This arrangement persisted until quite recently when the British Legion decided they needed some extra publicity and campaigned for the additional virtue signalling to be restored, which it duly was because politicians are too craven to resist when the flags are waving.
The exit polls did not ask about media consumption, so we need to look for indirect clues. NBC asked the question in April when President Joe Biden was still in the race, and the results were dramatic. Among people who got their news from “newspapers,” Biden was winning 70-21. Among people who got their news from “YouTube/Google,” Trump led 55-39.
Before he dropped our, Biden’s internal polling was showing Trump winning 400 EVs. Which is a good measure of his hubris in not doing so before the primaries.
Arguably, his biggest error of judgment.
Biden did actually beat Trump in 2020 and if he did not have dementia may well have done again, though costs of living still gave Trump the edge.
Harris was simply too woke and elitist coastal liberal for middle America. As I posted earlier this election was the first election the Democratic presidential candidate won most voters earning over $100,000 a year ever but also the first election the Republican candidate won most voters earning $30,000-$50,000 since Reagan and Bush 1988 and there are more of the latter than the former once you add those earning $50k to $100k Trump also won
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Surely better to send someone who's a bit crap at golf, so Trump wins?
The exit polls did not ask about media consumption, so we need to look for indirect clues. NBC asked the question in April when President Joe Biden was still in the race, and the results were dramatic. Among people who got their news from “newspapers,” Biden was winning 70-21. Among people who got their news from “YouTube/Google,” Trump led 55-39.
Before he dropped our, Biden’s internal polling was showing Trump winning 400 EVs. Which is a good measure of his hubris in not doing so before the primaries.
Arguably, his biggest error of judgment.
Biden did actually beat Trump in 2020 and if he did not have dementia may well have done again, though costs of living still gave Trump the edge.
Harris was simply too woke and elitist coastal liberal for middle America. As I posted earlier this election was the first election the Democratic presidential candidate won most voters earning over $100,000 a year ever but also the first election the Republican candidate won most voters earning $30,000-$50,000 since Reagan and Bush 1988 and there are more of the latter than the former once you add those earning $50k to $100k Trump also won
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Surely better to send someone who's a bit crap at golf, so Trump wins?
Are you suggesting his putative lordship wouldn't qualify on those grounds?
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Surely better to send someone who's a bit crap at golf, so Trump wins?
Are you suggesting his putative lordship wouldn't qualify on those grounds?
Surely Sean Connery is the right man for this Odd Job?
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Surely better to send someone who's a bit crap at golf, so Trump wins?
Trump gets on well with Kim Jong-Un whose dad shot 38 under par on a 7700 yard golf course, with 11 holes in one in his very first round of golf.
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Surely better to send someone who's a bit crap at golf, so Trump wins?
Trump gets on well with Kim Jong-Un whose dad shot 38 under par on a 7700 yard golf course, with 11 holes in one in his very first round of golf.
IIRC did he not retire from the game at that point to give the others a chance? Very sporting.
As I've pointed out before, the YouTuber MonsieurZ is one of the more accessible right-wing Americans. Here is his newest video about his predictions for the coming decades.
Let the scum show themselves up for what they are.
This is despicable. But that doesn't mean it should be illegal. Lots of things fall into that gap.
Even the Celtic fans in my company some of whom sit close to the Green Brigade are not happy with their actions. The SNP pro Palestine mind set is not widely supported. Expect a backlash from the unionists.
Was out in Glasgow Friday night and was amazed by how many English there are about. Glasgow still has very few immigrants and is mostly peaceful due to the strong local gang culture. You can walk the streets without worrying about your phone or watch.
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Surely better to send someone who's a bit crap at golf, so Trump wins?
Are you suggesting his putative lordship wouldn't qualify on those grounds?
Surely Sean Connery is the right man for this Odd Job?
"Hurrah! We’ve just climbed to Number 4 in the Substack World Politics leaderboard which means we’re probably the most read Substack in the UK and among the most read in the World.
While we now have 61,000 readers, many more people are reading us each month, with around 1-2 million clicks every month.
But why? What explains our success?
I think the answer has a lot to do with the remarkable and historic events this week which much of the legacy media, the elite class, and the established Groupthink, once again, largely failed to see coming."
Musk will share Dominic Cummings' fate if he keeps overshadowing the boss.
It does seem quite possible that the bromance between Trump and Musk will be short-lived, given the volatility of the two characters. Affairs that are very passionate to start with often end in tears.
Interestingly, no one has mentioned their previous falling out.
Remind me...
(When the fall-out happens, who wins? Trump is in the big chair, but Vance and co will presumably be happy to 25th Amendment him if he causes too much trouble.)
Let the scum show themselves up for what they are.
This is despicable. But that doesn't mean it should be illegal. Lots of things fall into that gap.
Even the Celtic fans in my company some of whom sit close to the Green Brigade are not happy with their actions. The SNP pro Palestine mind set is not widely supported. Expect a backlash from the unionists.
Was out in Glasgow Friday night and was amazed by how many English there are about. Glasgow still has very few immigrants and is mostly peaceful due to the strong local gang culture. You can walk the streets without worrying about your phone or watch.
There is no negotiated settlement possible. Jihad is the only answer
Fantastic final word on the poppy debate from the Guardian’s letter page. But as a warning it does contain a spoiler for a 103-year-old novel.
"In The Unpleasantness At The Bellona Club by Dorothy L. Sayers, Lord Peter Whimsey is able to date the murder of Gen Fentiman to 10 November and not, as first thought, Armistice Day, as the general was not wearing a poppy, which, of course, he would have been on 11 November. If, in 1921, a patriotic soldier who fought in the Great War wore his poppy on, and only on, 11 November, perhaps our public figures could do the same a hundred years later without being bullied and shamed.
Also worth recalling that back in Lord Peter's day the government decided to abandon the Two-Minute Silence on Armistice Day in favour of a national remembrance event on the closest Sunday instead. This arrangement persisted until quite recently when the British Legion decided they needed some extra publicity and campaigned for the additional virtue signalling to be restored, which it duly was because politicians are too craven to resist when the flags are waving.
It was temporarily changed in 1939 and then confirmed in its change in 1946.
The last Wimsey novel appeared in 1936 and the last story of any sort was written in 1943. So that’s stretching it a bit.
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Surely better to send someone who's a bit crap at golf, so Trump wins?
Are you suggesting his putative lordship wouldn't qualify on those grounds?
Surely Sean Connery is the right man for this Odd Job?
He died 4 years ago?
But he knew how to deal with fat old villains with blonde hair.
"Hurrah! We’ve just climbed to Number 4 in the Substack World Politics leaderboard which means we’re probably the most read Substack in the UK and among the most read in the World.
While we now have 61,000 readers, many more people are reading us each month, with around 1-2 million clicks every month.
But why? What explains our success?
I think the answer has a lot to do with the remarkable and historic events this week which much of the legacy media, the elite class, and the established Groupthink, once again, largely failed to see coming."
I don't look at his substack, but I presume all his musings are everything is woke, too much uncontrolled immigration...rinse and repeat.
"Hurrah! We’ve just climbed to Number 4 in the Substack World Politics leaderboard which means we’re probably the most read Substack in the UK and among the most read in the World.
While we now have 61,000 readers, many more people are reading us each month, with around 1-2 million clicks every month.
But why? What explains our success?
I think the answer has a lot to do with the remarkable and historic events this week which much of the legacy media, the elite class, and the established Groupthink, once again, largely failed to see coming."
"Matt Goodwin’s Substack goes to 61,400 subscribers from 170 countries and thousands of paying supporters who support our work."
Depending on how cheeky his definition of "thousands" is, that's at least £6000 or at least £12000 per month in paying readers. Explains why writers love substack so much.
You may have missed my point - Southport was not thought to be terror related until it was (and kept from the public beyond that point too).
There are about 3800 stabbings in the UK per year, going on NHS data. A tiny proportion are associated with terrorism: less than half a percent. (There were, I believe, 11 terrorism stabbings in 2020, 1 in 2021, 0 in 2022, and 2 in 2023. In 2024, there has been one by an extreme racist and there were the 13 in the one incident in Southport, although Rudakubana's motives and whether they constituted terrorism are unclear.)
I'm more worried about the >99.5% of non-terrorism related stabbings. I am unclear why the journalist or the reader should rush to a discussion of terrorism in an article of this nature.
Fantastic final word on the poppy debate from the Guardian’s letter page. But as a warning it does contain a spoiler for a 103-year-old novel.
"In The Unpleasantness At The Bellona Club by Dorothy L. Sayers, Lord Peter Whimsey is able to date the murder of Gen Fentiman to 10 November and not, as first thought, Armistice Day, as the general was not wearing a poppy, which, of course, he would have been on 11 November. If, in 1921, a patriotic soldier who fought in the Great War wore his poppy on, and only on, 11 November, perhaps our public figures could do the same a hundred years later without being bullied and shamed.
Also worth recalling that back in Lord Peter's day the government decided to abandon the Two-Minute Silence on Armistice Day in favour of a national remembrance event on the closest Sunday instead. This arrangement persisted until quite recently when the British Legion decided they needed some extra publicity and campaigned for the additional virtue signalling to be restored, which it duly was because politicians are too craven to resist when the flags are waving.
It was temporarily changed in 1939 and then confirmed in its change in 1946.
The last Wimsey novel appeared in 1936 and the last story of any sort was written in 1943. So that’s stretching it a bit.
With the greatest respect I think you've rather missed the point.
"Hurrah! We’ve just climbed to Number 4 in the Substack World Politics leaderboard which means we’re probably the most read Substack in the UK and among the most read in the World.
While we now have 61,000 readers, many more people are reading us each month, with around 1-2 million clicks every month.
But why? What explains our success?
I think the answer has a lot to do with the remarkable and historic events this week which much of the legacy media, the elite class, and the established Groupthink, once again, largely failed to see coming."
Goodwin, for all the criticisms he gets including from me, is interesting. And very generally he has been academically well ahead of the curve in considering the importance of national populism as a recent growth industry.
What of the future? He has placed himself in a truly intriguing position. He is, in some sense: academic, journalist, commentator, pundit, polemicist, supporter, influencer and (I think) potential leader of the UK branch of a movement now proved beyond doubt (on 5th November) to be profoundly significant.
The gulf between the thoughtful usefulness of his more academic output and the one sided polemicism he shows elsewhere is considerable.
"Hurrah! We’ve just climbed to Number 4 in the Substack World Politics leaderboard which means we’re probably the most read Substack in the UK and among the most read in the World.
While we now have 61,000 readers, many more people are reading us each month, with around 1-2 million clicks every month.
But why? What explains our success?
I think the answer has a lot to do with the remarkable and historic events this week which much of the legacy media, the elite class, and the established Groupthink, once again, largely failed to see coming."
He presumably means the US Presidential election when he talks of "events". The legacy media, elite class and "established Groupthink" were all that it could go either way. Ergo, the claim they "largely failed to see [it] coming" is nonsense.
You may have missed my point - Southport was not thought to be terror related until it was (and kept from the public beyond that point too).
There are about 3800 stabbings in the UK per year, going on NHS data. A tiny proportion are associated with terrorism: less than half a percent. (There were, I believe, 11 terrorism stabbings in 2020, 1 in 2021, 0 in 2022, and 2 in 2023. In 2024, there has been one by an extreme racist and there were the 13 in the one incident in Southport, although Rudakubana's motives and whether they constituted terrorism are unclear.)
I'm more worried about the >99.5% of non-terrorism related stabbings. I am unclear why the journalist or the reader should rush to a discussion of terrorism in an article of this nature.
How many are multiple stabbings though? I agree that most, by an overwhelming margin, are not terror and I am not saying this is, but multiple stabbings are rarer and more likely to be terrorism. I’m arguing for the police not putting out the ‘not treated as terrorism’ right at the start, rather that they should keep an open mind, and say so.
In my view it explains why the Democrats lost and why Labour only got 33% of the vote against one of the least popular governments in history.
The Democrats and Labour have the same problem. They delude themselves that they care for the have nots but they only do so within the context of their own privilege and priorities. Which the have nots do not give a damn about.
You may have missed my point - Southport was not thought to be terror related until it was (and kept from the public beyond that point too).
There are about 3800 stabbings in the UK per year, going on NHS data. A tiny proportion are associated with terrorism: less than half a percent. (There were, I believe, 11 terrorism stabbings in 2020, 1 in 2021, 0 in 2022, and 2 in 2023. In 2024, there has been one by an extreme racist and there were the 13 in the one incident in Southport, although Rudakubana's motives and whether they constituted terrorism are unclear.)
I'm more worried about the >99.5% of non-terrorism related stabbings. I am unclear why the journalist or the reader should rush to a discussion of terrorism in an article of this nature.
How many are multiple stabbings though? I agree that most, by an overwhelming margin, are not terror and I am not saying this is, but multiple stabbings are rarer and more likely to be terrorism. I’m arguing for the police not putting out the ‘not treated as terrorism’ right at the start, rather that they should keep an open mind, and say so.
If they say nothing, they get criticised. If they say they're not treating something as terrorism when they're not, they get criticised. If they say they are treating something as terrorism, and then it's not, they get criticised. If new evidence comes to light, they get criticised. Maybe we should just let the police get on with their job?
I mean, if you want to criticise the police, there're plenty of good reasons to criticise the police!
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
Surely better to send someone who's a bit crap at golf, so Trump wins?
No, Trump respects strength.
Beat Trump at golf but praise his shots and give the caddy a good beating.
In my view it explains why the Democrats lost and why Labour only got 33% of the vote against one of the least popular governments in history.
The Democrats and Labour have the same problem. They delude themselves that they care for the have nots but they only do so within the context of their own privilege and priorities. Which the have nots do not give a damn about.
All these analysis pieces are just people trotting out the same criticisms they had before the election result. Those on the right say the Dems were too left-wing or too woke. Those on the left say the Dems were too right-wing or not woke enough. Very few of them are actual psephological analyses based on robust evidence. They didn't pay enough attention to the young or to the old; to the working class or the middle class; to the urban, the suburban or the rural; etc. etc. etc.
The best thing to do is to ignore all supposed analyses in the first 3 months after an election defeat.
Astonishing statistic from the Remembrance coverage. If the dead being remembered were to march past the Cenotaph three abreast, the back of the column would be...
...in Edinburgh.
At my school, they used to read out all the ex-pupils who died in wars. The reading of WWI, its just went on and on and on and on...in many cases, what seemed like all male members of families.
One of my cousins collected the obituaries of all the family members who were killed in WWI into a short pamphlet. Very sad reading
Astonishing statistic from the Remembrance coverage. If the dead being remembered were to march past the Cenotaph three abreast, the back of the column would be...
...in Edinburgh.
At my school, they used to read out all the ex-pupils who died in wars. The reading of WWI, its just went on and on and on and on...in many cases, what seemed like all male members of families.
One of my cousins collected the obituaries of all the family members who were killed in WWI into a short pamphlet. Very sad reading
It was very powerful experience. The last post followed by 100s of names being read out.
In my view it explains why the Democrats lost and why Labour only got 33% of the vote against one of the least popular governments in history.
The Democrats and Labour have the same problem. They delude themselves that they care for the have nots but they only do so within the context of their own privilege and priorities. Which the have nots do not give a damn about.
The UK and USA centre and centre left are in complete meltdown, and all running to the same story - we failed to spot the obvious and we are useless self absorbed idiots who actually hate and ignore the interests of the poor and all those we claim to support.
You would need a heart of stone.....
The is one thing more though. Because of our system Labour's abject failure (coming first) led to their 3 billion majority. The Democrat's identical abject failure (by margin of error type shortfall of votes) will probably lead to the end of civilization as we know it. Funny old world.
In my view it explains why the Democrats lost and why Labour only got 33% of the vote against one of the least popular governments in history.
The Democrats and Labour have the same problem. They delude themselves that they care for the have nots but they only do so within the context of their own privilege and priorities. Which the have nots do not give a damn about.
All these analysis pieces are just people trotting out the same criticisms they had before the election result. Those on the right say the Dems were too left-wing or too woke. Those on the left say the Dems were too right-wing or not woke enough. Very few of them are actual psephological analyses based on robust evidence. They didn't pay enough attention to the young or to the old; to the working class or the middle class; to the urban, the suburban or the rural; etc. etc. etc.
The best thing to do is to ignore all supposed analyses in the first 3 months after an election defeat.
His analysis reminds me strongly of Norman MacCaig’s brilliant poem Assisi the final verse of which is: A rush of tourists, clucking contentedly, fluttered after him as he scattered the grain of the Word. It was they who had passed the ruined temple outside, whose eyes wept pus, whose back was higher than his head, whose lopsided mouth said Grazie in a voice as sweet as a child’s when she speaks to her mother or a bird’s when it spoke to St Francis.
It is the same flaw as the article so eloquently describes.
You may have missed my point - Southport was not thought to be terror related until it was (and kept from the public beyond that point too).
There are about 3800 stabbings in the UK per year, going on NHS data. A tiny proportion are associated with terrorism: less than half a percent. (There were, I believe, 11 terrorism stabbings in 2020, 1 in 2021, 0 in 2022, and 2 in 2023. In 2024, there has been one by an extreme racist and there were the 13 in the one incident in Southport, although Rudakubana's motives and whether they constituted terrorism are unclear.)
I'm more worried about the >99.5% of non-terrorism related stabbings. I am unclear why the journalist or the reader should rush to a discussion of terrorism in an article of this nature.
It's about the honesty of the authorities. Lying to the public has big consequences. Of course we cannot say more at this stage.
Yeah, but the prorogation was legal and the Miller 2 ruling was a disgrace - the biggest example of a court starting with its conclusion and propping it up with flimsy reasoning since Roe v Wade.
And, of course, it massively backfired on Spider Hale.
Well done,the Green Brigade. Fuck Remembrance Day. Fuck poppy fascism. Fuck the UK thinking it is not a nation of warmongering scumbags. PS. Like the new avatar, @TSE.
The constitutional meddling was the imbecilic Fixed-term Parliament Act.
To an extent, although it was obvious from day 1 to anyone paying attention that it was an effective nullity beyond the 2010-5 parliament - a government with a majority could always pass a one-line Bill, as indeed came to pass.
Did Nigel Fucking Farage really fly back just to bitch about not being at the Cenotaph?
Nigel Farage at the Cenotaph would have been an insult, given the number of Europeans that died, without whom the UK would have been on the losing side. On the other hand, Farage would have been an ideal Obersturmbannführer.
"Hurrah! We’ve just climbed to Number 4 in the Substack World Politics leaderboard which means we’re probably the most read Substack in the UK and among the most read in the World.
While we now have 61,000 readers, many more people are reading us each month, with around 1-2 million clicks every month.
But why? What explains our success?
I think the answer has a lot to do with the remarkable and historic events this week which much of the legacy media, the elite class, and the established Groupthink, once again, largely failed to see coming."
Goodwin, for all the criticisms he gets including from me, is interesting. And very generally he has been academically well ahead of the curve in considering the importance of national populism as a recent growth industry.
What of the future? He has placed himself in a truly intriguing position. He is, in some sense: academic, journalist, commentator, pundit, polemicist, supporter, influencer and (I think) potential leader of the UK branch of a movement now proved beyond doubt (on 5th November) to be profoundly significant.
The gulf between the thoughtful usefulness of his more academic output and the one sided polemicism he shows elsewhere is considerable.
I wonder what his ambitions are?
He will not rest until he rules the universe. He has a burn in his gut that one.
You may have missed my point - Southport was not thought to be terror related until it was (and kept from the public beyond that point too).
There are about 3800 stabbings in the UK per year, going on NHS data. A tiny proportion are associated with terrorism: less than half a percent. (There were, I believe, 11 terrorism stabbings in 2020, 1 in 2021, 0 in 2022, and 2 in 2023. In 2024, there has been one by an extreme racist and there were the 13 in the one incident in Southport, although Rudakubana's motives and whether they constituted terrorism are unclear.)
I'm more worried about the >99.5% of non-terrorism related stabbings. I am unclear why the journalist or the reader should rush to a discussion of terrorism in an article of this nature.
There was a recent fatal collision on Edinburgh's Cowgate between a bus and a pedestrian. The aftermath was almost unbelievably grisly.
A very large proportion of Edinburgh Facebook/Twitter commentariat are absolutely convinced that this was a terrorist attack, hushed up "like Southport". What they don't appreciate is just what can happen when a vehicle hits a person - indeed, something very similar happened on Gorgie Road last year.
Comments
https://x.com/TomBFlanagan/status/1855593523375915032
The exit polls did not ask about media consumption, so we need to look for indirect clues. NBC asked the question in April when President Joe Biden was still in the race, and the results were dramatic. Among people who got their news from “newspapers,” Biden was winning 70-21. Among people who got their news from “YouTube/Google,” Trump led 55-39.
What if Trump and Elon got pissy and the UK's support of OneWeb?
And those who like Jack Daniels and Jim Beam might want to stock up.
It all rests on what Trump does with Ukraine. If he hands them over to Putin, Starmer can't follow and he will align with the EU.
Project 2025 specifically called out services imports (specifically referring to offshore call centers), so you may the optimistic.
The venerable Smithson Junior has written a fair bit on this and we would be as well to listen to him.
SpaceX are actively bidding to launch any future tranche of satellites for OneWeb.
They do not play golf.
To deal with Trump you have to look strong at a level he understands.
Trump likes to play golf and cheats.
We need a golfer and someone willing to cheat.
A chance of redemption for Prince Andrew perhaps ?
Or how about this new Labour MP:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Leishman
Leishman is a member of the Professional Golfers' Association, and has received a Bachelor of Arts in golf management from Abertay University. He has coached at numerous Scottish golf clubs, including Alloa Golf Club where he owned a shop prior to his election to Parliament.
Likewise is there anyone in the cabinet who plays golf ?
McFadden, Healey, Reynolds might be our best hopes.
If not perhaps its time for Lord Kinabalu of PB.
https://x.com/implausibleblog/status/1855677397900959851
Why doesn't this guy just move on
Economists have warned that Mr Trump’s proposed tariffs and any consequent trade war could do significant damage to the UK economy, pushing up inflation and interest rates.
Officials at the Department for Business and Trade are now understood to be commissioning advice and forecasts on a range of economic scenarios that could emerge under a Trump presidency.
This includes possible retaliatory action and counter measures, including the possible imposition of counter sanctions on US exports to Britain.'
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/11/09/downing-street-war-gaming-responses-trump-trade-tariffs/
If we gift him a set of golf clubs that used to belong to a historic royal he will love it too.
Musk endorses Rick Scott for majority leader.
https://x.com/kaitlancollins/status/1855704604975210671
Don’t get them looking too closely.
2) I do hope civil servants are preparing options. That's the job.
Tariffs on imports might hit business and the poor, more expensive Florida holidays will not.
Which is a good measure of his hubris in not doing so before the primaries.
Arguably, his biggest error of judgment.
That will also hit his voters this time. According to NBC's exit poll while Harris won voters earning under
$30, 000, Trump won most voters earning from $30,000 - $99,999 with Harris winning higher earning voters earning $100,000-$199,999 and over $200,000
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/exit-polls
Because of reusability, SpaceX just need to build another upper stage per launch. And they are already making 1 every 3 days.
In an amusing twist, because SpaceX fill their launch schedule with Starlink launches, then substitute paying customers loads instead, in effect, SpaceX cancelled Starlink launches to launch OneWeb. They gave their rivals priority over their own sats….
Harris was simply too woke and elitist coastal liberal for middle America. As I posted earlier this election was the first election the Democratic presidential candidate won most voters earning over $100,000 a year ever but also the first election the Republican candidate won most voters earning $30,000-$50,000 since Reagan and Bush 1988 and there are more of the latter than the former once you add those earning $50k to $100k Trump also won
1) Biden doesn't abandon border control.
2) Biden appoints a dynamic Attorney General instead of Merrick Garland
3) Biden nominates Harris to replace Breyer on Scotus
4) Biden announces he will not run for re-election early in 2023
Doesn't ring true?
https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd6v3edv3p9o
No idea if terrorism or not, but recent events spring to mind. Why not just say no idea of motive?
James Ball
@jamesrbuk
Fantastic final word on the poppy debate from the Guardian’s letter page. But as a warning it does contain a spoiler for a 103-year-old novel.
"In The Unpleasantness At The Bellona Club by Dorothy L. Sayers, Lord Peter Whimsey is able to date the murder of Gen Fentiman to 10 November and not, as first thought, Armistice Day, as the general was not wearing a poppy, which, of course, he would have been on 11 November. If, in 1921, a patriotic soldier who fought in the Great War wore his poppy on, and only on, 11 November, perhaps our public figures could do the same a hundred years later without being bullied and shamed.
Rosemary Chamberlin
Bristol"
https://x.com/jamesrbuk/status/1855219642408607833
It is understood the incident was mental-health related.
Police confirmed it was not being treated as terrorism and they were not looking for anyone else.
https://news.sky.com/story/man-killed-after-three-people-stabbed-at-east-street-market-in-south-london-13251053
(When the fall-out happens, who wins? Trump is in the big chair, but Vance and co will presumably be happy to 25th Amendment him if he causes too much trouble.)
Its the UK ones I'm concerned about.
A lot happens in a lifetime.
I don't have a problem with people choosing to buy crap US food, as well as the good stuff; I do with heavily stacking the deck.
Kamala 2024 = 226 Electoral Votes
It's all about being as offensive as possible to cause maximum provocation to the other.
5 Predictions On The Future Of America https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iI0Na5typTs 26mins
https://www.murdermap.co.uk/victims/murders-london-2024-total-how-many/
Was out in Glasgow Friday night and was amazed by how many English there are about. Glasgow still has very few immigrants and is mostly peaceful due to the strong local gang culture. You can walk the streets without worrying about your phone or watch.
https://www.mattgoodwin.org/p/why-were-one-of-the-biggest-substacks
"Hurrah! We’ve just climbed to Number 4 in the Substack World Politics leaderboard which means we’re probably the most read Substack in the UK and among the most read in the World.
While we now have 61,000 readers, many more people are reading us each month, with around 1-2 million clicks every month.
But why? What explains our success?
I think the answer has a lot to do with the remarkable and historic events this week which much of the legacy media, the elite class, and the established Groupthink, once again, largely failed to see coming."
The last Wimsey novel appeared in 1936 and the last story of any sort was written in 1943. So that’s stretching it a bit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTBvu-fTTIk
Depending on how cheeky his definition of "thousands" is, that's at least £6000 or at least £12000 per month in paying readers. Explains why writers love substack so much.
I'm more worried about the >99.5% of non-terrorism related stabbings. I am unclear why the journalist or the reader should rush to a discussion of terrorism in an article of this nature.
What of the future? He has placed himself in a truly intriguing position. He is, in some sense: academic, journalist, commentator, pundit, polemicist, supporter, influencer and (I think) potential leader of the UK branch of a movement now proved beyond doubt (on 5th November) to be profoundly significant.
The gulf between the thoughtful usefulness of his more academic output and the one sided polemicism he shows elsewhere is considerable.
I wonder what his ambitions are?
And it’s from the Guardian!
In my view it explains why the Democrats lost and why Labour only got 33% of the vote against one of the least popular governments in history.
The Democrats and Labour have the same problem. They delude themselves that they care for the have nots but they only do so within the context of their own privilege and priorities. Which the have nots do not give a damn about.
I mean, if you want to criticise the police, there're plenty of good reasons to criticise the police!
Beat Trump at golf but praise his shots and give the caddy a good beating.
The best thing to do is to ignore all supposed analyses in the first 3 months after an election defeat.
You would need a heart of stone.....
The is one thing more though. Because of our system Labour's abject failure (coming first) led to their 3 billion majority. The Democrat's identical abject failure (by margin of error type shortfall of votes) will probably lead to the end of civilization as we know it. Funny old world.
A rush of tourists, clucking contentedly,
fluttered after him as he scattered
the grain of the Word. It was they who had passed
the ruined temple outside, whose eyes
wept pus, whose back was higher
than his head, whose lopsided mouth
said Grazie in a voice as sweet
as a child’s when she speaks to her mother
or a bird’s when it spoke
to St Francis.
It is the same flaw as the article so eloquently describes.
And, of course, it massively backfired on Spider Hale.
Fuck Remembrance Day. Fuck poppy fascism. Fuck the UK thinking it is not a nation of warmongering scumbags.
PS. Like the new avatar, @TSE.
A very large proportion of Edinburgh Facebook/Twitter commentariat are absolutely convinced that this was a terrorist attack, hushed up "like Southport". What they don't appreciate is just what can happen when a vehicle hits a person - indeed, something very similar happened on Gorgie Road last year.