Interesting proposal for corporation tax... Rather than trying to take a share of the profits and trying to close loopholes etc... Government should just take 25% non voting shares in companies.
Companies could also indefinitely and legally avoid paying taxes by not issuing dividends. Since not paying dividends increases the companies asset base, the share value could rise and the shareholders can make revenue by selling their shares while the government doesn't get a penny.
FPT: I'm more interested in the principle than what the rate should be. But i think many shareholders want dividends - and they would continue to push for them. This aligns their interests with government which i think is quite clever. Don't know how it works with foreign companies... Presumably they would have to still pay corporation tax to avoid having a competitive advantage.
Interesting proposal for corporation tax... Rather than trying to take a share of the profits and trying to close loopholes etc... Government should just take 25% non voting shares in companies.
Companies could also indefinitely and legally avoid paying taxes by not issuing dividends. Since not paying dividends increases the companies asset base, the share value could rise and the shareholders can make revenue by selling their shares while the government doesn't get a penny.
FPT: I'm more interested in the principle than what the rate should be. But i think many shareholders want dividends - and they would continue to push for them. This aligns their interests with government which i think is quite clever. Don't know how it works with foreign companies... Presumably they would have to still pay corporation tax to avoid having a competitive advantage.
I think the big issue would be around holding company structures. So, if you have a structure where Political Betting Group PLC owns PBservers Ltd, then do you have the government own 25% of each (making its economic interest in the subsidiary more than 25%), or just of TopCo which would mean that there would be no opportunity for the government to get hands on dividends from PBservers Ltd to TopCo?
Interesting proposal for corporation tax... Rather than trying to take a share of the profits and trying to close loopholes etc... Government should just take 25% non voting shares in companies.
Companies could also indefinitely and legally avoid paying taxes by not issuing dividends. Since not paying dividends increases the companies asset base, the share value could rise and the shareholders can make revenue by selling their shares while the government doesn't get a penny.
FPT: I'm more interested in the principle than what the rate should be. But i think many shareholders want dividends - and they would continue to push for them. This aligns their interests with government which i think is quite clever. Don't know how it works with foreign companies... Presumably they would have to still pay corporation tax to avoid having a competitive advantage.
I think the big issue would be around holding company structures. So, if you have a structure where Political Betting Group PLC owns PBservers Ltd, then do you have the government own 25% of each (making its economic interest in the subsidiary more than 25%), or just of TopCo which would mean that there would be no opportunity for the government to get hands on dividends from PBservers Ltd to TopCo?
Hmm... If govt owns a quarter of TopCo - then when it pays dividends it can take its share from all the companies below it? Why would PBservers pay a dividend to a company but then leave it there - wouldn't real people at some point want to get a dividend?
Not sure the claim 'Lib Dems seem to be recovering in the polls' stacks up, more flatlining.
I think it's inarguable that they have moved from 8% at the GE to about 10% now. Whether they will go any higher, or will slip back, remains to be seen.
My forecast for 12-14 seats on a 12-14% vote share in 2020 remains.
Of the four I think Leicester are most likely to qualify, yet they are the longest odds. That's not to say that the 6/1 with Marathon Bet is value, but if it isn't then backing Juve, Real and Monaco probably is.
Of the four I think Leicester are most likely to qualify, yet they are the longest odds. That's not to say that the 6/1 with Marathon Bet is value, but if it isn't then backing Juve, Real and Monaco probably is.
Coming away from Madrid ust one goal down is not a disaster, but AM will be tough to break down. Missing Huth will be a real problem. Amartey plays for Ghana as CB and got as far as the AFCON Semi final, and team of the tournament, but Wes Morgan may be fit.
Shakespeare was more tactically acute than I expected. The half time sub and change of formation worked well to nullify Madrid. Parking the bus like the best.
Expect a very weak side against Palace, the return tie is going to be tremendous.
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Seems to me the lesson is flatter Trump's ego and he will change his position. Maybe Assad will come out wearing a make America great again hat?
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Seems to me the lesson is flatter Trump's ego and he will change his position. Maybe Assad will come out wearing a make America great again hat?
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
There are two scenarios, it seems to me:
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
There are two scenarios, it seems to me:
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
2. I think. Does this sound like a thoughtful statesperson ? “I said it was obsolete,” Trump recalled during a joint news conference at the White House. “It’s no longer obsolete.”... Or an idiot ?
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
There are two scenarios, it seems to me:
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
There are two scenarios, it seems to me:
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Not all of the by-election massive swings have been in areas full of AB Remain voters.
The point Mark makes in the podcast is an important one - there is a constituency of 'moderate' Leave voters (both moderate Tory and Labour-leaning people) who are concerned about the progression towards a harder Brexit for whom the LibDems offer an effective way to shoot across the government's bows,
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
With Trump's changing stance on NATO it strikes me that we ought to quietly and gradually drop away from the 2% defence spend we do.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
When was the last time you made a positive comment on PB. Todays effort must surely be a first. or almost a first?+
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
You know what would solve the Brexit blues? A good old fashioned AV thread.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
When was the last time you made a positive comment on PB. Todays effort must surely be a first. or almost a first?+
I make loads of positive comments..... for an ulsterman.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
Many congratulations! I can't see my daughter breaking the binds for a while yet!
I am a very soft Brexiteer these days, don't you know! Recent developments fill me with hope.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
When was the last time you made a positive comment on PB. Todays effort must surely be a first. or almost a first?+
I make loads of positive comments..... for an ulsterman.
All I can recall is you slagging off George and Dave .. ad nauseam
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
You know what would solve the Brexit blues? A good old fashioned AV thread.
I getting worried about Southam getting depressed about Brexit.
It's already April and he hasnt even issued his traditional drought warning.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
It was actually May who pushed Trump towards NATO and the EU and of course the fact Trump accepts both has nothing to do with any future UK US trade deal or how much information GCHQ supplies the EU
Trump's conversion to the status quo could be a simple calculation that his insurgency has served its purpose. Now he's top dog, he wants to keep it that way. "I rather like my swamp. I think i will hang on to it."
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
It was actually May who pushed Trump towards NATO and the EU and of course the fact Trump accepts both has nothing to do with any future UK US trade deal or how much information GCHQ supplies the EU
With Trump's changing stance on NATO it strikes me that we ought to quietly and gradually drop away from the 2% defence spend we do.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
Hmmm....the world is a more dangerous place now than it's been for a while. Norks. Russkies. Jihadists. China. Falling oil price. 2008 Mk2 on its way. The Donald. Juncker. I'd humbly suggest it's folly on stilts to weaken ourselves deliberately even further. The armed services are critically understaffed. If we're going to not spend some money please can we not spend £10bn on DfiD - Lambos n Mercs for dictators and a spurious number pulled out of Dave's butt for PR purposes.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
When was the last time you made a positive comment on PB. Todays effort must surely be a first. or almost a first?+
I make loads of positive comments..... for an ulsterman.
All I can recall is you slagging off George and Dave .. ad nauseam
George certainly Dave not so much.
But it brought waves of righteous joy to many on the board.
You can cheer up now, Osbornes gone and the economy is in with a chance.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
May 4th is when we will find out if there has been a Lib Dem recovery or not. Either they make substantial gains which indicate that they are well placed to recover the sort of rural seats that they lost in large numbers in 2015 or their polling is confirmed and they are pretty much flat lining.
I think they will find it more difficult than it should be because it looks like the Tory vote will be up too. They may well get an increase in their vote without a lot of reward but even that would be a start. There may be some easy pickings off the carcass of Labour but in these particular elections Labour is already a bit player with not much to lose and where they do have seats the Lib Dems are pretty weak.
Overall I expect net gains but I think that they will be modest.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
It does not change UK voters desire to control free movement and cut payments to the EU at the moment so makes zero difference to May's agreement to any 'soft Brexit'
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Not all of the by-election massive swings have been in areas full of AB Remain voters.
The point Mark makes in the podcast is an important one - there is a constituency of 'moderate' Leave voters (both moderate Tory and Labour-leaning people) who are concerned about the progression towards a harder Brexit for whom the LibDems offer an effective way to shoot across the government's bows,
Even in moderate Leave seats it has been mainly Remain voters voting LD
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
You know what would solve the Brexit blues? A good old fashioned AV thread.
I getting worried about Southam getting depressed about Brexit.
It's already April and he hasnt even issued his traditional drought warning.
We've already got one in Devon, hasn't rained for two weeks and the grass has stopped growing. And we had a very dry winter.
With Trump's changing stance on NATO it strikes me that we ought to quietly and gradually drop away from the 2% defence spend we do.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
Just to annoy Mr Brooke (congratulations on your daughter's wedding btw) Brexit will consume huge amounts of patronage as the government hopes to buy off all sorts of interests: other EU countries, car manufacturers, farmers, Scotland, Northern Ireland, non-eu country deals etc
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
I'd humbly suggest it's folly on stilts to weaken ourselves deliberately even further. The armed services are critically understaffed. If we're going to not spend some money please can we not spend £10bn on DfiD - Lambos n Mercs for dictators and a spurious number pulled out of Dave's butt for PR purposes.
Oh, I'd quite agree with this. Looking through the numbers they seem desperately "over-chiefed" though - I think there is room for a tremendous amount of cost saving without compromising efficacy.
With Trump's changing stance on NATO it strikes me that we ought to quietly and gradually drop away from the 2% defence spend we do.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
No, Trump would take us less seriously and it sends a message of weakness over Gibraltar
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
There are two scenarios, it seems to me:
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
You will need to have more than some random thoughts on Brexit and NATO to prove the man who built Trump Towers cares about reality.
I'd go for 2 myself.
However I wonder somewhat about your latter point on the EU and softness. Most MEPs appear to have roughly the same grasp of reality as Donald Trump (it has come to something when Guy Verhofstadt looks sane by comparison). My suspicion is that even if the Russians were invading Poland the EU Parliament will still impose a full hard Brexit on us for daring to interfere with their dream of a fully federal continent wide EU.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
You know what would solve the Brexit blues? A good old fashioned AV thread.
I getting worried about Southam getting depressed about Brexit.
It's already April and he hasnt even issued his traditional drought warning.
Despite it being a dry winter too. He is indeed distracted as are too many on the threads but at least he maintains his manners and courtesy. Way too much personal abuse in the last week or so.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
No it doesn't. It was May who pushed this change from Trump and it is the UK who will decide how much intelligence they share with the EU and Trump remains just as committed to a trade deal with the UK even if breaking up the EU is no longer one of his main priorities
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
could you change your name to Private Frazer ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
On the contrary, the journey Trump seems to be making - or, alternatively, his total unreliability - is very good news for the UK as it builds the case for the softest of Brexits. If I were a swivel-eyed anti-European Farage, Fox or Johnson, I would be rather depressed by recent developments. But as I'm not, I'm not.
I had my daughters wedding at the weekend in blazing sunshine and lots of family and friends with me until yesterday.
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
You know what would solve the Brexit blues? A good old fashioned AV thread.
I getting worried about Southam getting depressed about Brexit.
It's already April and he hasnt even issued his traditional drought warning.
We've already got one in Devon, hasn't rained for two weeks and the grass has stopped growing. And we had a very dry winter.
We've just had our first rain here in three weeks.
Typically, it was when I had just got in the materials to finally landscape the garden.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Exactly he will back NATO over an EU army in line with the position of the UK government
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
There are two scenarios, it seems to me:
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
You will need to have more than some random thoughts on Brexit and NATO to prove the man who built Trump Towers cares about reality.
I'd go for 2 myself.
However I wonder somewhat about your latter point on the EU and softness. Most of them appear to have roughly the same grasp of reality as Donald Trump (it has come to something when Guy Verhofstadt looks sane by comparison). My suspicion is that even if the Russians were invading Poland the EU Parliament will still impose a full hard Brexit on us for daring to interfere with their dream of a fully federal continent wide EU.
The European Parliament cannot impose anything. The final Brexit deal will be agreed by national governments.
With Trump's changing stance on NATO it strikes me that we ought to quietly and gradually drop away from the 2% defence spend we do.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
No, Trump would take us less seriously and it sends a message of weakness over Gibraltar
Trump blows whichever way the wind takes him, as for Gibraltar - well that is another NATO member.....
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
There are two scenarios, it seems to me:
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
You will need to have more than some random thoughts on Brexit and NATO to prove the man who built Trump Towers cares about reality.
I'd go for 2 myself.
However I wonder somewhat about your latter point on the EU and softness. Most of them appear to have roughly the same grasp of reality as Donald Trump (it has come to something when Guy Verhofstadt looks sane by comparison). My suspicion is that even if the Russians were invading Poland the EU Parliament will still impose a full hard Brexit on us for daring to interfere with their dream of a fully federal continent wide EU.
The European Parliament cannot impose anything. The final Brexit deal will be agreed by national governments.
Unfortunately not correct. They cannot impose a deal, but they can veto one:
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Not all of the by-election massive swings have been in areas full of AB Remain voters.
The point Mark makes in the podcast is an important one - there is a constituency of 'moderate' Leave voters (both moderate Tory and Labour-leaning people) who are concerned about the progression towards a harder Brexit for whom the LibDems offer an effective way to shoot across the government's bows,
Even in moderate Leave seats it has been mainly Remain voters voting LD
In the national polls, perhaps, but not in the by-elections. In the national polls most of the LibDem support comes from Remain voters, for sure. In by-elections, particularly local ones, there have been huge swings that must have included leave voters (what evidence to the contrary do you have?) - for example the big gains in Sunderland, Rotherham and Oldham.
Indeed the answer to the conundrum as to why LibDems are doing well in by-elections but not in "next GE" polling may be that the latter only picks up the Remain LibDems whereas 'soft Leave' people too are willing to back them in an actual election to fire across government bows, as both Mark and I are suggesting.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Indeed and it is not in the interests of a strong EU or a strong NATO to isolate or alienate one of its largest export markets and sources of military competence. The logic of Trump's position is that both the UK and the EU play nice, which is exactly what we want.
With Trump's changing stance on NATO it strikes me that we ought to quietly and gradually drop away from the 2% defence spend we do.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
Reducing the defence budget by a quarter reduces the military capacity by much more than a quarter as so much of the defence budget funds Trident, ceremonial troops for the tourists, expensive equipment which doesn't work and hundreds of generals, admirals and air marshals.
A better way to save money on military spending would be to stop the warmongering that British politicians are so prone to.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
He reminds me of Marquess Curzon, foreign secretary under Lloyd George and Bonar Law, overlooked for the premiership to his astonishment and dismay in favour of Baldwin (whom he called 'a person of utmost insignificance') and who was also a racist far-right nutjob who owed his position to his family but did undoubtedly have powers of intellect and invective that were well above average.
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
There are two scenarios, it seems to me:
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
You will need to have more than some random thoughts on Brexit and NATO to prove the man who built Trump Towers cares about reality.
I'd go for 2 myself.
However I wonder somewhat about your latter point on the EU and softness. Most of them appear to have roughly the same grasp of reality as Donald Trump (it has come to something when Guy Verhofstadt looks sane by comparison). My suspicion is that even if the Russians were invading Poland the EU Parliament will still impose a full hard Brexit on us for daring to interfere with their dream of a fully federal continent wide EU.
The European Parliament cannot impose anything. The final Brexit deal will be agreed by national governments.
Unless May agreed to keep free movement unchecked and pay 50 billion euros to the EU and change course and agree to stay in the single market and lose half her voters to UKIP it will not be soft Brexit even if it may not be as hard as some suggest. A soft Brexit and return to the single market probably depends on a future Labour government maybe backed by the LDs and SNP
I'd humbly suggest it's folly on stilts to weaken ourselves deliberately even further. The armed services are critically understaffed. If we're going to not spend some money please can we not spend £10bn on DfiD - Lambos n Mercs for dictators and a spurious number pulled out of Dave's butt for PR purposes.
Oh, I'd quite agree with this. Looking through the numbers they seem desperately "over-chiefed" though - I think there is room for a tremendous amount of cost saving without compromising efficacy.
There we agree. Should the number of admirals really exceed the number of ships! But this is a drop in the ocean. The services need boots, kit, training and ammo. And pay. Soldiers' pay is fucking disgrace.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
No it doesn't. It was May who pushed this change from Trump and it is the UK who will decide how much intelligence they share with the EU and Trump remains just as committed to a trade deal with the UK even if breaking up the EU is no longer one of his main priorities
No, it was Syria and reality that helped Trump see the NATO light. As for intelligence, a US committed to NATO will not do anything that increases the security threat Europe faces. And a trade deal with the US will be the deal the US says it will be. One that does not give the UK an advantage over EU member states is one that does not provide any leverage in the Brexit negotiations.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
It was actually May who pushed Trump towards NATO and the EU and of course the fact Trump accepts both has nothing to do with any future UK US trade deal or how much information GCHQ supplies the EU
Trump in line with U.K. Government = bad for the UK Trump out of line with U.K. Government = bad for the UK
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Not all of the by-election massive swings have been in areas full of AB Remain voters.
The point Mark makes in the podcast is an important one - there is a constituency of 'moderate' Leave voters (both moderate Tory and Labour-leaning people) who are concerned about the progression towards a harder Brexit for whom the LibDems offer an effective way to shoot across the government's bows,
Even in moderate Leave seats it has been mainly Remain voters voting LD
In the national polls, perhaps, but not in the by-elections. In the national polls most of the LibDem support comes from Remain voters, for sure. In by-elections, particularly local ones, there have been huge swings that must have included leave voters (what evidence to the contrary do you have?) - for example the big gains in Sunderland, Rotherham and Oldham.
Indeed the answer to the conundrum as to why LibDems are doing well in by-elections but not in "next GE" polling may be that the latter only picks up the Remain LibDems whereas 'soft Leave' people too are willing to back them in an actual election to fire across government bows, as both Mark and I are suggesting.
Copeland and Stoke suggest not and Sunderland was local factors
With Trump's changing stance on NATO it strikes me that we ought to quietly and gradually drop away from the 2% defence spend we do.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
Just to annoy Mr Brooke (congratulations on your daughter's wedding btw) Brexit will consume huge amounts of patronage as the government hopes to buy off all sorts of interests: other EU countries, car manufacturers, farmers, Scotland, Northern Ireland, non-eu country deals etc
well of course it will
but special pleading isnt new, weve had tons of it while we were in the EU
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Exactly he will back NATO over an EU army in line with the position of the UK government
I doubt he cares particularly about an EU army. If it means Germany spends more on defence and brings in Sweden, there are some advantages to it from his point of view. His main concern is to get get Germany to reduce the number of cars and components it imports into the US
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Indeed and it is not in the interests of a strong EU or a strong NATO to isolate or alienate one of its largest export markets and sources of military competence. The logic of Trump's position is that both the UK and the EU play nice, which is exactly what we want.
The UK will not isolate itself. Our government will act rationally. Bad news for right wing, Europe-haters. Trump is not their friend. The Europeans know this.
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Not all of the by-election massive swings have been in areas full of AB Remain voters.
The point Mark makes in the podcast is an important one - there is a constituency of 'moderate' Leave voters (both moderate Tory and Labour-leaning people) who are concerned about the progression towards a harder Brexit for whom the LibDems offer an effective way to shoot across the government's bows,
OTOH, the Lib Dems have barely moved in Parliamentary by-elections in Leave-voting seats. I think we'll get a clearer picture on May 4th.
A better way to save money on military spending would be to stop the warmongering that British politicians are so prone to.
We should take the German approach - warm words to the septics whilst they sort everywhere out. If there is one thing Trump has committed to it is the US military !
With Trump's changing stance on NATO it strikes me that we ought to quietly and gradually drop away from the 2% defence spend we do.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
Just to annoy Mr Brooke (congratulations on your daughter's wedding btw) Brexit will consume huge amounts of patronage as the government hopes to buy off all sorts of interests: other EU countries, car manufacturers, farmers, Scotland, Northern Ireland, non-eu country deals etc
well of course it will
but special pleading isnt new, weve had tons of it while we were in the EU
True, but the bill will go up dramatically on Brexit.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
No it doesn't. It was May who pushed this change from Trump and it is the UK who will decide how much intelligence they share with the EU and Trump remains just as committed to a trade deal with the UK even if breaking up the EU is no longer one of his main priorities
That's like saying "acting against US interests is no longer one of his main priorities."
This change in position was always predictable and May had nothing to do with it.
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Not all of the by-election massive swings have been in areas full of AB Remain voters.
The point Mark makes in the podcast is an important one - there is a constituency of 'moderate' Leave voters (both moderate Tory and Labour-leaning people) who are concerned about the progression towards a harder Brexit for whom the LibDems offer an effective way to shoot across the government's bows,
Even in moderate Leave seats it has been mainly Remain voters voting LD
In the national polls, perhaps, but not in the by-elections. In the national polls most of the LibDem support comes from Remain voters, for sure. In by-elections, particularly local ones, there have been huge swings that must have included leave voters (what evidence to the contrary do you have?) - for example the big gains in Sunderland, Rotherham and Oldham.
Indeed the answer to the conundrum as to why LibDems are doing well in by-elections but not in "next GE" polling may be that the latter only picks up the Remain LibDems whereas 'soft Leave' people too are willing to back them in an actual election to fire across government bows, as both Mark and I are suggesting.
Copeland and Stoke suggest not and Sunderland was local factors
Both of those were clearly billed and seen as potentially close two horse races where it was always likely the LibDems would be squeezed. In Stoke there was pressure on remain voters to back Labour to keep UKIP out - and the Labour candidate had backing from More United.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
It was actually May who pushed Trump towards NATO and the EU and of course the fact Trump accepts both has nothing to do with any future UK US trade deal or how much information GCHQ supplies the EU
Trump in line with U.K. Government = bad for the UK Trump out of line with U.K. Government = bad for the UK
Clear?
Trump committed to a strong NATO and EU = very bad news for right wing anti-Europeans = very good news for the UK.
The best outcome from here is the soft Brexit the Tory right would hate. Trump is making it more likely.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Indeed and it is not in the interests of a strong EU or a strong NATO to isolate or alienate one of its largest export markets and sources of military competence. The logic of Trump's position is that both the UK and the EU play nice, which is exactly what we want.
The UK will not isolate itself. Our government will act rationally. Bad news for right wing, Europe-haters. Trump is not their friend. The Europeans know this.
Well that's fine then. I want our government to act rationally in the national interest. If that involves a soft Brexit, as I believe it does, that is a reason to be cheerful. Despite the oncoming drought.
I'd humbly suggest it's folly on stilts to weaken ourselves deliberately even further. The armed services are critically understaffed. If we're going to not spend some money please can we not spend £10bn on DfiD - Lambos n Mercs for dictators and a spurious number pulled out of Dave's butt for PR purposes.
Oh, I'd quite agree with this. Looking through the numbers they seem desperately "over-chiefed" though - I think there is room for a tremendous amount of cost saving without compromising efficacy.
There we agree. Should the number of admirals really exceed the number of ships! But this is a drop in the ocean. The services need boots, kit, training and ammo. And pay. Soldiers' pay is fucking disgrace.
Soldiers also need to know they won't be hung out to dry by politicians when it's expedient.
"If other countries pay their fair share instead of relying on the United States to make up the difference we will all be much more secure," said the US president.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Exactly he will back NATO over an EU army in line with the position of the UK government
I doubt he cares particularly about an EU army. If it means Germany spends more on defence and brings in Sweden, there are some advantages to it from his point of view. His main concern is to get get Germany to reduce the number of cars and components it imports into the US
The problem is, though, that an EU army won't result in more spending. German politicians have made it clear that they are not going to be upping their defence budgets. There will be a new fancy EU military HQ, staffed by pan EU top brass with shiny new braid, but no more tanks, or ships, or guns. More disengagement from NATO, though.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces the small amount of Brexit negotiation leverage the UK might have, yes. It removes from the table the threats about withdrawing security cooperation some of the more swivel-eyed on the right have been talking about, while generally strengthening the EU's already strong hand - there is no Brexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Exactly he will back NATO over an EU army in line with the position of the UK government
I doubt he cares particularly about an EU army. If it means Germany spends more on defence and brings in Sweden, there are some advantages to it from his point of view. His main concern is to get get Germany to reduce the number of cars and components it imports into the US
Perhaps Germany could echo Trump's own logic - "A trade deal will be much better for you if you sort out the Putin problem."
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
Looks like he is also pulling back from trade war with China.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
It was actually May who pushed Trump towards NATO and the EU and of course the fact Trump accepts both has nothing to do with any future UK US trade deal or how much information GCHQ supplies the EU
Insofar as Tessy exerted an iota of influence over the Don, surely she would have pulled him by his malodorous little hand rather than pushed him?
Whether the Lib Dems are surging or drifting depends on whether you think their recent and undoubtedly new by-election success is leading indicator or irrelevant. Back in the day, the Lib Dems had support amongst the CDE's. Now it's pretty much AB's only, in the polls. Is that a Brexit effect or are the CDE's, who are less interested in politics, just lagging?
I think it is Brexit, mostly. The Lib Dems are doing very well with wealthier voters who are really upset about Brexit.
Not all of the by-election massive swings have been in areas full of AB Remain voters.
The point Mark makes in the podcast is an important one - there is a constituency of 'moderate' Leave voters (both moderate Tory and Labour-leaning people) who are concerned about the progression towards a harder Brexit for whom the LibDems offer an effective way to shoot across the government's bows,
Even in moderate Leave seats it has been mainly Remain voters voting LD
In the national polls, perhaps, but not in the by-elections. In the national polls most of the LibDem support comes from Remain voters, for sure. In by-elections, particularly local ones, there have been huge swings that must have included leave voters (what evidence to the contrary do you have?) - for example the big gains in Sunderland, Rotherham and Oldham.
Indeed the answer to the conundrum as to why LibDems are doing well in by-elections but not in "next GE" polling may be that the latter only picks up the Remain LibDems whereas 'soft Leave' people too are willing to back them in an actual election to fire across government bows, as both Mark and I are suggesting.
This is the change in LibDem support between 2010 and the by-election:
Copeland -3.0% Stoke Central -11.9% Sleaford -7.2% Richmond Park +6.9% Witney +10.8%
Not much evidence there that the LibDems are picking up 'soft Leave' votes. Rather that they have potential in middle class Remain areas.
Trump's conversion to NATO and the EU is a very big deal, isn't it?
If longterm - he seems to believe the last thing he hears, and follow the advice of whoever speaks to him last.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Something that is in line with stated U.K. Government objectives is a problem?
A Trump committed to the EU and NATO certainly reduces thexit saviour across the Atlantic. The good news is that it may mean we end up with a much softer Brexit, of course.
It doesn't change anything on either front. How much the UK intelligence services share with the EU or any UK US trade deal are not affected at all, it is mainly a movement by Trump against Russia, nothing more
Yes, it does. A US that supports a strong NATO and EU will not countenance or enable anything that undermines either. That applies to both security and trade.
There's a tension there, though. A lot of the thrust of current EU political development undercuts NATO - I think we know which one Trump will prioritise. It's not a simple two-dimensional issue.
Indeed and it is not in the interests of a strong EU or a strong NATO to isolate or alienate one of its largest export markets and sources of military competence. The logic of Trump's position is that both the UK and the EU play nice, which is exactly what we want.
The UK will not isolate itself. Our government will act rationally. Bad news for right wing, Europe-haters. Trump is not their friend. The Europeans know this.
Well that's fine then. I want our government to act rationally in the national interest. If that involves a soft Brexit, as I believe it does, that is a reason to be cheerful. Despite the oncoming drought.
See below - I am cheerful. The Farage/Fox/Johnson/Davis hard Brexiteers have been left high and dry by Trump. That's very good news for the UK. How May navigates the fury of the right wing Tory press when all this becomes apparent will be interesting to watch.
Comments
It's early afternoon in Sydney, so pinching a first would be demeaning.
But i think many shareholders want dividends - and they would continue to push for them.
This aligns their interests with government which i think is quite clever. Don't know how it works with foreign companies... Presumably they would have to still pay corporation tax to avoid having a competitive advantage.
Speculation concerning a stock market flotation and appearance in the FTSE 100 is also being talked of in hushed tones by financial journalists.
Not sure the claim 'Lib Dems seem to be recovering in the polls' stacks up, more flatlining.
My forecast for 12-14 seats on a 12-14% vote share in 2020 remains.
Here are the odds for the four teams that lost this week in the Champions League to turn it around and qualify:
Dortmund - 5/2
Barcelona - 5/1
Bayern - 37/10
Leicester - 6/1
Of the four I think Leicester are most likely to qualify, yet they are the longest odds. That's not to say that the 6/1 with Marathon Bet is value, but if it isn't then backing Juve, Real and Monaco probably is.
Shakespeare was more tactically acute than I expected. The half time sub and change of formation worked well to nullify Madrid. Parking the bus like the best.
Expect a very weak side against Palace, the return tie is going to be tremendous.
I am not sure Nigel Farage will be getting as many opportunities to lick the President's arse in future.
More importantly, where does this leave the UK? It's a tricky one to call. If Trump really has realised that a strong NATO and EU are fundamental to the US's interests, how do we play it? Clearly, any threats of reducing security cooperation with the Europeans would have to be predicated on the Americans giving that the green light. That looks far less likely now. As does some kind of special US/UK trade deal designed to screw the EU over.
As you say, it could all change again; but that actually makes it harder for us to build a sustainable, coherent position.
Maybe Assad will come out wearing a make America great again hat?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/12/us/politics/steve-bannon-white-house-trump.html
He was known as Lord Cushion because he bore the imprint of the person who last sat on him - much as Trump does!
1. Trump is a genuine convert now that the influence of alt-right nihilists is waning in the face of reality.
2. He is somone who sways with the wind and is totally unpredictable.
Either way, the Atlanticist fantasy that many on the Europe-hating right were entertaining about Trump being a strong, reliable, anti-EU friend to Brexit Britain does not seem to be remotely credible now.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/791251/kim-jong-un-north-korea-imminent-war-pyongyang-immediate-evacuation
Does this sound like a thoughtful statesperson ?
“I said it was obsolete,” Trump recalled during a joint news conference at the White House. “It’s no longer obsolete.”...
Or an idiot ?
it would make it easier for us all to understand where youre coming from. :-)
Worldwide catastrophe may have been avoided .... but only just.
The point Mark makes in the podcast is an important one - there is a constituency of 'moderate' Leave voters (both moderate Tory and Labour-leaning people) who are concerned about the progression towards a harder Brexit for whom the LibDems offer an effective way to shoot across the government's bows,
I return to PB to find remainer gloom and leaver petty griping. Really we need to up the tone of this site or we wont enjoy the summer.
Lets be honest there are no real penalties, sanctions or consequences for not doing so. Say down to 1.5%, that would free up cash for other areas, decrease borrowing or allow for lower tax increases/reductions...
I am a very soft Brexiteer these days, don't you know! Recent developments fill me with hope.
It's already April and he hasnt even issued his traditional drought warning.
I'd humbly suggest it's folly on stilts to weaken ourselves deliberately even further. The armed services are critically understaffed.
If we're going to not spend some money please can we not spend £10bn on DfiD - Lambos n Mercs for dictators and a spurious number pulled out of Dave's butt for PR purposes.
But it brought waves of righteous joy to many on the board.
You can cheer up now, Osbornes gone and the economy is in with a chance.
I think they will find it more difficult than it should be because it looks like the Tory vote will be up too. They may well get an increase in their vote without a lot of reward but even that would be a start. There may be some easy pickings off the carcass of Labour but in these particular elections Labour is already a bit player with not much to lose and where they do have seats the Lib Dems are pretty weak.
Overall I expect net gains but I think that they will be modest.
I'd go for 2 myself.
However I wonder somewhat about your latter point on the EU and softness. Most MEPs appear to have roughly the same grasp of reality as Donald Trump (it has come to something when Guy Verhofstadt looks sane by comparison). My suspicion is that even if the Russians were invading Poland the EU Parliament will still impose a full hard Brexit on us for daring to interfere with their dream of a fully federal continent wide EU.
Typically, it was when I had just got in the materials to finally landscape the garden.
http://www.europarl.org.uk/en/events-info/brexit
Which is why WTO is the likeliest result.
Indeed the answer to the conundrum as to why LibDems are doing well in by-elections but not in "next GE" polling may be that the latter only picks up the Remain LibDems whereas 'soft Leave' people too are willing to back them in an actual election to fire across government bows, as both Mark and I are suggesting.
A better way to save money on military spending would be to stop the warmongering that British politicians are so prone to.
But this is a drop in the ocean. The services need boots, kit, training and ammo. And pay. Soldiers' pay is fucking disgrace.
Trump out of line with U.K. Government = bad for the UK
Clear?
but special pleading isnt new, weve had tons of it while we were in the EU
This change in position was always predictable and May had nothing to do with it.
The best outcome from here is the soft Brexit the Tory right would hate. Trump is making it more likely.
"If other countries pay their fair share instead of relying on the United States to make up the difference we will all be much more secure," said the US president.
Copeland -3.0%
Stoke Central -11.9%
Sleaford -7.2%
Richmond Park +6.9%
Witney +10.8%
Not much evidence there that the LibDems are picking up 'soft Leave' votes. Rather that they have potential in middle class Remain areas.
The drought is a concern, of course ;-)