Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

taffys said:

I can't help thinking that Farage's current Trump arse-lick is not going to end well for him.

This is to entirely misunderstand the relationship. Trump genuinely thinks Farage has been a major help to him. First, in helping to secure Brexit, and then helping to secure him the presidency by tweaking his campaign. Which he did. Its not about arse-likhan.

He thinks Farage is a highly capable guy, based on what Nige has done for him. Free of charge.

Yes, people are missing this. I also think Britishness (Farage is a bit spivvy in some eyes but he speaks with a bantam-weight posh accent, which is enough) carries some weight in the US. He also has a lot of knowledge about politics, especially British and EU politics, that Trump doesn't have. In short he's an asset to Trump. Something which Teresa May's Government, sadly, is so far being rather lead-footed about.

Not sadly. Rightly.

I'm not sure what rectitude has to do with it. We don't demand the removal of Assad yet suck up to the Saudis, ignore Mugabe, do a hairpin turn on Iran, for rightness' sake do we? We treat all these misbehavers totally differently because of geopolitical currents and influences, mainly emanating from the US.

Farage would obviously be totally unsuitable to be the ambassador (has anyone even asked him and his poor wife if they even want the job?), but as a sort of on-off part of a welcome/trade delegation, I don't think the door should have been closed so firmly.

It also can't be ruled out that Trump makes time during his state visit to see Farage then. Which again would be a huge slap in the face to the Government. For now, they need to get Farage inside the tent pissing out.

Keen to get onto your usual topics, aren't you?

Your last line is the important one: Even if we kept Farage on side, he'll p*ss where he wants to, and that'll probably over the government. He's uncontrollable.

Governments sometimes need to be strong to send a message. The short but swift reply to this suggestion certainly sends a message to Trump, and one he'll probably respect.

edmundintokyo said:

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

david_herdson said:

SouthamObserver said:

matt said:

Cyclefree said:

CD13 said:

Apart from being sent out to lie for the Government of the day, the four requirements for an ambassador are to be diplomatic, posh, follow orders, and preferably know which knife to use with fish. Farage ticks the boxes on the second and last.

Trump was just doing him a favour as pay-back. And sending a shot across the bows.

I would not describe Trump as posh. Not at all. Rather a common little man, if anything. As is Trump. Money does not mean poshness. No wonder they get on.

Speaking bluntly, saying what needs to be said is one thing. But neither of these imply that one has to be ill-mannered and offensive.

Trump is a bully. If this tweet finally persuades the British political establishment that the so-called relationship is nothing of the kind and that Trump will look after his own interests and no-one else's then he will have done us a favour.

What you don't do to bullies - or their sidekicks - is appease them. Britain used to understand this. Time for it to remember this basic lesson. Again.

The interesting line there is "his own interests". Where will he fall if there's a choice between his interests and the US' interest?

I am surprised you even ask the question. Trump's interests are the US's interests. End of.

Down that road lies impeachment.

No, down that road leads people calling for impeachment, which neither the House or the Senate will vote for because they're afraid of primaries and personal retribution.

Only up til the point where Trump becomes a liability.

He's already a liability. But there's a collective action problem. If it was a single vote then they could all move on it at once, but it's a complicated, multi-step process. They have to keep this up against the furious anger of their base, and the person they're trying to remove has a reputation for petty retribution, and control of a secretive agency that keeps records of basically all their communications data.

The Republicans could do it, but they'd have to be extremely courageous. And they didn't get where they are today by being extremely courageous.

He wasn't a liability as far as Senators were concerned this time, once he becomes one they will find their courage.

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

david_herdson said:

SouthamObserver said:

matt said:

Cyclefree said:

CD13 said:

Apart from being sent out to lie for the Government of the day, the four requirements for an ambassador are to be diplomatic, posh, follow orders, and preferably know which knife to use with fish. Farage ticks the boxes on the second and last.

Trump was just doing him a favour as pay-back. And sending a shot across the bows.

I would not describe Trump as posh. Not at all. Rather a common little man, if anything. As is Trump. Money does not mean poshness. No wonder they get on.

Speaking bluntly, saying what needs to be said is one thing. But neither of these imply that one has to be ill-mannered and offensive.

Trump is a bully. If this tweet finally persuades the British political establishment that the so-called relationship is nothing of the kind and that Trump will look after his own interests and no-one else's then he will have done us a favour.

What you don't do to bullies - or their sidekicks - is appease them. Britain used to understand this. Time for it to remember this basic lesson. Again.

The interesting line there is "his own interests". Where will he fall if there's a choice between his interests and the US' interest?

I am surprised you even ask the question. Trump's interests are the US's interests. End of.

Down that road lies impeachment.

No, down that road leads people calling for impeachment, which neither the House or the Senate will vote for because they're afraid of primaries and personal retribution.

Only up til the point where Trump becomes a liability.

He's already a liability. But there's a collective action problem. If it was a single vote then they could all move on it at once, but it's a complicated, multi-step process. They have to keep this up against the furious anger of their base, and the person they're trying to remove has a reputation for petty retribution, and control of a secretive agency that keeps records of basically all their communications data.

The Republicans could do it, but they'd have to be extremely courageous. And they didn't get where they are today by being extremely courageous.

He wasn't a liability as far as Senators were concerned this time, once he becomes one they will find their courage.

He was a liability to most of them- some even stopped answering any questions about Trump. But they were scared of offending his supporters also so they didn't want to disown him...

Luckyguy1983 said:

logical_song said:

williamglenn said:

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

david_herdson said:

SouthamObserver said:

matt said:

Cyclefree said:

CD13 said:

Apart from being sent out to lie for the Government of the day, the four requirements for an ambassador are to be diplomatic, posh, follow orders, and preferably know which knife to use with fish. Farage ticks the boxes on the second and last.

Trump was just doing him a favour as pay-back. And sending a shot across the bows.

I would not describe Trump as posh. Not at all. Rather a common little man, if anything. As is Trump. Money does not mean poshness. No wonder they get on.

Speaking bluntly, saying what needs to be said is one thing. But neither of these imply that one has to be ill-mannered and offensive.

Trump is a bully. If this tweet finally persuades the British political establishment that the so-called relationship is nothing of the kind and that Trump will look after his own interests and no-one else's then he will have done us a favour.

What you don't do to bullies - or their sidekicks - is appease them. Britain used to understand this. Time for it to remember this basic lesson. Again.

The interesting line there is "his own interests". Where will he fall if there's a choice between his interests and the US' interest?

I am surprised you even ask the question. Trump's interests are the US's interests. End of.

Down that road lies impeachment.

No, down that road leads people calling for impeachment, which neither the House or the Senate will vote for because they're afraid of primaries and personal retribution.

Only up til the point where Trump becomes a liability.

They've been saying he's a liability all along so why would they be believed?

He will become a liability when the American people decide that he is. Any guesses, two years maybe? It should become clear whether he is or isn't following the mid terms.

Surely after the build up, anything short of a national disaster must be considered a resounding success. Trump will continue to go around putting his foot in it probably, but so did George W Bush.

It's the economy, stupid (no offence). Protectionism may not make America Great Again. It's also broken promises, will Mexico fund the building of the wall? It's also scandals. Trump could become very unpopular very quickly.

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

taffys said:

I can't help thinking that Farage's current Trump arse-lick is not going to end well for him.

This is to entirely misunderstand the relationship. Trump genuinely thinks Farage has been a major help to him. First, in helping to secure Brexit, and then helping to secure him the presidency by tweaking his campaign. Which he did. Its not about arse-likhan.

He thinks Farage is a highly capable guy, based on what Nige has done for him. Free of charge.

Yes, people are missing this. I also think Britishness (Farage is a bit spivvy in some eyes but he speaks with a bantam-weight posh accent, which is enough) carries some weight in the US. He also has a lot of knowledge about politics, especially British and EU politics, that Trump doesn't have. In short he's an asset to Trump. Something which Teresa May's Government, sadly, is so far being rather lead-footed about.

Not sadly. Rightly.

I'm not sure what rectitude has to do with it. We don't demand the removal of Assad yet suck up to the Saudis, ignore Mugabe, do a hairpin turn on Iran, for rightness' sake do we? We treat all these misbehavers totally differently because of geopolitical currents and influences, mainly emanating from the US.

Farage would obviously be totally unsuitable to be the ambassador (has anyone even asked him and his poor wife if they even want the job?), but as a sort of on-off part of a welcome/trade delegation, I don't think the door should have been closed so firmly.

It also can't be ruled out that Trump makes time during his state visit to see Farage then. Which again would be a huge slap in the face to the Government. For now, they need to get Farage inside the tent pissing out.

Keen to get onto your usual topics, aren't you?

Your last line is the important one: Even if we kept Farage on side, he'll p*ss where he wants to, and that'll probably over the government. He's uncontrollable.

Governments sometimes need to be strong to send a message. The short but swift reply to this suggestion certainly sends a message to Trump, and one he'll probably respect.

Actually, I was particularly sensitive not to mention two countries that we (you) can't speak sensibly about. You've rewarded that with a typically graceless and ugly reply, well done.

rkrkrk said:

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

logical_song said:

edmundintokyo said:

david_herdson said:

SouthamObserver said:

matt said:

Cyclefree said:

CD13 said:

Apart from being sent out to lie for the Government of the day, the four requirements for an ambassador are to be diplomatic, posh, follow orders, and preferably know which knife to use with fish. Farage ticks the boxes on the second and last.

Trump was just doing him a favour as pay-back. And sending a shot across the bows.

I would not describe Trump as posh. Not at all. Rather a common little man, if anything. As is Trump. Money does not mean poshness. No wonder they get on.

Trump is a bully.
What you don't do to bullies - or their sidekicks - is appease them. Britain used to understand this. Time for it to remember this basic lesson. Again.

I am surprised you even ask the question. Trump's interests are the US's interests. End of.

Down that road lies impeachment.

No, down that road leads people calling for impeachment, which neither the House or the Senate will vote for because they're afraid of primaries and personal retribution.

Only up til the point where Trump becomes a liability.

He's already a liability. But there's a collective action problem. If it was a single vote then they could all move on it at once, but it's a complicated, multi-step process. They have to keep this up against the furious anger of their base, and the person they're trying to remove has a reputation for petty retribution, and control of a secretive agency that keeps records of basically all their communications data.

The Republicans could do it, but they'd have to be extremely courageous. And they didn't get where they are today by being extremely courageous.

He wasn't a liability as far as Senators were concerned this time, once he becomes one they will find their courage.

He was a liability to most of them- some even stopped answering any questions about Trump. But they were scared of offending his supporters also so they didn't want to disown him...

I define 'liability' as something which would stop them getting elected, rather than something that they think will stop them getting elected. The Republicans did better than expected in the Senate.
The mid terms should show what's happening.
In the meantime we are all living in 'interesting times', God help us.

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

taffys said:

I can't help thinking that Farage's current Trump arse-lick is not going to end well for him.

This is to entirely misunderstand the relationship. Trump genuinely thinks Farage has been a major help to him. First, in helping to secure Brexit, and then helping to secure him the presidency by tweaking his campaign. Which he did. Its not about arse-likhan.

He thinks Farage is a highly capable guy, based on what Nige has done for him. Free of charge.

Yes, people are missing this. I also think Britishness (Farage is a bit spivvy in some eyes but he speaks with a bantam-weight posh accent, which is enough) carries some weight in the US. He also has a lot of knowledge about politics, especially British and EU politics, that Trump doesn't have. In short he's an asset to Trump. Something which Teresa May's Government, sadly, is so far being rather lead-footed about.

Not sadly. Rightly.

I'm not sure what rectitude has to do with it. We don't demand the removal of Assad yet suck up to the Saudis, ignore Mugabe, do a hairpin turn on Iran, for rightness' sake do we? We treat all these misbehavers totally differently because of geopolitical currents and influences, mainly emanating from the US.

Farage would obviously be totally unsuitable to be the ambassador (has anyone even asked him and his poor wife if they even want the job?), but as a sort of on-off part of a welcome/trade delegation, I don't think the door should have been closed so firmly.

It also can't be ruled out that Trump makes time during his state visit to see Farage then. Which again would be a huge slap in the face to the Government. For now, they need to get Farage inside the tent pissing out.

Keen to get onto your usual topics, aren't you?

Your last line is the important one: Even if we kept Farage on side, he'll p*ss where he wants to, and that'll probably over the government. He's uncontrollable.

Governments sometimes need to be strong to send a message. The short but swift reply to this suggestion certainly sends a message to Trump, and one he'll probably respect.

Actually, I was particularly sensitive not to mention two countries that we (you) can't speak sensibly about. You've rewarded that with a typically graceless and ugly reply, well done.

Why was my reply ugly? And which countries are you referring to? Turkey and Russia? I'm perfectly happy to have a sane, sensible discussion about any countries.

Pulpstar said:

The best part about Trump's twitter account is that it is clearly mostly him.

There are obviously a few tweets that have been composed by whichever lackey has been given the gig to do his social media stuff, but by and large it is raw, unvarnished Trump.

That is a big contrast to most leaders who clearly aren't writing their own tweets.

Yeah you don't have to wonder what The Donald really thinks about something, he is apt to tell you.

logical_song said:

Pulpstar said:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/801029194906038272

Note the EIGHT

At least he didn't say TWELVE or FOREVER.

I think you are misreading him. What he means is that the first reshuffle of the Glorious Eternal Trump government will be in eight years.

logical_song said:

Pulpstar said:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/801029194906038272

Note the EIGHT

At least he didn't say TWELVE or FOREVER.

Yet. The practical problem is, he's already committing crimes. He presumably doesn't want to get prosecuted for those crimes. So he can't allow power to transfer to the opposition.

Afternoon all

Jon Hulsman in City AM on Monday called Trump an "American economic nationalist". I'm not entirely sure what that means - Trump wants to do his best for the American people and the American economy - nothing wrong with that and he has that in common with many leaders and most (if not all) former POTUS.

The problem he has is the desire to help the Rust Belt and the rural heartland bumps up against globalisation and the simple notion that if products and services can be provided cheaper in another country that's where they will be provided. That used to be true for parts of the same country but now it's the rationale for the economic development of sub-Saharan Africa by China.

To make that development happen, you need quality infrastructure - good roads, bigger airports, faster railways - and the "response" to globalisation in the West is now shaped around that. Make your widgets here - we have the workers, we have the infrastructure. Our workers may be paid more but they are better educated (sometimes) and more productive (possibly) and willing to accept change (up to a point).

Trump is a businessman and he may see America in terms of a business and the solutions he offers are predicated on making America great (for business) again.

For the rest of the world, what does that mean ? Very much (arguably) like Carter, Clinton, George W Bush and even Obama, Trump was elected on the prioritisation of the domestic agenda but the world may not allow Trump the luxury to look wholly inward. All the other named POTUS got dragged into international issues and their presidencies became defined by events beyond America's borders (and that may explain the internal economic malaise).

For Europe and Britain (and the two are joined whether we like it or not), the key is whether Article 5 of the NATO Treaty still matters. It is that alone which has maintained the peace since the Soviet-American partition of the continent in 1945-48. There will be those (and I'm one of them) who don't believe the Russian occupation of Tallinn, Riga or Vilnius is worth the risk of the nuclear destruction of Birmingham, Manchester or London but if Trump is committed to the defence of western Europe he'll need to say so unequivocally but that doesn't mean he can't foster an improvement in US-Russian relations and I for one hope he does so (not that they can be much worse than they are now).

I also have no problem with American complaints of European countries not paying their fair share into NATO - every member commits 2% of their national spend into NATO. The question for the UK, France, Belgium and the US is or are commitments beyond NATO and whether these can or should still be supported.

IF Trump does decide NATO has had its time, what then ? I did idly wonder if in 50 years time, British troops will be standing alongside their Russian allies along the Amur River facing the continuing build up of Chinese troops - just a thought.

eek said:

GIN1138 said:

williamglenn said:

Today in Trump land - the continuation of the NY Times feud.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/801021596228091905

Perhaps the UK should offer political asylum to Rosie O'Donnell in retaliation for the Farage thing.

Is NYT one of Ruperts papers?

nope that's the NY Post

Oh. Thanks.

GIN1138 said:

williamglenn said:

Today in Trump land - the continuation of the NY Times feud.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/801021596228091905

Perhaps the UK should offer political asylum to Rosie O'Donnell in retaliation for the Farage thing.

Is NYT one of Ruperts papers?

the New York Post is his tabloid I recall.

Incidentally I noticed that some of the Trump followers on Reddit are sending salt to the NY Times, currently they are up to 2,600 pounds.

I think it's more likely that Farage will become the US ambassador to Britain.

It's interesting that Trump continues his tactics of appearing transparent even if he's not.
Also that he is making it into an 80's soap opera vs fictitious or real enemies (like the media).

It's like watching Dynasty or Dallas.

glw said:

Incidentally I noticed that some of the Trump followers on Reddit are sending salt to the NY Times, currently they are up to 2,600 pounds.

Just like the viewers liked to see Alexis slapped in Dynasty, people love to see Trump slap the media.

It's soap opera tactics, as long as Trump has an enemy that has a worse reputation than him he wins the crowd.

He is replacing Hillary with multiple targets.

Speedy said:

I think it's more likely that Farage will become the US ambassador to Britain.

It's interesting that Trump continues his tactics of appearing transparent even if he's not.
Also that he is making it into an 80's soap opera vs fictitious or real enemies (like the media).

It's like watching Dynasty or Dallas.

It is not an accident. It is reality tv.

I forgotten which media commentator made this comparison, but they said that Trump gets social media and reality tv like Team Obama got the internet. While Obama managed to do email "mail shots" for getting donations and tapping up support, Trump plays everything out like a reality show (which are still hugely popular).

Trump is forever whipping real and faux drama. Today is throwing Farage hand grenade and the "slip" of saying 8 years.

Speedy said:

Just like the viewers liked to see Alexis slapped in Dynasty, people love to see Trump slap the media.

It's soap opera tactics, as long as Trump has an enemy that has a worse reputation than him he wins the crowd.

He is replacing Hillary with multiple targets.

And the shipping labels in many cases are to "The Failing New York Times" which is pure Trump.

edmundintokyo said:

logical_song said:

Pulpstar said:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/801029194906038272

Note the EIGHT

At least he didn't say TWELVE or FOREVER.

Yet. The practical problem is, he's already committing crimes. He presumably doesn't want to get prosecuted for those crimes. So he can't allow power to transfer to the opposition.

Are you thinking of relatively 'small' crimes, to do with his 'University' or Foundation? The checks and balances should be able to stop him doing worse than that, shouldn't they?

glw said:

Speedy said:

Just like the viewers liked to see Alexis slapped in Dynasty, people love to see Trump slap the media.

It's soap opera tactics, as long as Trump has an enemy that has a worse reputation than him he wins the crowd.

He is replacing Hillary with multiple targets.

And the shipping labels in many cases are to "The Failing New York Times" which is pure Trump.

Trump vs the Media:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qB7ywr2cNMM

Meanwhile as we watch the soap opera, Trump would be doing his job as President away from the camera.

MTimT said:

Pulpstar said:

MTimT said:

Pulpstar said:

"Totally blue" states by geography:

MA, HI

All red:

WV, OK

Think those are the only four.

Wyoming and Vermont are the next closest.

What is the definition of totally blue? By district in the Presidential vote? Holding all statewide positions? All of Presidential vote, Governor, US Senators and US Representatives? And both state houses?

For the Presidential election, simple map - every single county blue (Or red)

Thanks. Doesn't bode well for Manchin in WV in 2018.

He's pitching to be Trump's AG, isn't he?

Farage should be Governor-General, NOT a mere ambassador!

Pulpstar said:

Counterfactual:

Remain and Hillary Clinton have won. Dave is still PM, and he's received a discreet telegram from Hillary saying that though she doesn't have any room in her cabinet a certain D Miliband would be a great US-UK ambassador...

Yet another banana skin for David to slip up on?

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Farage should be Governor-General, NOT a mere ambassador!

There's an obvious role for Farage that everyone is overlooking.

The new Mayor of Greater Manchester.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Farage should be Governor-General, NOT a mere ambassador!

Perhaps Trump should appoint him US Ambassador to London.

Triggered by an interview with Matthew Parris on R% today I have been looking up some of the famous quotations of H.L. Menken. The following appear relevant to the world today:
For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.

On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

rcs1000 said:

MTimT said:

Pulpstar said:

MTimT said:

Pulpstar said:

"Totally blue" states by geography:

MA, HI

All red:

WV, OK

Think those are the only four.

Wyoming and Vermont are the next closest.

What is the definition of totally blue? By district in the Presidential vote? Holding all statewide positions? All of Presidential vote, Governor, US Senators and US Representatives? And both state houses?

For the Presidential election, simple map - every single county blue (Or red)

Thanks. Doesn't bode well for Manchin in WV in 2018.

He's pitching to be Trump's AG, isn't he?

Robert, I saw an amusing diagram to explain the status of the Trump appointments process.

Candidates: everyone
Positions: for everything

PS it was in a much better graphic form that than.