I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
Trump is very much like having a baby...
...as President.
Oi, my 3 week old grandson is seriously offended. He is yet to break up any alliances, abandon any allies or do serious damage to the economy.
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
There was a reasonable case (among all the utter nonsense) for Brexit - see, for example, @Richard_Tyndall .
There is no reasonable case for Trump as president. And Trump re-elected is simply insane - while over here, polls show a load of those who voted for Brexit have a degree of regret over doing so.
I disagree.
There is a “reasonable” case for Trumpism: that long-term policies have perpetuated the US’s status as a debtor nation, and this has deindustrialised the U.S. and left it weaker against geopolitical rivals.
Secondly, that conflict in Europe is a costly distraction from USA’s key challenge in the Asia-Pacific.
Those are both eminently arguable.
I agree with this, broadly speaking. Trumpism and Brexit both result from correctly perceiving some real problems but misdiagnosing both the cause and the solution. Broadly speaking, Brexit seems as dumb to non-Brits as Trumpism does to non-Americans, but both projects have enjoyed excessive support domestically owing to successful disinformation campaigns and the fact that each project successfully latches on to some peculiar flaw in the national psyche. Trumpism seems to be delivering worse outcomes more quickly, because it is being pursued far more aggressively than Brexit was. But let's not pretend that Brexit hasn't harmed this country materially, when everyone knows it has. Equally, we will see apparently sane and intelligent Americans defending Trumpism as some kind of painful but necessary corrective, just as we have otherwise smart and lucid people defending Brexit on here, still.
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
The problem with your analogy is that practically none of the disasters predicted in advance of Brexit came you pass. Whereas if anything we were too optimistic on Trump.
Brexit has very roughly played out as I expected. Sone of my worst fears (the break up of the union) have not come to pass. The country is poorer, weaker, and more divided than it would have been.
Trump is obviously much, much worse than Brexit. I don’t think many on here were ever particularly optimistic about him, what surprising is more the speed and volatility rather than the general direction.
You can't make an omlette without breaking eggs. Any serious attempt to Make America Great Again will necessarily create some disruption.
You can also make a great mess on the ground with no omelette to show for it. Besides, wasn't that argument previously used for something else?
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
What would the liabilities be like for Canada? What sort of healthcare do Canada have? I guess those states might be net contributors but I wouldn't be certain.
Mark Carney should ask the King to open the Canadian Parliament after the election.
What a delicious idea! Supposedly Trump was most put out seeing the pictures of the King with Zelenskyy. So lets have Charles open the Canadian Parliament after the next election to really wind him up.
Perhaps Mr Mandelson should explain that if USA absorbs Canada, USA will become subject to the Crown again. Nobody seems to care about facts any more and I'm sure he could make it sound convincing.
What about that Aukus? That's a dodo now, isn't it?
On a serious note that is a future problem for us too. I make it small odds on that one of the UK, France or Germany falls to these nutters in the next decade.
Whatever defensive grouping we can build together has to be flexible enough to deal with that.
That's a good point actually. All the commentary kind of assumes there's a core sane group of nations who will stay that way.
Yeah, people are still massively complacent and getting their event probabilities out of whack because we have lived our lives in remarkably and unusually stable times. They really need some gamblers to help with strategy.
Yep. I think the Trump madness makes neofascism over here in Europe slightly less likely but it's still a live possibility. Interestingly (if true) I hear that Keir Starmer rates a populist right breakthrough at the next UK election as a one in four chance. Although I don't know how he's defining breakthrough.
The threat of a communist revolution in America is quite real too. Look at the people cheering on Luigi Mangione and now the vandalism of anything Tesla. The violence will only escalate unless it’s stopped.
The likelihood of a "communist revolution" is approximately zero.
Same as the probability of WilliamGoebbels making an honest post
When I was at school we used to line up outside the classroom and then if someone shouted "rammy" people would start pushing from each end of the line until the people in the middle collapsed in a heap on the floor. I bet none of yous soft English bastards got that in your fancy private schools!
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
There was a reasonable case (among all the utter nonsense) for Brexit - see, for example, @Richard_Tyndall .
There is no reasonable case for Trump as president. And Trump re-elected is simply insane - while over here, polls show a load of those who voted for Brexit have a degree of regret over doing so.
I disagree.
There is a “reasonable” case for Trumpism: that long-term policies have perpetuated the US’s status as a debtor nation, and this has deindustrialised the U.S. and left it weaker against geopolitical rivals.
Secondly, that conflict in Europe is a costly distraction from USA’s key challenge in the Asia-Pacific.
Those are both eminently arguable.
The question really depends on whether your argument is about careful surgery or a sledge hammer. Looked at carefully there was (and is) a very good case for a certain sort of Brexit - eg one in which we left the 'ever closer union' but stayed in the SM; just as there is a very good case for a number of Trumpian elements of policy; less woke, more and better industry, Pacific priority, more balanced defence alliances when it comes to paying and so on.
In neither case is there an argument for blunderbuss tactics or destruction of nations.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
I'm not sure why Illinois... there's no current border with Canada. Just make the offer to the 3 Pacific States, Alaska and Hawaii - and leave rump US with the Rockies as the border. Geographically it makes way more sense for them to all be 'Canada'...
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
There was a reasonable case (among all the utter nonsense) for Brexit - see, for example, @Richard_Tyndall .
There is no reasonable case for Trump as president. And Trump re-elected is simply insane - while over here, polls show a load of those who voted for Brexit have a degree of regret over doing so.
I disagree.
There is a “reasonable” case for Trumpism: that long-term policies have perpetuated the US’s status as a debtor nation, and this has deindustrialised the U.S. and left it weaker against geopolitical rivals.
Secondly, that conflict in Europe is a costly distraction from USA’s key challenge in the Asia-Pacific.
Those are both eminently arguable.
The question really depends on whether your argument is about careful surgery or a sledge hammer. Looked at carefully there was (and is) a very good case for a certain sort of Brexit - eg one in which we left the 'ever closer union' but stayed in the SM; just as there is a very good case for a number of Trumpian elements of policy; less woke, more and better industry, Pacific priority, more balanced defence alliances when it comes to paying and so on.
In neither case is there an argument for blunderbuss tactics or destruction of nations.
Yes. Well that is essentially the point I am seeking to make. It’s possible to imagine a “sane” Trumpism, though necessarily not one which Trump himself is able to pursue.
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
The problem with your analogy is that practically none of the disasters predicted in advance of Brexit came you pass. Whereas if anything we were too optimistic on Trump.
Brexit has very roughly played out as I expected. Sone of my worst fears (the break up of the union) have not come to pass. The country is poorer, weaker, and more divided than it would have been.
Trump is obviously much, much worse than Brexit. I don’t think many on here were ever particularly optimistic about him, what surprising is more the speed and volatility rather than the general direction.
You can't make an omlette without breaking eggs. Any serious attempt to Make America Great Again will necessarily create some disruption.
Do we think Putin doesn't want to end it? Strikes me he'd be rather relieved, especially if he gets out with some more landmass than when he went in.
He'd probably like to get all of the oblasts he has 'claimed' as part of Russia, but could live with accepting what he as currently conquered, especially since Ukraine will never be getting in to NATO, which may well now be on the way out anyway.
If these policies are carried on a recession is 100% guaranteed.
The turn point is passing - even if they went back to sanity, right now, it would not reduce the probability of a recession below 75% I reckon. The damage is being baked in.
And sanity is a pretty unlikely option. Even if this particular pile of madness is reversed, it is likely to be replaced by the same people doing different mad things.
Lack of men in gray suits is a major flaw in the US system.
Being a fucking Republic is the flaw in the American system. The best countries are constitutional monarchies. UK, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands etc.
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
The problem with your analogy is that practically none of the disasters predicted in advance of Brexit came you pass. Whereas if anything we were too optimistic on Trump.
Brexit has very roughly played out as I expected. Sone of my worst fears (the break up of the union) have not come to pass. The country is poorer, weaker, and more divided than it would have been.
Trump is obviously much, much worse than Brexit. I don’t think many on here were ever particularly optimistic about him, what surprising is more the speed and volatility rather than the general direction.
Well most of the disasters claimed by those opposed to Brexit never came to pass. We were told there would be an immediate recession - there wasn't. We were told it would spark WW3 - it obviously didn't.
Funnily enough Trump looks like he might cause both those things.
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
Trump is very much like having a baby...
...as President.
Oi, my 3 week old grandson is seriously offended. He is yet to break up any alliances, abandon any allies or do serious damage to the economy.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
A comment that can be reflected back directly at you/Europe.
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
I'm not sure why Illinois... there's no current border with Canada. Just make the offer to the 3 Pacific States, Alaska and Hawaii - and leave rump US with the Rockies as the border. Geographically it makes way more sense for them to all be 'Canada'...
Heh. Very deliberate. Look at Trump’s acolytes’ statements about the Great Lakes. I mean we could off Canada and it’s bordering states a place in our Union of course. We might have to let the Aussies have California for logistical reasons.
When I was at school we used to line up outside the classroom and then if someone shouted "rammy" people would start pushing from each end of the line until the people in the middle collapsed in a heap on the floor. I bet none of yous soft English bastards got that in your fancy private schools!
Softies. When my wife was at school she got a free school lunch for being a dinner monitor. When the doors opened everyone would sprint forward. She found a good kick in the balls of one of the front runners would cause a sufficient pile up behind to allow a queue to be formed.
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
Non-zero chance could still mean more like 0.005% chance.
I am obviously joking about a Canadian land grab, but I think a world in which Trump said he wanted to annex Canada by force (still hopefully unlikely, but conceivable) is the same world in which secessionism was back on the table.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
A comment that can be reflected back directly at you/Europe.
Except I have shown hatred for nothing except Trumpism…
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
The problem with your analogy is that practically none of the disasters predicted in advance of Brexit came you pass. Whereas if anything we were too optimistic on Trump.
Brexit has very roughly played out as I expected. Sone of my worst fears (the break up of the union) have not come to pass. The country is poorer, weaker, and more divided than it would have been.
Trump is obviously much, much worse than Brexit. I don’t think many on here were ever particularly optimistic about him, what surprising is more the speed and volatility rather than the general direction.
Well most of the disasters claimed by those opposed to Brexit never came to pass. We were told there would be an immediate recession - there wasn't. We were told it would spark WW3 - it obviously didn't.
Funnily enough Trump looks like he might cause both those things.
Putting aside the fact that there has been a significant impact on British growth and trade performance, Britain was lucky to avoid a recession, in my view.
Of course recessions are devilishly hard to predict, and I vaguely recall that Treasury caveated the hell out of what was ultimately a political forecast by George Osborn.
I don’t think anyone seriously predicted WW3. It’s one of these silly gotchas that infest British political discourse. What is true is that Brexit tested Britain’s relationship with key allies; was a political win for Russia (ask yourself why), and actually if you follow the breadcrumbs, even seems to have led to Britain’s loss on the Chagos case at the ICJ.
Ironically, Trump gives Britain its best chance of escaping the malaise of the Brexit legacy.
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
The problem with your analogy is that practically none of the disasters predicted in advance of Brexit came you pass. Whereas if anything we were too optimistic on Trump.
Brexit has very roughly played out as I expected. Sone of my worst fears (the break up of the union) have not come to pass. The country is poorer, weaker, and more divided than it would have been.
Trump is obviously much, much worse than Brexit. I don’t think many on here were ever particularly optimistic about him, what surprising is more the speed and volatility rather than the general direction.
Well most of the disasters claimed by those opposed to Brexit never came to pass. We were told there would be an immediate recession - there wasn't. We were told it would spark WW3 - it obviously didn't.
Funnily enough Trump looks like he might cause both those things.
the immediate financial crisis was headed off, customs changes have still to be fully implemented (because of the negative impact) and UK economy has flat-lined / recession though Brexit is not the only cause.
Trump is like if a no-deal Brexit had been fully implemented the week after the vote plus possibility of WW3
They've actually played pretty willing all along, likely because they don't have a lot of options. Trump just made things even worse by getting personally offended they didn't seem thrilled about it all.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
Gardenwalker opposed Brexit But J don't think he us 'blinded' nor do I think 'hatred' is the first thing that comes to mind when I read his posts. I think he is wrong but his arguments should not simply dismissed as emotional.
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
Non-zero chance could still mean more like 0.005% chance.
I am obviously joking about a Canadian land grab, but I think a world in which Trump said he wanted to annex Canada by force (still hopefully unlikely, but conceivable) is the same world in which secessionism was back on the table.
If you zoom out historically, was it not David Cameron who put secessionism back on the table? When Jean-Claude Juncker called him one of the great destroyers of modern times, perhaps he was more right than he realised.
I'd like to know who was responsible for making American voters so annoyed that they ended up electing someone like Trump as president.
Trump told a lot of lies. Vance and Musk did too. People were told they were lies. They did not care. Trump voters are the only ones responsible for Trump being President. They own the consequences of their decision entirely. No-one else is to blame.
PBers won’t thank me for the analogy, but Trump is Brexit on steroids.
Every feature of Brexit has its Trumpian analogue. Including this idea that, actually, it’s the Democrats’ fault.
The problem with your analogy is that practically none of the disasters predicted in advance of Brexit came you pass. Whereas if anything we were too optimistic on Trump.
Brexit has very roughly played out as I expected. Sone of my worst fears (the break up of the union) have not come to pass. The country is poorer, weaker, and more divided than it would have been.
Trump is obviously much, much worse than Brexit. I don’t think many on here were ever particularly optimistic about him, what surprising is more the speed and volatility rather than the general direction.
You can't make an omlette without breaking eggs. Any serious attempt to Make America Great Again will necessarily create some disruption.
You can also make a great mess on the ground with no omelette to show for it. Besides, wasn't that argument previously used for something else?
As Göring said "Wo gehobelt wird, da fallen Späne."
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
Non-zero chance could still mean more like 0.005% chance.
I am obviously joking about a Canadian land grab, but I think a world in which Trump said he wanted to annex Canada by force (still hopefully unlikely, but conceivable) is the same world in which secessionism was back on the table.
If you zoom out historically, was it not David Cameron who put secessionism back on the table? (Snip)
They've actually played pretty willing all along, likely because they don't have a lot of options. Trump just made things even worse by getting personally offended they didn't seem thrilled about it all.
Presumably Ukraine have been in favour of a ceasefire from the 1st minute of Day 1 of the invasion, it was the capitulation to Russia proposed by Trump that they were unhappy about.
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
Non-zero chance could still mean more like 0.005% chance.
I am obviously joking about a Canadian land grab, but I think a world in which Trump said he wanted to annex Canada by force (still hopefully unlikely, but conceivable) is the same world in which secessionism was back on the table.
If you zoom out historically, was it not David Cameron who put secessionism back on the table? (Snip)
No.
Yes it was. He even gave Vladimir Putin advice on the matter and suggested the Scottish referendum as a model for Crimea.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
Gardenwalker opposed Brexit But J don't think he us 'blinded' nor do I think 'hatred' is the first thing that comes to mind when I read his posts. I think he is wrong but his arguments should not simply dismissed as emotional.
Thank you.
Ironically, there is actually not a huge difference in what was our preferred ending point. You want to be inside EFTA, I believe, which is inside the single market and outside the customs union.
I too, believe that is the best outcome at this moment in time (whether EFTA or a bespoke arrangement).
I really hope that events in Europe provoke the EU and the UK to move beyond the various supposed challenges of the past.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
Gardenwalker opposed Brexit But J don't think he us 'blinded' nor do I think 'hatred' is the first thing that comes to mind when I read his posts. I think he is wrong but his arguments should not simply dismissed as emotional.
I meant wheat I wrote. There’s a lot of folk missing the real strategic risks because they are drawing all the wrong parallels, largely driven by a Brexit hangover. Whatever type of Brexit we ended up with, the whole psychodrama was about honouring a treaty provision that determined how it was done. That’s the difference. A respect for international law. Trump is a herald of something very different - ghost of Christmas future showing us a world in which international order breaks down and might makes right.
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
Non-zero chance could still mean more like 0.005% chance.
I am obviously joking about a Canadian land grab, but I think a world in which Trump said he wanted to annex Canada by force (still hopefully unlikely, but conceivable) is the same world in which secessionism was back on the table.
If you zoom out historically, was it not David Cameron who put secessionism back on the table? (Snip)
No.
Yes it was. He even gave Vladimir Putin advice on the matter and suggested the Scottish referendum as a model for Crimea.
You very much cherry-pick to make your point. But at least you are expressing an opinion rather than posing a question! Who's on shift tonight?
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
Gardenwalker opposed Brexit But J don't think he us 'blinded' nor do I think 'hatred' is the first thing that comes to mind when I read his posts. I think he is wrong but his arguments should not simply dismissed as emotional.
I meant wheat I wrote. There’s a lot of folk missing the real strategic risks because they are drawing all the wrong parallels, largely driven by a Brexit hangover. Whatever type of Brexit we ended up with, the whole psychodrama was about honouring a treaty provision that determined how it was done. That’s the difference. A respect for international law. Trump is a herald of something very different - ghost of Christmas future showing us a world in which international order breaks down and might makes right.
It is interesting (to me, at least...) that the cargo ship is still on fire, after the fire in the ship carrying aviation gas has been extinguished. There are probably many factors to this, but one will be quite how much energy is embodied in the tat we need to live.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
The commonality is simple in its rawest form: desiring simple answers to complex problems. Whilst there were many sane Europhobes, many were just people wanting simple answers. The problems facing the country was not *our* fault, because we are brilliant. It therefore must be the fault of the others.
Which is why many (not all...) Brexiteers are now Reform, and the 'problems' are no longer caused by the EU, but immigrants...
And this will continue forever, because the idiots will never realise the problem is not whatever they read in the Mail or see on Twix, but *them*.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
Gardenwalker opposed Brexit But J don't think he us 'blinded' nor do I think 'hatred' is the first thing that comes to mind when I read his posts. I think he is wrong but his arguments should not simply dismissed as emotional.
His point about distinguishing between Trump and ‘Trumpism’ is the oddest part of his argument. There’s no rational way to do so.
It is interesting (to me, at least...) that the cargo ship is still on fire, after the fire in the ship carrying aviation gas has been extinguished. There are probably many factors to this, but one will be quite how much energy is embodied in the tat we need to live.
I saw a suggestion yesterday that the other ship might have been anchored in the wrong place, but since the link says the captain of the moving vessel has been arrested, they must be satisfied that wasn't the case. A horrible thing to happen.
"Canadians who are in the United States for 30 days or longer will soon have to register their information with the United States government, according to a notice obtained by ABC News." https://x.com/josh_wingrove/status/1899486639539290394
The linked piece continues:
Traditionally, Canadians who cross the northern border by land and stay for longer than 30 days do not have to register with the federal government, but the secretary of Homeland Security can unilaterally change that rule.
Those who stay for longer than 30 days will be required to apply for registration with the federal government and be fingerprinted starting on April 11, according to the rule, which is expected to be posted on the federal register Wednesday.
Canadians who stay in the U.S. for 30 days or more and were not issued evidence of registration (such as Form I-94) at entry will need to complete the new Form G-325R, according to the rule.
What about that Aukus? That's a dodo now, isn't it?
On a serious note that is a future problem for us too. I make it small odds on that one of the UK, France or Germany falls to these nutters in the next decade.
Whatever defensive grouping we can build together has to be flexible enough to deal with that.
That's a good point actually. All the commentary kind of assumes there's a core sane group of nations who will stay that way.
Yeah, people are still massively complacent and getting their event probabilities out of whack because we have lived our lives in remarkably and unusually stable times. They really need some gamblers to help with strategy.
Yep. I think the Trump madness makes neofascism over here in Europe slightly less likely but it's still a live possibility. Interestingly (if true) I hear that Keir Starmer rates a populist right breakthrough at the next UK election as a one in four chance. Although I don't know how he's defining breakthrough.
The threat of a communist revolution in America is quite real too. Look at the people cheering on Luigi Mangione and now the vandalism of anything Tesla. The violence will only escalate unless it’s stopped.
I think you moving into Reichstag fire territory now. Absolutely pathetic
"Canadians who are in the United States for 30 days or longer will soon have to register their information with the United States government, according to a notice obtained by ABC News." https://x.com/josh_wingrove/status/1899486639539290394
The linked piece continues:
Traditionally, Canadians who cross the northern border by land and stay for longer than 30 days do not have to register with the federal government, but the secretary of Homeland Security can unilaterally change that rule.
Those who stay for longer than 30 days will be required to apply for registration with the federal government and be fingerprinted starting on April 11, according to the rule, which is expected to be posted on the federal register Wednesday.
Canadians who stay in the U.S. for 30 days or more and were not issued evidence of registration (such as Form I-94) at entry will need to complete the new Form G-325R, according to the rule.
This dispute is so weird. Other than reviving Liberal Party fortunes it doesn't seem to benefit either side.
Quite a good podcast from Quilette - a conversation with David Frum.
Quite good for context from a long-time Republican (incl. throughout Trump's first term, but currently a former Republican) view. Blunt on Trump's likes and dislikes, capriciousness, and the influence of Russian money. 30 minutes:
It's quite possible that Rubio has only managed to manoeuvre US policy towards Ukraine in a less erratic direction because Trump has now become distracted by a far more unhinged obsession with destroying Canada
"In the latest souring of relations between the North American neighbours, Mr Trump announced he would impose 50pc tariffs on all steel and aluminium coming into the US from Canada."
Telegraph blog
RIP the Anglosphere.
Just for a bit of fun - a hypothetical Pan-Anglosphere Election!
According to the most recent Anglosphere election results (with Canada and Australia pending), and with a total electoral college distributed proportionally by population (unlike the present US system!), but "winner-takes-all" at State level (like the present US system):
Remember - this just for a bit of fun!
USA (50 states plus DC) 538 electors (2024), but distributed proportionally 310 Radical Right, 228 Radical Left
US Territories (Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.) 6 Electors, ie. 5 for Puerto Rico, 1 at large for the others (2024) 6 Radical Right
UK (4 "states", ie. the Home Nations) 109 electors (2024) 109 Radical Left (oh, well!)
UK Dependencies and Territories, 1 at large Elector (elections 2019 to 2025) 1 Radical Centrist Dad (most elected representatives are unaffiliated)
Canada (13 states, including Quebec) 60 electors (2021) 49 Radical Left, 11 Radical Right - of course, will change later in the year!
Australia (6 states plus Canberra, the Aus external territories are included in NSW and WA) 42 electors (2022) 34 Radical Left, 8 Radical Right - of course, will change later in the year!
Singapore (1 city-state) 9 electors (2020) (I have included Singapore because at the 2020 Census they are 48% English speaking "at home" (main language), compared with 32% in 2010) 9 Radical Right - probably won't change later in the year!
New Zealand (1 state, ie. the main islands plus the three territories) 8 electors (2023) 8 Radical Right
Ireland (1 state) 8 electors (2024) 8 Radical Right
Remember - this just for a bit of fun!
TOTAL: 781 Electoral Votes for the whole Anglosphere Federation:
420 Radical Left (53.8%) 360 Radical Right (46.1%) 1 Radical Centrist Dad (0.1%)
And the "Populist" Vote:
114,004,295 Radical Left (50.6%) 107,322,582 Radical Right (47.6%) 3,946,274 Radical Centrist Dads/Moms (1.8%)
And remember - this is just for a bit of fun!
Source: www.781.com
We need the French in as a permanently disruptive balancing minority.
Trading with Bullies Economics for a Hard-Power World
https://www.siliconcontinent.com/p/trading-with-bullies … While the outbreak of conflict has drawn all our attention to the importance of national security, war is the exception not the rule. Countries want to achieve their geopolitical ambitions, but the destructive nature of conflict makes it in their mutual interest to avoid it. The problem of national security is therefore often not about the application of force but the exploitation of potential force (Schelling, 1960). The core problem is strengthening one's bargaining position — one of the benefits of having a large military is that you may never need to use it.
Bargaining power derives not only from the ability to win a conflict (military power) but also from one's resilience in withstanding its costs. Crucially, while governments control military power, many decisions that affect resilience are made by the private sector. Private companies decide whether to source chips from Taiwan or produce them at home, choices that have strategic implications beyond their commercial calculations.
The national security externality exists because private actors do not account for how their decisions affect their government's bargaining power through resilience to conflict. When a US company imports cheap Chinese chips and builds infrastructure dependent on them, it creates a strategic vulnerability — a cost not reflected in market prices.
Once we account for this security externality, standard economic thinking gives us clear guidance. Markets underinvest in resilience because they fail to price the strategic value of certain productive capabilities. .. Excess capacity in healthcare or defense appears inefficient in normal times but is invaluable during emergencies.
The US CHIPS Act shows this thinking in action. Despite higher costs compared to Asian production, domestic chip factories address a strategic weakness that became obvious when chip shortages halted manufacturing. The US Defense Department has been doing the same for critical minerals, creating stockpiles against future disruptions. Similarly, the EU's Economic Security Strategy mitigates critical bottlenecks through diversification or strategic reserves, providing insurance against coercion without dismantling the broader free trade architecture...
… Kooi's analysis reveals a powerful insight: no sector is inherently ‘strategic’ in an absolute sense. Instead, what makes a sector strategically important depends entirely on the specific conflict scenario being considered. Suppose conflict takes the form of a trade dispute. The European Union faces radically different vulnerabilities in a trade dispute with China than in one with the USA.
The optimal subsidy for any sector depends on how much prices would rise in that sector in a particular conflict*...
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
Gardenwalker opposed Brexit But J don't think he us 'blinded' nor do I think 'hatred' is the first thing that comes to mind when I read his posts. I think he is wrong but his arguments should not simply dismissed as emotional.
His point about distinguishing between Trump and ‘Trumpism’ is the oddest part of his argument. There’s no rational way to do so.
There's no such thing as Trump"ism", there is only Trump. He'd confirm if asked and answering honestly (which I know is the remotest of hypotheticals).
I can't stop thinking that she's like a student politician from the federation of conservative students of old. who's in love with the chairman of the tories.
I can't stop thinking that she's like a student politician from the federation of conservative students of old. who's in love with the chairman of the tories.
A kind of more youthful Nadine... Mad as a box of frogs.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions 9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere 10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
So blinded by your hatred of it that you can’t see the wood for the trees.
Gardenwalker opposed Brexit But J don't think he us 'blinded' nor do I think 'hatred' is the first thing that comes to mind when I read his posts. I think he is wrong but his arguments should not simply dismissed as emotional.
I meant wheat I wrote. There’s a lot of folk missing the real strategic risks because they are drawing all the wrong parallels, largely driven by a Brexit hangover. Whatever type of Brexit we ended up with, the whole psychodrama was about honouring a treaty provision that determined how it was done. That’s the difference. A respect for international law. Trump is a herald of something very different - ghost of Christmas future showing us a world in which international order breaks down and might makes right.
The strategic risk was what we took when we progressively signed over control of our country to the USA - a long process that was instigated in earnest after World War 2 when Marshall Aid was given on the understanding of alignment on various areas, and has continued quietly to progress ever since. When it’s reached the point where that hatchet faced shit John Kerry can come and lecture us not to open a single coalmine (when America has 991), and the US can lobby us to raise Corporation Tax - and lo, we fail to open the coalmine, and we raise Corporation Tax - we have a serious problem. Trump is just an example of what can happen - given that he seems well-disposed toward the UK, I'd say he's quite a benign example.
We have no control over America electing a populist demagogue - what we do have power over is the extent to which we made ourselves an unacknowledged subsidiary of USA inc.
I feel for Ukraine wrt the ceasefire. But it seems Rubio is on board with some protection for their interests. I just wonder if his job is safe if/when Putin says nyet!
"Canadians who are in the United States for 30 days or longer will soon have to register their information with the United States government, according to a notice obtained by ABC News." https://x.com/josh_wingrove/status/1899486639539290394
The linked piece continues:
Traditionally, Canadians who cross the northern border by land and stay for longer than 30 days do not have to register with the federal government, but the secretary of Homeland Security can unilaterally change that rule.
Those who stay for longer than 30 days will be required to apply for registration with the federal government and be fingerprinted starting on April 11, according to the rule, which is expected to be posted on the federal register Wednesday.
Canadians who stay in the U.S. for 30 days or more and were not issued evidence of registration (such as Form I-94) at entry will need to complete the new Form G-325R, according to the rule.
This dispute is so weird. Other than reviving Liberal Party fortunes it doesn't seem to benefit either side.
It will be used as a pretext by Trump and the broligarchs to go full Putin. You have to build it up over time.
It is interesting (to me, at least...) that the cargo ship is still on fire, after the fire in the ship carrying aviation gas has been extinguished. There are probably many factors to this, but one will be quite how much energy is embodied in the tat we need to live.
I saw a suggestion yesterday that the other ship might have been anchored in the wrong place, but since the link says the captain of the moving vessel has been arrested, they must be satisfied that wasn't the case. A horrible thing to happen.
Even if it was anchored in the 'wrong' place, the ship that was moving should have avoided it. Being in the wrong place is a minor causal factor, at worst.
“Here lies the body of William Jay, Who died maintaining his right of way— He was right, dead right, as he sped along, But he’s just as dead as if he were wrong.”
@FirstSquawk · 11m TRUMP SAYS HE IS LOOKING AT REDUCING TARIFFS ON CANADA NOW, ASKED IF HE WOULD REDUCE THAT HE SAYS “PROBABLY SO”
How can any business plan with all this rubbish going on?
Business is a bit of a gamble at the best of times; this is just making it utterly random. Unless, I guess, you are in the inner crowd and get sniffs of the way Trump's wind is blowing...
@FirstSquawk · 11m TRUMP SAYS HE IS LOOKING AT REDUCING TARIFFS ON CANADA NOW, ASKED IF HE WOULD REDUCE THAT HE SAYS “PROBABLY SO”
How can any business plan with all this rubbish going on?
Business is a bit of a gamble at the best of times; this is just making it utterly random. Unless, I guess, you are in the inner crowd and get sniffs of the way Trump's wind is blowing...
As an FT subscriber it’s been quite entertaining reading the journey that US investors have been on. A Trump bubble at the start turning into a Trump rout. As you say, you can’t plan even one week to the next. It’s insanity.
I feel for Ukraine wrt the ceasefire. But it seems Rubio is on board with some protection for their interests. I just wonder if his job is safe if/when Putin says nyet!
If there ends up being a ceasefire with no US security guarantees, and that is a potential scenario given the extent to which the US is willing to hold Ukraine's feet to the fire, Europe will need to continue increasing military aid to Ukraine at a rate of knots to ensure they can rearm quicker than Russia.
"I don't see it at all," President Trump says when asked by @karentravers about the possibility of a recession. He says he was not concerned by the stock market sell-off.
Sir Keir Starmer hails ‘remarkable’ breakthrough after Ukraine reaches agreement with US over potential ceasefire deal
He says the ball is in Russia’s court and that the UK is ready to help bring an end to the conflict in a ‘just and permanent way’
‘I warmly welcome the agreement today in Jeddah and congratulate President Trump and President Zelenskyy for this remarkable breakthrough.
‘This is an important moment for peace in Ukraine and we now all need to redouble our efforts to get to a lasting and secure peace as soon as possible.
‘As both American and Ukrainian delegations have said, the ball is now in the Russian court. Russia must now agree to a ceasefire and an end to the fighting too.
‘I will be convening leaders this Saturday to discuss next steps. We are ready to help bring an end to this war in a just and permanent way that allows Ukraine to enjoy its freedom’
"I don't see it at all," President Trump says when asked by @karentravers about the possibility of a recession. He says he was not concerned by the stock market sell-off.
Of course he doesn't, people are probably putting money into his bank accounts with steady frequency.
It is interesting (to me, at least...) that the cargo ship is still on fire, after the fire in the ship carrying aviation gas has been extinguished. There are probably many factors to this, but one will be quite how much energy is embodied in the tat we need to live.
I saw a suggestion yesterday that the other ship might have been anchored in the wrong place, but since the link says the captain of the moving vessel has been arrested, they must be satisfied that wasn't the case. A horrible thing to happen.
I'd arrest and charge the whole crew with something placeholdery.
That ship going at fairly full speed into a US merchant military supply vessel. I'd not be ruling out either cock up or conspiracy.
There’s a few scenarios: 1) the Trump team are Fucking Morons. They genuinely believe the stupid things they are saying 2) the Trump team know this is stupid but believe their supporters are Fucking Morons 3) combinations thereof
@FirstSquawk · 11m TRUMP SAYS HE IS LOOKING AT REDUCING TARIFFS ON CANADA NOW, ASKED IF HE WOULD REDUCE THAT HE SAYS “PROBABLY SO”
How can any business plan with all this rubbish going on?
Business is a bit of a gamble at the best of times; this is just making it utterly random. Unless, I guess, you are in the inner crowd and get sniffs of the way Trump's wind is blowing...
You can't plan when you have no idea what mad new rules may apply tomorrow. 4 years of this nonsense will trash the US economy even if Trump doesn't follow through with his threats.
There must be a non-zero chance that Trump actually ends up with fewer states in the union rather than more.
Canada should offer New York and Illinois the chance to join it.
Non-zero chance could still mean more like 0.005% chance.
Its quite a lot higher than zero.
The California secession proposition has already been legally approved to collect signatures. If 546,651 signatures are collected by July 22nd, then a commission must be appointed to consider secession in 2027, report in 2028, with a vote on actual secession in November 2028.
There’s a few scenarios: 1) the Trump team are Fucking Morons. They genuinely believe the stupid things they are saying 2) the Trump team know this is stupid but believe their supporters are Fucking Morons 3) combinations thereof
Measles cases in Texas and New Mexico now number over 250, with two deaths being linked to the outbreak. (For comparison, the US had 285 cases of measles in all of 2024).
@FirstSquawk · 11m TRUMP SAYS HE IS LOOKING AT REDUCING TARIFFS ON CANADA NOW, ASKED IF HE WOULD REDUCE THAT HE SAYS “PROBABLY SO”
How can any business plan with all this rubbish going on?
Business is a bit of a gamble at the best of times; this is just making it utterly random. Unless, I guess, you are in the inner crowd and get sniffs of the way Trump's wind is blowing...
You can't plan when you have no idea what mad new rules may apply tomorrow. 4 years of this nonsense will trash the US economy even if Trump doesn't follow through with his threats.
It is already causing substantial problems. If the Trumpvermin don´t stop screwing the system, then the US will suffer a permanent discount, as we have discussed before.
Trusk are currently filming a Tesla commercial at The Whitehouse
Important government business, I have no doubt.
Is this purely because lefties were overrepresented on Tesla ownership in the past so Musk is trying to break into a more untapped market of unhinged MAGAs?*
Are all these fluctuating 'tariffs for a day' actually getting charged?
Trump could be a student of the way Norman Lamont finally cured Britain's inflation problem by announcing interest rate rises and then cancelling them.
Drawing a parallel between Trump and Brexit is obvious nonsense. To be fair to Corbyn and Truss, I am not sure even they count as they both respected the rule of law and the concept of global rules.
Trump is something very different. Trump is 19th century thinking in 2025. That’s why he’s a fellow traveller with Putin, and that’s why this is a dangerous moment in world history. We really could go backwards.
As I said, PBers wouldn’t thank me. Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites” 2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”) 3. Fake economic prospectus 4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?) 5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc. 6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners 7. Hostility to long-standing allies 8. Attacks on democratic conventions ...
It is weird hearing REMAINERS accusing LEAVERS of attacking democracy when they spent three and a half years frustrating the biggest democratic vote for anything in this country's history and would probably still be doing so were it not for Boris Johnson.
Reminds me of Trump, the convicted felon, posing as a law and order president or Putin accusing the Ukrainians of starting the war, committing war crimes, etc. etc.
Comments
Besides, wasn't that argument previously used for something else?
In neither case is there an argument for blunderbuss tactics or destruction of nations.
Still many partisans of Brexit on here.
Yet, so many common factors.
1. Revolt against supposed “elites”
2. Informed by nationalistic nostalgia (“Take BACK control”, “Make America Great AGAIN”)
3. Fake economic prospectus
4. Economic magical thinking (why trade with sclerotic Europe when we can trade with fast growing rest of world?)
5. Hostility to supposed traitors in civil service, legal profession etc.
6. Hostility to immigrants and foreigners
7. Hostility to long-standing allies
8. Attacks on democratic conventions
9. Mentalist, techno-fascist consigliere
10. Utter incompetence at the top due to the suppression of “experts” and the elevation of populist idiots.
Etc etc
Obviously Trump is much worse, but Brexit and Trumpism have strong familial resemblance.
Non-zero chance could still mean more like 0.005% chance.
The best countries are constitutional monarchies. UK, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands etc.
Funnily enough Trump looks like he might cause both those things.
It won’t work. They won’t get enough in tariffs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c51ypekv9xwt
Of course recessions are devilishly hard to predict, and I vaguely recall that Treasury caveated the hell out of what was ultimately a political forecast by George Osborn.
I don’t think anyone seriously predicted WW3.
It’s one of these silly gotchas that infest British political discourse. What is true is that Brexit tested Britain’s relationship with key allies; was a political win for Russia (ask yourself why), and actually if you follow the breadcrumbs, even seems to have led to Britain’s loss on the Chagos case at the ICJ.
Ironically, Trump gives Britain its best chance of escaping the malaise of the Brexit legacy.
Trump is like if a no-deal Brexit had been fully implemented the week after the vote plus possibility of WW3
https://www.politico.eu/article/juncker-calls-david-cameron-one-of-the-great-destroyers-of-modern-times/
Ironically, there is actually not a huge difference in what was our preferred ending point. You want to be inside EFTA, I believe, which is inside the single market and outside the customs union.
I too, believe that is the best outcome at this moment in time (whether EFTA or a bespoke arrangement).
I really hope that events in Europe provoke the EU and the UK to move beyond the various supposed challenges of the past.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cgq1pwjlqq2t
Which is why many (not all...) Brexiteers are now Reform, and the 'problems' are no longer caused by the EU, but immigrants...
And this will continue forever, because the idiots will never realise the problem is not whatever they read in the Mail or see on Twix, but *them*.
"Canadians who are in the United States for 30 days or longer will soon have to register their information with the United States government, according to a notice obtained by ABC News."
https://x.com/josh_wingrove/status/1899486639539290394
The linked piece continues:
Traditionally, Canadians who cross the northern border by land and stay for longer than 30 days do not have to register with the federal government, but the secretary of Homeland Security can unilaterally change that rule.
Those who stay for longer than 30 days will be required to apply for registration with the federal government and be fingerprinted starting on April 11, according to the rule, which is expected to be posted on the federal register Wednesday.
Canadians who stay in the U.S. for 30 days or more and were not issued evidence of registration (such as Form I-94) at entry will need to complete the new Form G-325R, according to the rule.
Leavitt: Tariffs are a tax hike on foreign countries and a tax cut for the American people
Reporter: Have you ever paid a tariff? I have. They don’t get charged on foreign countries
Leavitt: I think it’s insulting that you are trying test my knowledge on economics
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1899518327258763372
Quite good for context from a long-time Republican (incl. throughout Trump's first term, but currently a former Republican) view. Blunt on Trump's likes and dislikes, capriciousness, and the influence of Russian money. 30 minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05p3Q9yRFBU
It's quite possible that Rubio has only managed to manoeuvre US policy towards Ukraine in a less erratic direction because Trump has now become distracted by a far more unhinged obsession with destroying Canada
Trading with Bullies
Economics for a Hard-Power World
https://www.siliconcontinent.com/p/trading-with-bullies
… While the outbreak of conflict has drawn all our attention to the importance of national security, war is the exception not the rule. Countries want to achieve their geopolitical ambitions, but the destructive nature of conflict makes it in their mutual interest to avoid it. The problem of national security is therefore often not about the application of force but the exploitation of potential force (Schelling, 1960). The core problem is strengthening one's bargaining position — one of the benefits of having a large military is that you may never need to use it.
Bargaining power derives not only from the ability to win a conflict (military power) but also from one's resilience in withstanding its costs. Crucially, while governments control military power, many decisions that affect resilience are made by the private sector. Private companies decide whether to source chips from Taiwan or produce them at home, choices that have strategic implications beyond their commercial calculations.
The national security externality exists because private actors do not account for how their decisions affect their government's bargaining power through resilience to conflict. When a US company imports cheap Chinese chips and builds infrastructure dependent on them, it creates a strategic vulnerability — a cost not reflected in market prices.
Once we account for this security externality, standard economic thinking gives us clear guidance. Markets underinvest in resilience because they fail to price the strategic value of certain productive capabilities. .. Excess capacity in healthcare or defense appears inefficient in normal times but is invaluable during emergencies.
The US CHIPS Act shows this thinking in action. Despite higher costs compared to Asian production, domestic chip factories address a strategic weakness that became obvious when chip shortages halted manufacturing. The US Defense Department has been doing the same for critical minerals, creating stockpiles against future disruptions. Similarly, the EU's Economic Security Strategy mitigates critical bottlenecks through diversification or strategic reserves, providing insurance against coercion without dismantling the broader free trade architecture...
… Kooi's analysis reveals a powerful insight: no sector is inherently ‘strategic’ in an absolute sense. Instead, what makes a sector strategically important depends entirely on the specific conflict scenario being considered. Suppose conflict takes the form of a trade dispute. The European Union faces radically different vulnerabilities in a trade dispute with China than in one with the USA.
The optimal subsidy for any sector depends on how much prices would rise in that sector in a particular conflict*...
*And the relative likelihood of that conflict.
Mad as a box of frogs.
We have no control over America electing a populist demagogue - what we do have power over is the extent to which we made ourselves an unacknowledged subsidiary of USA inc.
“Here lies the body of William Jay, Who died maintaining his right of way— He was right, dead right, as he sped along, But he’s just as dead as if he were wrong.”
·
11m
TRUMP SAYS HE IS LOOKING AT REDUCING TARIFFS ON CANADA NOW, ASKED IF HE WOULD REDUCE THAT HE SAYS “PROBABLY SO”
Business is a bit of a gamble at the best of times; this is just making it utterly random. Unless, I guess, you are in the inner crowd and get sniffs of the way Trump's wind is blowing...
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/mar/11/manchester-united-new-stadium-next-to-old-trafford-norman-foster
"I don't see it at all," President Trump says when asked by @karentravers about the possibility of a recession. He says he was not concerned by the stock market sell-off.
Breaking:
Sir Keir Starmer hails ‘remarkable’ breakthrough after Ukraine reaches agreement with US over potential ceasefire deal
He says the ball is in Russia’s court and that the UK is ready to help bring an end to the conflict in a ‘just and permanent way’
‘I warmly welcome the agreement today in Jeddah and congratulate President Trump and President Zelenskyy for this remarkable breakthrough.
‘This is an important moment for peace in Ukraine and we now all need to redouble our efforts to get to a lasting and secure peace as soon as possible.
‘As both American and Ukrainian delegations have said, the ball is now in the Russian court. Russia must now agree to a ceasefire and an end to the fighting too.
‘I will be convening leaders this Saturday to discuss next steps. We are ready to help bring an end to this war in a just and permanent way that allows Ukraine to enjoy its freedom’
That ship going at fairly full speed into a US merchant military supply vessel. I'd not be ruling out either cock up or conspiracy.
1) the Trump team are Fucking Morons. They genuinely believe the stupid things they are saying
2) the Trump team know this is stupid but believe their supporters are Fucking Morons
3) combinations thereof
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/total-recall-three-breasted-actress-schwarzenegger-colin-farrell-358688/
The California secession proposition has already been legally approved to collect signatures. If 546,651 signatures are collected by July 22nd, then a commission must be appointed to consider secession in 2027, report in 2028, with a vote on actual secession in November 2028.
"A cloud, no bigger than a mans hand"
https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/california-secede-2028-ballot-measure-allowed-to-get-signatures/
@emilymullin.bsky.social
Measles cases in Texas and New Mexico now number over 250, with two deaths being linked to the outbreak. (For comparison, the US had 285 cases of measles in all of 2024).
Is this purely because lefties were overrepresented on Tesla ownership in the past so Musk is trying to break into a more untapped market of unhinged MAGAs?*
*I have no data on that, just speculating.
Reminds me of Trump, the convicted felon, posing as a law and order president or Putin accusing the Ukrainians of starting the war, committing war crimes, etc. etc.
Trump says he will declare violence against Tesla dealerships domestic terrorism
@acnewsitics
So when it's a Tesla dealership, it's domestic terrorism, but when it's the Capitol, it’s just ‘tourists’?
Apparently