The 2024 US presidential election.

[Cowley]

Not quite sure how it was fed in, but I don’t think how many countries in the UK you’ve visited is relevant to the Donald Trump presidency!

 

[nw1]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is covid. Or rather the perceived effects of covid.
Although there are obviously many reasons for voters choosing candidates one of the main reasons is usually the economy. I think at the moment most of the western world feels financially worse off than they did five years ago.
In virtually every election that has taken place since 2021 the party which was incumbent during the pandemic has either been booted out or had it's majority severely reduced.
It doesn't seem to matter whether the party was to the left or right or what their response was to covid they were punished by voters. This has happened in Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, Netherlands and the UK (amongst others).
The US is an interesting one because Trump was in power during the first phase (lost in 2020) and Biden during the second (and subsequent) phases.
Obviously there are other factors in play but covid seems to have had a negative effect on parties governing at the time.

I wish that certain sections of the US public had realised that when voting for Trump supposedly because "the economy was better under him".

Most of the Trump I reign was pre-Covid and before Covid trashed the economy, so small wonder the economy was better in 2017-19 than it has been from 2020-24. I'm amazed more people don't have the basic awareness to realise this.

 

[AlterEgo]

As I said, he will be diplomatic and deal with him through gritted teeth. Just like all our politicians of either colour have done with questionable regimes in the past.

Ah right yes, so knowing he's doing it through gritted teeth is important, isn't it? It's important for us - and to a lesser extent the Americans - to know exactly what Lammy thinks of the President, and to be given the opportunity to say something more diplomatic.

Or would you rather you didn't know that?

 

[nw1]

Ah right yes, so knowing he's doing it through gritted teeth is important, isn't it? It's important for us - and to a lesser extent the Americans - to know exactly what Lammy thinks of the President, and to be given the opportunity to say something more diplomatic.

There's certainly precedent for that. Remember May appointing Boris to be Foreign Secretary, someone well known for anti-EU views and actions?

Or would you rather you didn't know that?

Would you rather Lammy be sacked just because he's not a friend of Trump?

And never mind the other 250-odd (I forget the exact number) countries in the world for which Lammy might be the best person for the job?

Lammy's one of the good guys, from what I can see. I have heard him speak, in person, on two separate occasions.

There would be outrage if Lammy was sacked over this. And it would do Starmer no favours at all.

 

[AlterEgo]

Would you rather Lammy be sacked just because he's not a friend of Trump?

No? Who said anything about him being sacked?

Would you as a voter rather just be ignorant of what politicians think? You're the one suggesting his remarks shouldn't be reported or repeated.

 

[nw1]

No? Who said anything about him being sacked?

That is my assumption about what people stirring this up might want, because they see him, wrongly, as a potential troublemaker who might upset the "special relationship".

Would you as a voter rather just be ignorant of what politicians think? You're the one suggesting his remarks shouldn't be reported or repeated.

No, but the whole thing could be used by the right to make life difficult for Lammy. It seems pointless to me to bring this up now.
Lammy will be diplomatic, we all know that. So bringing the thing up achieves nothing.

 

[bavvo]

That is my assumption about what people stirring this up might want, because they see him, wrongly, as a potential troublemaker who might upset the "special relationship".

No, but the whole thing could be used by the right to make life difficult for Lammy. It seems pointless to me to bring this up now.
Lammy will be diplomatic, we all know that. So bringing the thing up achieves nothing.

It's worth remembering that many of Trumps 'allies' including the Republican House and Senate leaders, and his own vice president have previously publicly trashed him for both his character and actions.

 

[AlterEgo]

Lammy will be diplomatic, we all know that. So bringing the thing up achieves nothing.

Do we know that unless we give him an opportunity to actually, retract or correct statements in the interests of diplomacy?

"We know Lammy will be a good Foreign Secretary" is such a ridiculous justification for saying why the Foreign Secretary's remarks shouldn't be reported, and is so presumptive.

 

[Acfb]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is covid. Or rather the perceived effects of covid.
Although there are obviously many reasons for voters choosing candidates one of the main reasons is usually the economy. I think at the moment most of the western world feels financially worse off than they did five years ago.
In virtually every election that has taken place since 2021 the party which was incumbent during the pandemic has either been booted out or had it's majority severely reduced.
It doesn't seem to matter whether the party was to the left or right or what their response was to covid they were punished by voters. This has happened in Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, Netherlands and the UK (amongst others).
The US is an interesting one because Trump was in power during the first phase (lost in 2020) and Biden during the second (and subsequent) phases.
Obviously there are other factors in play but covid seems to have had a negative effect on parties governing at the time.

Incumbents seem to be doing badly nearly everywhere, although perhaps the Republic of Ireland will be the exception to that.

 

[DarloRich]

We need to start spending on our armed forces now not in 2030.

The insurance policy behind the western liberal alliance is NATO and the ultimate insurer of the armed forces of the USA.

I suspect with Trump in charge they will not be willing to pay out. Without them NATO does not work.

If(perhaps when) Putin invades one of the Baltic states what happens? Today article 5 applies. After the 20th of January?

We need to be armed well enough to protect ourselves let alone our friends!

 

[nw1]

I see the hatred hasn't stopped just because he's won, a worrying sign for the presidency:

Nancy Pelosi blames Joe Biden as Democratic finger-pointing intensifies

The powerful former speaker of the House suggested the Democrats could have fared better if the president stood down as candidate sooner.

www.bbc.co.uk

Donald Trump has promised the mass deportation of people who do not have legal permission to be in the United States.

In an interview with NBC News today, the president-elect said his administration would have "no choice" but to carry out those deportations.

"It’s not a question of a price tag. It’s not - really, we have no choice," he told the network.

"When people have killed and murdered, when drug lords have destroyed countries, and now they’re going to go back to those countries because they’re not staying here. There is no price tag."

So all illegal migrants are murderers and drug lords? That's certainly what he seems to imply.

God Help America.

 

[1D54]

Mass deportation of illegals surely puts killers and drug lords in that category. I have no doubt he is deadly serious but how successful he will be is another thing, at least it may put a halt to these 'caravans' that travel through the central and south American continent heading to the USA if they realise they have no chance of gaining entry.

 

[nw1]

Mass deportation of illegals surely puts killers and drug lords in that category.

He is associating illegal immigrants with killers and drug lords though, and implying that most or all of them are in one of the latter categories.

 

[1D54]

Figures quoted on news channels tonight were 20 million so it's the usual tough talk that is often associated with him but this is nonsense. It simply ain't gonna happen.

 

[philosopher]

Incumbents seem to be doing badly nearly everywhere, although perhaps the Republic of Ireland will be the exception to that.

The reason I have heard that incumbents keep losing elections is due to high inflation in recent years. The impact of both Covid and the Russia Ukraine war has led to the high inflation and hence incumbents doing badly in elections.

 

[DustyBin]

We need to start spending on our armed forces now not in 2030.

The insurance policy behind the western liberal alliance is NATO and the ultimate insurer of the armed forces of the USA.

I suspect with Trump in charge they will not be willing to pay out. Without them NATO does not work.

If(perhaps when) Putin invades one of the Baltic states what happens? Today article 5 applies. After the 20th of January?

We need to be armed well enough to protect ourselves let alone our friends!

I totally agree with you in regard to defence spending; our leaders are asleep at the wheel and the consequences have the potential to be catastrophic. Perhaps they know something we don’t, but I’m really not confident…

On a positive note, invading the Baltics is a non-starter for Putin currently, and I don’t see that changing.

 

[DarloRich]

On a positive note, invading the Baltics is a non-starter for Putin currently, and I don’t see that changing.

As of today = correct.

As of January with Ukraine settled, his mate Trump in the whitehouse and a period of rest and rebuilding of his forces. Not so sure

 

[1D54]

He'll never set foot on NATO / EU territory. An attack on one is an attack on all and he'd never get away with it. He would be starting a conflict he simply couldn't win.

 

[nw1]

The reason I have heard that incumbents keep losing elections is due to high inflation in recent years. The impact of both Covid and the Russia Ukraine war has led to the high inflation and hence incumbents doing badly in elections.

Should we hope inflation is high in the USA in the next four years then?

The Dems badly, badly need to get in, in 2028. To be honest I think they will, because Trump will be pretty dire for America, certainly when it comes to civil rights, freedom of speech, normalisation of far-right violence, and international reputation.

Four years time, they will realise the stupid, stupid mistake they have made. And hopefully shock Europe, Canada, Australia, NZ and others into not making the same mistake in any elections taking place in around 3-5 years time.

As I said, silver lining. Trump might have saved us from a Farage premiership in 2029. After 4 years of US chaos and right-wing authoritarianism, will we really want to put ourselves through the same thing? People might finally be grateful that we have a middle-of-the-road government, rather than constantly complaining about Starmer, oblivious to the fact that most of the alternatives are far worse. We should count ourselves damned lucky that we are not ruled by the likes of Trump or other people of his ilk such as Orban or Le Pen.

 

[Acfb]

As I said, silver lining. Trump might have saved us from a Farage premiership in 2029. After 4 years of US chaos, will we really want to put ourselves through the same thing? People might finally be grateful that we have a middle-of-the-road government, rather than constantly complaining about Starmer, oblivious to the fact that most of the alternatives are far worse. We should count ourselves damned lucky that we are not ruled by the likes of Trump or other people of his ilk such as Orban or Le Pen.

My main fear is the effect it will have on our government/the Labour Party in terms of foreign policy and necessary diplomatic relations etc. It's also quite embarrassing how the Telegraph/Spectator/Tory right wing have drunk the Trump Kool-Aid. That said I don't really see any lessons from America for any of the other anglosphere countries as Trump is unique/America is in a class of its own.

Having said all this, I think the Lib Dems will be the big winners if Kemi Badenoch continues cheerleading for Trump as only a majority of Reform voters in Britain support Trump.

 

[nlogax]

As I said, silver lining. Trump might have saved us from a Farage premiership in 2029. After 4 years of US chaos and right-wing authoritarianism, will we really want to put ourselves through the same thing?

Not convinced by this at all. If anything this will further accelerate the rise of Farridge.

 

[nw1]

Not convinced by this at all. If anything this will further accelerate the rise of Farridge.

Will it though?

As I said I suspect Trump will only produce a mixture of chaos and authoritarianism in the USA, and problems worldwide.

Will we really want to put ourselves through the same thing? Will middle-of-the-road Brits want to experience, in 2029, a repeat of what the US had experienced in the preceding four years? Any Farage attempt at PM could easily be fought with the simple slogan "Vote Farage, Get Trump".

If Trump sells out on Ukraine, will we want to support a leader who might be perceived as more likely to capitulate to Russia?

Perhaps if the UK media (including not just the hard-right rags such as the Mail, Express and Telegraph - but also the BBC etc) starts cheerleading for Trump, but not otherwise.

 

[Acfb]

Not convinced by this at all. If anything this will further accelerate the rise of Farridge.

I'm not sure what Farage's aims are apart from self publicity. I had hoped that he might go off to America (and possibly work for Trump) before he unfortunately got elected here. I don't think Reform is going anywhere for the time being given the weaknesses of both the Tories and Labour but I'm not sure Farage really cares about the future of it unlike Tice.

 

[nw1]

My main fear is the effect it will have on our government/the Labour Party in terms of foreign policy and necessary diplomatic relations etc. It's also quite embarrassing how the Telegraph/Spectator/Tory right wing have drunk the Trump Kool-Aid. That said I don't really see any lessons from America for any of the other anglosphere countries as Trump is unique/America is in a class of its own.

Having said all this, I think the Lib Dems will be the big winners if Kemi Badenoch continues cheerleading for Trump as only a majority of Reform voters in Britain support Trump.

Yes, it will certainly be interesting how the Lib Dems do next time. As you say, quite well, I suspect. As they will be immune from any negative effect on the current government's actions, they will surely hold pretty much all their seats. Furthermore they are quite likely to gain some of the university-town / big-city seats from Labour.

I suppose the unknown is, will Badenoch still be Tory leader by 2029? Or will they have someone rather more middle-of-the-road, such as Cleverly? The latter is far more likely to win the votes of the saner Tory supporters and far more likely to win an election - but on the plus side, a Cleverly administration, while somewhat right-wing, would still be within the parameters of relatively sensible government that we have enjoyed since 1945 (aside from Johnson and Truss).

 

[DustyBin]

As of today = correct.

As of January with Ukraine settled, his mate Trump in the whitehouse and a period of rest and rebuilding of his forces. Not so sure

I agree with @1D54 on this. Even with Ukraine “settled” he’s not going to be in a position to challenge NATO, or even a non-NATO defence pact between say the Baltics and Poland and/or Finland for years (probably decades). Plus Ukraine itself, even if forced to cede territory, will continue to exist and pose a significant obstacle to any expansionist plans Putin may have.

To bring us back on topic, none of us know what Trump will do in regard to Russia and Ukraine. It’s a concern obviously, but his “mate” in the Kremlin is probably as worried as anyone!

 

[JamesT]

Will it though?

As I said I suspect Trump will only produce a mixture of chaos and authoritarianism in the USA, and problems worldwide.

Will we really want to put ourselves through the same thing? Will middle-of-the-road Brits want to experience, in 2029, a repeat of what the US had experienced in the preceding four years? Any Farage attempt at PM could easily be fought with the simple slogan "Vote Farage, Get Trump".

If Trump sells out on Ukraine, will we want to support a leader who might be perceived as more likely to capitulate to Russia?

Perhaps if the UK media (including not just the hard-right rags such as the Mail, Express and Telegraph - but also the BBC etc) starts cheerleading for Trump, but not otherwise.

Or perhaps people will remember Bill Clinton's mantra of "It's the economy, stupid!"? If they see the US economy growing whereas ours may be stuck in European-style stagnation, they might decide the pound in their pocket trumps everything else.

 

[nw1]

Or perhaps people will remember Bill Clinton's mantra of "It's the economy, stupid!"? If they see the US economy growing whereas ours may be stuck in European-style stagnation, they might decide the pound in their pocket trumps everything else.

But it's not just the economy, that is indeed a stupid attitude to take.

People need to understand that peace, civil rights, freedom of speech (as long as you're not promoting hatred) and respect for minorities are perhaps the most important things in a democracy.

Personally, myself, I have become increasingly unnerved by world events (the terrible trio of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu), increasingly fearful of the possible spread of far-right authoritarianism, and am valuing a preservation of what we have enjoyed since 1945 more than anything else.

 

[1D54]

the pound in their pocket trumps everything else.

Pun intended?

 

[DustyBin]

But it's not just the economy, that is indeed a stupid attitude to take.

People need to understand that peace, civil rights, freedom of speech (as long as you're not promoting hatred) and respect for minorities are perhaps the most important thing in a democracy.

Easy to say when you’re not queuing at a food bank!

 

[nw1]

Easy to say when you’re not queuing at a food bank!

I think you've misunderstood my comments. I'm not saying the economy isn't important, there are other things we need to think about too. Particularly in a world with the likes of Putin, plus, less seriously but still concerningly, Trump, Orban, Le Pen and the like.

Peace is important, as I know you realise. Civil rights are important.

And besides, I think we all know that Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Nigel Farage, Kemi Badenoch and the rest of the hard-right nutjobs don't give two hoots about the poor. How, exactly, will Donald Trump save Americans from having to go to food banks? How will Badenoch or Farage do the same here?