• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Thoughts on the Trump presidency

Bevan Price

Established Member
Joined
22 Apr 2010
Messages
8,344
I think that Mr Trump realises that a 3rd term is impossible, so he will possibly try to ensure that one of his close cronies becomes the next president - maybe Vance, or Miller, for example. It remains to be seen if that happens, but for reasons I cannot comprehend, millions of Americans seem to believe that Trump is "God's gift" to America and believe everything he says / does .
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
5,611
Amendments to the US Constitution require ratification by a two-thirds majority in the Senate.

Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

Heck, more likely than not the GOP aren't even going to hold a simple majority after the mid-term elections.

The only way DJT gets a third term is if he runs as someone's VP candidate and they then resign. Who in the current GOP could he trust not to stab him in the back?
I mean to be blunt whose gonna stop him?

Laws are only worth anything if someone enforces them, and its clear the supreme court and Congress have to appetite for that when it comes to Trump.

If he's still walking he will try.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Except it's not going to make him look good in the eye of sensible Americans.
You think he cares about that?
It's just playing to the MAGA crowd. Preaching to the converted, and thus entirely politically useless. This whole saga will not bring one single new Republican vote in, I suspect - but it might lose a few million.
But if he can just say find the votes to make him win in 2020, even though he didnt win, and then not get any legal punishment or consequence from that, what's going to atop him doing the same in the midterms and in 2028.
Furthermore, it will increase international distrust of hard-right populist "characters" (ahem), and likely lose votes for his mates over here in Europe.
You think Trump actually cares about that?
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
But if he can just say find the votes to make him win in 2020, even though he didnt win, and then not get any legal punishment or consequence from that, what's going to atop him doing the same in the midterms and in 2028.

I'd say the upcoming elections are very different to say 2024.

In 2024 there seemed to be a lot of people who didn't like Biden, many from the left, who stayed in bed; and others closer to the centre were voting Trump on the basis of Trump I, which almost seems relatively moderate compared to Trump II.

There are surely going to be a lot of people who will vote against him this time, who might have even voted for him last time, and then the "complacent left" who stayed at home last time are likely to be persuaded to get out of bed to vote.

So he's going to have to "find" a lot of missing votes to "win" in the midterms and 2028.

Also in 2028, it'll presumably be another GOP candidate and is he likely to "find" votes to benefit someone else?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

You think Trump actually cares about that?
Maybe not, except that some of them appear to be his mates. But as I said, he could be our (as in Europeans) useful idiot so there is a bit of a silver lining there.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
10,508
Location
Cheshire
I'd say the upcoming elections are very different to say 2024.

In 2024 there seemed to be a lot of people who didn't like Biden, many from the left, who stayed in bed; and others closer to the centre were voting Trump on the basis of Trump I, which almost seems relatively moderate compared to Trump II.

There are surely going to be a lot of people who will vote against him this time, who might have even voted for him last time, and then the "complacent left" who stayed at home last time are likely to be persuaded to get out of bed to vote.

So he's going to have to "find" a lot of missing votes to "win" in the midterms and 2028.

Also in 2028, it'll presumably be another GOP candidate and is he likely to "find" votes to benefit someone else?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


Maybe not, except that some of them appear to be his mates. But as I said, he could be our (as in Europeans) useful idiot so there is a bit of a silver lining there.
In the 2024 campaign, Trump leaned heavily on social media influencers like Joe Rogan. They probably helped tip a lot of swing voters in his direction, and this has been discussed at length by a number of online and mainstream political commentators that I've listened to recently. However with the growing crisis that ICE's actions is creating, along with the Epstein Files still not being released, and even Trump's sudden interest in land grabs, many influencers like Rogan that were loyal supporters have started to wobble and really question not only Trump's policies, but their own support of him.

This could be a big influence on those upcoming Midterms. Not all Republican supporters are happy, many are now starting to feel the pain of Trump's tariffs, healthcare and immigration policies, whilst wondering why he still ducks and dives over Epstein. It's probably way too early to call it, but some commentators are starting to predict that there could be quite a big swing for red candidates, especially as some big name Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Green are exiting the stage. It's also why many predict that Trump will ramp up activities to either disrupt or disown the Midterms, as even he has admitted they could take a hell of a beating.
 

Lewisham2221

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2005
Messages
2,751
Location
Staffordshire
In the 2024 campaign, Trump leaned heavily on social media influencers like Joe Rogan. They probably helped tip a lot of swing voters in his direction, and this has been discussed at length by a number of online and mainstream political commentators that I've listened to recently. However with the growing crisis that ICE's actions is creating, along with the Epstein Files still not being released, and even Trump's sudden interest in land grabs, many influencers like Rogan that were loyal supporters have started to wobble and really question not only Trump's policies, but their own support of him.

This could be a big influence on those upcoming Midterms. Not all Republican supporters are happy, many are now starting to feel the pain of Trump's tariffs, healthcare and immigration policies, whilst wondering why he still ducks and dives over Epstein. It's probably way too early to call it, but some commentators are starting to predict that there could be quite a big swing for red candidates, especially as some big name Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Green are exiting the stage. It's also why many predict that Trump will ramp up activities to either disrupt or disown the Midterms, as even he has admitted they could take a hell of a beating.
Have eggs got cheaper yet? That's where he won a lot of votes last time isn't it? I suspect voters who were swayed by promises of lower living costs will be far less inclined to vote red again if those savings haven't materialised.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
10,508
Location
Cheshire
Have eggs got cheaper yet? That's where he won a lot of votes last time isn't it? I suspect voters who were swayed by promises of lower living costs will be far less inclined to vote red again if those savings haven't materialised.
I believe so, however the effect of tariffs and healthcare policies are kicking in over there, and it's being noticed
 

Gloster

Veteran Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
13,040
Location
Up the creek
Maybe not, except that some of them appear to be his mates. But as I said, he could be our (as in Europeans) useful idiot so there is a bit of a silver lining there.

Trump doesn’t have a single mate that he cares about less than himself. He would rat on anybody outside the family, and possibly even them, to get what he wants. But they would happily rat on him. To state the bleedin’ obvious, he is a man without the slightest loyalty to anybody or anything except satisfying his current want, whether it is greed, power, influence, acclaim or whatever today.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
10,508
Location
Cheshire
Trump doesn’t have a single mate that he cares about less than himself. He would rat on anybody outside the family, and possibly even them, to get what he wants. But they would happily rat on him. To state the bleedin’ obvious, he is a man without the slightest loyalty to anybody or anything except satisfying his current want, whether it is greed, power, influence, acclaim or whatever today.
Trump is only remotely something like loyal when someone is seemingly useful to him. And he's assembled a sycophant circus around him, all of who are betting on winning big by never saying "No" to the boss & covering every one of his many gaffs, to stay useful. The best, sorry worst example of which was Levitt the other day when responding on X to a reporter asking about why Trump kept mentioning Iceland instead of Greenland during one of his rants, erm speeches. She claimed he meant "land of ice", i.e. a land made of ice, or in other words Greenland.

Its just such an astonishingly pathetic excuse, you could almost feel sorry for her. Except for the fact that she actually seems to believe this, such is her commitment to the cult. Bats*** crazy stuff!
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
9,430
Trump is only remotely something like loyal when someone is seemingly useful to him. And he's assembled a sycophant circus around him, all of who are betting on winning big by never saying "No" to the boss & covering every one of his many gaffs, to stay useful. The best, sorry worst example of which was Levitt the other day when responding on X to a reporter asking about why Trump kept mentioning Iceland instead of Greenland during one of his rants, erm speeches. She claimed he meant "land of ice", i.e. a land made of ice, or in other words Greenland.

Its just such an astonishingly pathetic excuse, you could almost feel sorry for her. Except for the fact that she actually seems to believe this, such is her commitment to the cult. Bats*** crazy stuff!
Ah, Karoline Zacharova.
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,829
Location
West is best
Have eggs got cheaper yet? That's where he won a lot of votes last time isn't it? I suspect voters who were swayed by promises of lower living costs will be far less inclined to vote red again if those savings haven't materialised.

Eggs have got cheaper, but how much Trump had to do with this is another matter. Read on and see what BBC Verify reports...

BBC Verify said:

From gas to groceries, has Trump kept his promise to tackle rising prices?​


Tom Edgington
BBC Verify, Reporting fromWashington DC

Published 6 November 2025

President Donald Trump was swept to power for a second time on the back of a central campaign promise to tackle inflation.

The steep rise in the cost of living was top of voters' minds and Trump blamed President Joe Biden.

He also made sweeping promises to bring down prices for Americans "starting on day one".

One year on from his victory, BBC Verify revisits some of the president's claims.

Groceries​

"When I win, I will immediately bring prices down, starting on Day One," Trump declared at an August 2024 news conference surrounded by packaged foods, milk, meats and eggs.

Official data - which includes a four-month period when Biden was still president - shows grocery prices rose by 2.7% in the 12 months to September 2025, with some items seeing significantly sharper increases:
  • Coffee: 18.9%
  • Ground beef (minced beef): 12.9%
  • Bananas: 6.9%
Since Trump took office in January, the data also shows that apart from one recorded fall in April, grocery prices have risen each month.

"The president of the United States has very little control over the price of food, especially in the short term," food economics expert Professor David Ortega told BBC Verify.

Trump's tariffs are driving up prices of certain foods, he said - a third of coffee consumed in the US comes from Brazil and therefore has a 50% tariff.

Trump's illegal immigration crackdown may also have had an impact, Ortega adds, especially in farming where as many as 40% of workers are estimated to be undocumented, which is close to a million people.

"As you know, farmers and companies have to raise wages in order to attract more labour. But trying to quantify those impacts in terms of price increase is almost impossible at the moment."

Diane Swonk, the chief economist for KPMG, believes tariff and immigration policy changes have contributed to higher costs.

"There's no question that those shifts are now starting to show up as inflation pressures," she said.

But she adds that other factors, including weather events, have contributed.

"On coffee you had climate issues for a very bad growing season and that was exacerbated by a tariff on Brazil and also Colombia," she said.

A White House official told BBC Verify President Trump did not control weather patterns in South America and coffee prices hikes were a global phenomenon.

Data that tracks the cost of coffee shows prices have risen globally, peaking in February, but are now falling.

The same official said the president was addressing rising beef prices by temporarily increasing imports.

While grocery prices are up overall, not every item has become more expensive.

When Trump succeeded Biden in January, the price of a dozen large eggs was $4.93 (£3.79), rising to a record high of $6.23 (£4.78) in March following bird flu outbreaks.

Since then prices have fallen to $3.49 (£2.68) a dozen.

"President Trump's supply-side policies are taming Joe Biden's inflation crisis," White House Spokesman Kush Desai said.

Other items that have fallen in price over the past 12 months include: butter and margarine (-2%), ice cream (-0.7%) and frozen vegetables (-0.7%).

Electricity​

During his campaign, Trump pledged to cut electricity bills sharply.

"Under my administration we will be slashing energy and electricity prices by half within 12 months, at a maximum 18 months," he told a rally in August 2024.

Since he became president, prices have risen.

The latest figures show average residential electricity rates reached 17.62 cents per kWh (kilowatt hour) in August 2025 - up from 15.94 cents per kWh in January 2025, according to the US Energy Information Administration.

"It was technically impossible [to halve prices] at the time he made the promise," according to Professor James Sweeney from the Stanford Precourt Institute for Energy.

Electricity prices not only reflect the cost of generation but also the expense of delivering it through "the wires and the transformers and everything else", he explained.

Prof Sweeney attributes the increase to both demand and supply issues.

"We have a surge in demand mostly driven by data centres. People creating images using artificial intelligence are using significant amounts of electricity."

He added that cuts to renewable energy subsidies and tariffs on imported steel - which raise the cost of building new power generators - have also pushed up prices.

Swonk agreed that the AI boom is pushing up prices, especially for those on lower incomes.

"It exacerbates inequality because consumers that have more access to solar panels and renewables tend to be wealthier households," she said.

In response a White House official said that Trump was expanding coal, natural gas and nuclear power, which was "the only viable way to meet the growing energy demand and to lower energy prices".

Cars​

At a campaign rally in September 2024, Trump extended his grocery pledge to cars, telling supporters: "We're going to get the prices down… groceries, cars, everything".

However, the average price of a new car topped $50,000 (£38,411) for the first time ever in September, up from $48,283 (£37,092) in January according to Kelley Blue Book, a US vehicle valuation research company.

Car prices typically rise 2-3% a year, explained Erin Keating from Cox Automotive.

"Tariffs, which have been the biggest factor in the automotive industry over the last 12 months, have been nothing but inflationary."

She explained new car prices are increasing by about 4% a year, with tariffs contributing at least one percentage point.

"We really think in 2026 that's going to go higher because most of the manufacturers are holding their fire on raising prices directly due to tariffs, but they're going to have to come in at some point."

Keating did point to tax breaks for people in Trump's spending bill, which she believes may incentivise people to buy new cars.

When asked about the rising price of cars, a White House official told BBC Verify the administration had taken historic regulatory actions to "reverse the left's radical energy scam and save billions annually".

Gasoline​

Trump made a specific campaign pledge of "getting gasoline below $2 a gallon".

On the day he entered the White House the average price for a gallon of "regular" gas was $3.125 (£2.39) according to the American Automobile Association (AAA).

While a long way short of his pledge to get prices below $2, the price of a gallon of gas has fallen to a national average of $3.079 (£2.36).

In response, a White House official pointed us to a gas price comparison website, which had a slightly lower national average of $2.97 (£2.27) per gallon compared with the AAA's data.

The official added that President Trump has quickly unleashed American energy to make gas affordable again for families across the country.

Link to source

BBC Verify said:

Fact-checking Trump’s economy speech​

Published at 15:12, 14 January 2026

Tom Edgington
BBC Verify senior journalist

President Donald Trump gave a speech yesterday focusing on the US economy and what he sees as his administration’s key achievements over the past 12 months, including claiming that “inflation is defeated”.

That is despite newly-released official figures showing prices rose by 2.7% in the 12 months ending December, unchanged from the previous month. While annual inflation is down from 3% when Trump took office last January, it remains above the 2% target set by the Federal Reserve, the US central bank.

He also claimed that former President Joe Biden oversaw “the worst inflation in the history of our country”. Prices did rise significantly during Biden's first two years in office, peaking at 9.1% in June 2022 shortly after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine - which contributed to inflation in other countries.

However, this was not the “worst” on record in the US. This occurred in 1920, when inflation reached 23.7%. It was also higher at points in the 1970s and 1980s.

Trump also boasted that "growth is exploding” and “at all-time high”.

It is true the US economy has picked up, according to the most recent data. In the three months to September 2025, the economy grew at an annual rate of 4.3%, up from 3.8% in the second quarter. This followed a contraction of 0.6% in the three months to March.

However, while the latest quarter was better than analysts expected and marked the strongest annualised growth in two years, it was not an all-time high.

Trump also spoke about falling petrol prices during his speech: a claim we looked at yesterday.

Link to source

BBC Verify said:

Has Trump met his pledge on lowering petrol prices?​

Published at 17:35 13 January 2026

Tom Edgington
BBC Verify senior journalist

As protests over ICE tactics continue to dominate the headlines, the Trump administration been highlighting its economic record on the official White House X account.

In a post about gasoline prices, the White House declared “promises made, promises kept” alongside a photo of Donald Trump.

It claimed prices had fallen to $2.79 (£2.42) a gallon (3.8 litres), the “LOWEST average in nearly five years”.

The five year claim is correct, according to data from the American Automobile Association (AAA).

Last week the AAA said 2026 had started with the lowest national average petrol price since March 2021.

This morning the AAA’s website reports a national average price of $2.82, only marginally higher than the figure cited by the White House.

This compares to the national average price of $3.07 a gallon a year ago and down from a record high of $5.17 in June 2022, under the administration of former president Joe Biden.

However, while the average petrol price has fallen, it is still above Trump’s campaign pledge to get gasoline to under $2 a gallon.

Link to source
 

Krokodil

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2023
Messages
6,608
Location
Wales
US elections are run by the States, not the Federal government.
Except that some states (such as Colorado) tried to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot on the basis that an insurrectionist is supposed to be barred from standing.

The Supreme Court overruled, saying that it was above their jurisdiction.
 

muz379

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2014
Messages
2,515
Even still, the whole point of the World Cup is that they are international players, visiting temporarily. They are not taking employment or accommodation from local people, which has always been my understanding of the reason behind restrictions on working (or living) abroad. You'd think that they'd be allowed in with just an ID check, and a passport can do that.

So it does surprise me, one of those cases where the law does not follow common sense, it appears.
Worth bearing in mind as well though that we aren't just talking about well known football players here that everyone would recognise. Some international squads have players literally nobody apart from your super niche football fanatic would know of.

And of course all the families and supporting staff that come along with the teams, the coaches,the PA's the physios etc.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,730
Location
Scotland
Except that some states (such as Colorado) tried to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot on the basis that an insurrectionist is supposed to be barred from standing.
That is factually incorrect. It was a primary election, not a presidential election.
The Supreme Court overruled, saying that it was above their jurisdiction.
Also incorrect.
 
Last edited:

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,829
Location
West is best
Trump's latest controversial words have caused outrage...

BBC News said:

Trump's claim Nato troops avoided Afghanistan front line sparks outrage in UK​

Published at 10:03

Donald Trump's claim that Nato troops stayed "a little off the front lines" during the war in Afghanistan has provoked anger among UK politicians and veterans' families.

Speaking to Fox on Thursday, the US president said he was "not sure" the military alliance would be there for the US "if we ever needed them".

"They'll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan," he said, "and they did, they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines".

Health and Social Care Minister Stephen Kinnock calls the comments "disappointing" and "wrong", while Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch labels them "flat-out nonsense".

The UK was among several allies to join the US in Afghanistan from 2001, after it invoked Nato's collective security clause following the 9/11 terror attacks. Four-hundred and fifty-seven British service personnel were killed in the conflict.

What did Trump say?​

Published at 10:12

Nato invoked Article 5, which states that "an armed attack against one Nato member shall be considered an attack against them all", following the 9/11 terror attacks.

Speaking to Fox last night, US President Donald Trump said he was "not sure" the military alliance would be there for the US "if we ever needed them".

"We've never needed them," he said, adding: "We have never really asked anything of them."

"They'll say they sent some troops to Afghanistan," he said, "and they did, they stayed a little back, a little off the front lines".

Health and Social Care Minister Stephen Kinnock has suggested UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer would speak to Trump abut the remarks.

"He's incredibly proud of our armed forces, and he will make that clear to the president," he told LBC.

Link to source (note, a "live" page).

Anything to keep other damaging stories out of the headlines...
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,592
Location
LBK
Another disgusting offensive lie today. He can make that claim in a pub in Aldershot of my choosing.

I am not the biggest fan of our armed forces but that is a vile lie. I knew a lad personally who was killed in Afghanistan, and another reservist who lost a leg in Iraq (one of our voluntary escapades which vastly diminshed our global standing by doing America's bidding).

Not on the front lines my eye. Yes they were. 457 of ours died in Afghanistan alone.
 

Howardh

Established Member
Joined
17 May 2011
Messages
9,797
And Farage has come out and condemned his pretend mate's words? No??
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,829
Location
West is best
And what is the official White House response?

BBC News said:

'Trump was right, US contributions to Nato dwarf allies' - White House​

Published at 15:13

Bernd Debusmann Jr
Reporting from the White House

We've just received a statement from the White House response that did not immediately address our questions about Trump's comments on Nato's contributions to the war in Afghanistan.

Here's what Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly told us: "President Trump is right – America’s contributions to Nato dwarf that of other countries, and his success in delivering a five percent spending pledge from Nato allies is helping Europe take greater responsibility for its own defence.

"The United States is the only Nato partner who can protect Greenland, and the President is advancing Nato interests in doing so."

When pressed, the White House had nothing to add.
Link to source
 

brad465

Veteran Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
11,543
Location
Taunton or Kent
What makes this more insulting is that the person who made those comments is a notorious draft dodger. The fact he can get away with something like this shows how far past the point of no return all of the US constitution and media setup is.
 

Falcon1200

Established Member
Joined
14 Jun 2021
Messages
6,598
Location
Neilston, East Renfrewshire
What makes this more insulting is that the person who made those comments is a notorious draft dodger.

Indeed, but at least his disgusting words have had the unintended consequence of bringing his lack of military service back into focus. If anyone knows how to avoid the front line it is him....

Hopefully senior figures in the US military, some of whom would doubtless served alongside British and other nation's soldiers, will already have put him right. Whether an apology will be forthcoming is another thing.
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,829
Location
West is best
Indeed, but at least his disgusting words have had the unintended consequence of bringing his lack of military service back into focus. If anyone knows how to avoid the front line it is him....

Hopefully senior figures in the US military, some of whom would doubtless served alongside British and other nation's soldiers, will already have put him right. Whether an apology will be forthcoming is another thing.
I would hope that this will help persuade the majority of serving U.S. military and veterans which way to vote in the mid term elections later this year.
 

Cowley

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
15 Apr 2016
Messages
18,949
Location
Devon
Whether an apology will be forthcoming is another thing.
He won’t apologise. He’ll either double down, blame someone else for giving him the wrong information or say he didn’t say it.

Not apologising for anything is part of the MO.
 

Krokodil

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2023
Messages
6,608
Location
Wales
That is factually incorrect. It was a primary election, not a presidential election.
It's not factually incorrect. I just said "2024 ballot". The primary was a ballot held in 2024, was it not?

Also incorrect.
In what way was it incorrect? It was a paraphrasing of the ruling here:
But States have no power under the Constitution to enforce Section 3 with respect to federal offices, especially the Presidency,
 

Strathclyder

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2013
Messages
3,837
Location
Clydebank
Yet more easily disprovable BS from the black hole of depravity squatting in the Oval Office designed to distract and deflect. Can't even begin to imagine what the familes are feeling right now, but I expect shock and rage to be right at the forefront. Far more furious than I am and I'm all but spitting feathers right now.

Said it once, I'll say it again. I'm shocked, disgusted and pissed off, but not surprised in the least. He has a history of insulting and degrading those who serve in the armed forces (remember the 'losers and suckers' remark? I sure do), made all the more bitterly ironic as he's a serial draft-dodger. 'A little off the front lines?' Even if that were true - it damn well ain't; just ask the 457 British service members who were killed in Afghanistan alone and the countless others maimed there, both physically and psychologically - not as far back as you've been your entire life, General Bone-Spurs. So, on behalf of them I say this: Go to hell.

Another disgusting offensive lie today. He can make that claim in a pub in Aldershot of my choosing.
He can spout that off in any pub in Glasgow, see what happens then.

And what is the official White House response?


Link to source
That ain't a surprise either, but no less enraging and insulting. After this, the 'special relationship' should just be torn up, all trade deals withdrawn at the earliest oppurtunity, all reserve currency sold and in turn we should start to strengthen our relationships with Europe, Canada, Australia etc. May as well have gone up to each and every relative of our fallen service members and spat in their face.
 
Last edited:

Howardh

Established Member
Joined
17 May 2011
Messages
9,797
He won’t apologise. He’ll either double down, blame someone else for giving him the wrong information or say didnt say it.

Not apologising for anything is part of the MO.
Trump's comments were on a Fox News interview and if I'm correct went out "live". Had it been recorded I bet even Fox news would have shredded and binned the tape before it saw the light of day.
 

Sorcerer

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2022
Messages
2,191
Location
Liverpool
It's true, America didn't really need it's NATO allies when going into Afghanistan because it's easily among the greatest military forces in history and would've been perfectly capable of doing the job alone. But we went with them anyway because we wanted to stand by our American allies and honour the agreement of Article 5 because otherwise what good is the alliance?

Yet despite that and despite losing over 400 of our own, this cheese-brained wannabe strongman dictator dares to suggest we held back after already doubting whether NATO would even be there for them at all. The irony of course being that we have more reason to believe they wouldn't be there for us when not actively jeopardising the alliance by threatening to annex allied territory.

For all of his faults on domestic policy, Keir Starmer really does have an admirable level of patience to be dealing with someone so intolerable. If it were me I'd have practically destroyed the geopolitical relations by mouthing off to him on the phone with the only hope of recovery being his ageing mind forgetting about it a day later.
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,829
Location
West is best
For all of his faults on domestic policy, Keir Starmer really does have an admirable level of patience to be dealing with someone so intolerable. If it were me I'd have practically destroyed the geopolitical relations by mouthing off to him on the phone with the only hope of recovery being his ageing mind forgetting about it a day later.
If I were the PM, I would have been polite at first, but then later, rather more direct.

I would have asked Trump, how much difficulty would it cause if all facilities in the U.K. and at our overseas territories where they are used by the U.S. military, would be unavailable for use due to the need to carry out extensive maintenance.

Then I would have said, now imagine if this included the facilities used by the U.S. military in other NATO or commonwealth countries.

Now further imagine what that would mean if it became permanent.

Then I would directly ask him if someone insulted him, would he expect an apology.

If he still did not get the message, then I would directly tell him that he must give an apology in public. Then before he could answer, leave the room...
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
33,730
Location
Scotland
In what way was it incorrect?
Because it was the specifically the fact that they quoted the 14th Amendment as their justification, not that they didn't have the power to control elections, which was your claim.
 

Gloster

Veteran Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
13,040
Location
Up the creek
If I were the PM, I would have been polite at first, but then later, rather more direct.

I would have asked Trump, how much difficulty would it cause if all facilities in the U.K. and at our overseas territories where they are used by the U.S. military, would be unavailable for use due to the need to carry out extensive maintenance.

Then I would have said, now imagine if this included the facilities used by the U.S. military in other NATO or commonwealth countries.

Now further imagine what that would mean if it became permanent.

Then I would directly ask him if someone insulted him, would he expect an apology.

If he still did not get the message, then I would directly tell him that he must give an apology in public. Then before he could answer, leave the room...

And it still wouldn’t have the slightest effect: Trump is impervious to anything that doesn’t suit him.
 

Top