Thoughts on the Trump presidency

[ainsworth74]

The GOP majority in both Houses is small, so literally a handful of Republicans voting with the Democrats could pass a motion that opposes something Trump is doing. This has actually happened in the Senate with Canada tariffs and there is potential for Trump's legislation to be defeated if it goes to Congress.

Oh yes the House GOP majority is so slender that it only needs a few to be peeled off and they'll be in all sorts of trouble. One of the reasons why they're having to do this via Executive Order isn't just that they want the Executive to reign supreme but that they also know that a lot of this would struggle to get through the House. It only needs a few Republican's to be peeled off and it's dead in the water. So rule by fiat will continue for the foreseeable as they won't go to Congress as it's too hard to win and the GOP Congressional leadership seems happy to have Congress denuded of any of it's actual functions beyond the bare minimum.

However, as I understand it, overturning an executive order requires legislation to be actively passed by both Houses. That requires the Bill to go on the agenda in the House (controlled by the GOP Speaker) and to get a supermajority in the Senate (requiring more Republicans to vote with the Dems).

That's broadly my understanding, though it has to be on a matter which is within the constitutional purview of Congress for them to be able to overturn the relevant Executive Order via legislation. Though technically a supermajority is not required I suspect one will be in effect needed as no doubt when the bill comes across Trump's desk to sign he will veto it requiring Congress to override the veto which requires two-thirds support of both House and Senate. So, even harder than just needing a supermajority in the Senate!

 

[YorkshireBear]

Having recently read the Robert Harris trilogy on Cicero it all sounds very familar!

 

[sor]

Any sensible country will go with China. The USA is done, for now at least.

China will never back down and is more important to most countries than the USA. Trump has now made that perfectly clear with his comments about supplying things like military products, and now refusing to sell to Ukraine.

I do fear the UK still believes in this 'special relationship' nonsense, plus now Brexiteers thinking this is our moment to show why leaving the EU was good and will push for a US trade deal at the expense of everything else, but would hope we resist.

And we still have the state visit with a meeting with the King ace up our sleeves. Trump seems keen to do a deal just for this, so we must find a way to drag things out because once he's been then we're done too.

It must also be said that Trump's flagship trade policy is to antagonise the two countries that already have the most comprehensive trade deal - Canada and Mexico. A deal that he "negotiated" in his first term following his desire to tear up NAFTA. So he's done this twice.

Against that backdrop, it seems utterly insane that anyone should suggest that the UK give up anything substantial in return for its own "deal". Certainly not food standards or "free speech". Better relations with the EU should be the UK's overriding priority, followed by virtually any other country except the US.

 

[Annetts key]

It must also be said that Trump's flagship trade policy is to antagonise the two countries that already have the most comprehensive trade deal - Canada and Mexico. A deal that he "negotiated" in his first term following his desire to tear up NAFTA. So he's done this twice.

Against that backdrop, it seems utterly insane that anyone should suggest that the UK give up anything substantial in return for its own "deal". Certainly not food standards or "free speech". Better relations with the EU should be the UK's overriding priority, followed by virtually any other country except the US.

Absolutely agree 100%

 

[jon0844]

It must also be said that Trump's flagship trade policy is to antagonise the two countries that already have the most comprehensive trade deal - Canada and Mexico. A deal that he "negotiated" in his first term following his desire to tear up NAFTA. So he's done this twice.

Against that backdrop, it seems utterly insane that anyone should suggest that the UK give up anything substantial in return for its own "deal". Certainly not food standards or "free speech". Better relations with the EU should be the UK's overriding priority, followed by virtually any other country except the US.

There has never been as good an opportunity for Labour to announce closer ties with the EU than now. If we decide to try and buck the trend and go with the USA we'll definitely be shafted, as well as embarrassing ourselves. The fact Nigel Farage and Liz Truss want us to do it should make it obvious enough that it's a bad idea.

 

[brad465]

There has never been as good an opportunity for Labour to announce closer ties with the EU than now. If we decide to try and buck the trend and go with the USA we'll definitely be shafted, as well as embarrassing ourselves. The fact Nigel Farage and Liz Truss want us to do it should make it obvious enough that it's a bad idea.

The Trade & Cooperation agreement is being reviewed next year as per one of the conditions of the agreement. I suspect this is when closer ties will be pursued.

 

[Harpo]

The fact Nigel Farage and Liz Truss want us to do it should make it obvious enough that it's a bad idea.

Re: Farage - The supreme irony of advocating divorce from the EU to regain our sovereignty, only to suggest we sign a promise to kiss Trump’s donkey, or similar, and do as told.

Re: Truss - The supreme irony of any economic guidance from Truss.

 

[edwin_m]

The Trade & Cooperation agreement is being reviewed next year as per one of the conditions of the agreement. I suspect this is when closer ties will be pursued.

But is that soon enough?

 

[jon0844]

But is that soon enough?

Well, whatever we do with the USA between now and then will likely change anyway. It's not like we'll get a firm deal that isn't subject to the whims of a crazy lunatic and his sycophants.

 

[edwin_m]

Well, whatever we do with the USA between now and then will likely change anyway. It's not like we'll get a firm deal that isn't subject to the whims of a crazy lunatic and his sycophants.

Hence why I'm suggesting we should string Trump along in the hope (but not the expectation) of getting something, while quietly working to agree things in Europe. Which may be what is actually happening.

 

[jon0844]

Hence why I'm suggesting we should string Trump along in the hope (but not the expectation) of getting something, while quietly working to agree things in Europe. Which may be what is actually happening.

Yeah, keep dangling the meeting with the King card.. but always put it off until next month because of <insert excuse here>. That's about all we have that gives us any leverage.

 

[The Ham]

Yeah, keep dangling the meeting with the King card.. but always put it off until next month because of <insert excuse here>. That's about all we have that gives us any leverage.

"When diaries allow" (please ignore any meetings that our king has had with other allies of ours, they're not state visits, as can be seen by the fact that they are just tea in one of the small palaces - you really want the grand dinner at Buckingham Palace don't you, anything else doesn't really count).

 

[Annetts key]

Hence why I'm suggesting we should string Trump along in the hope (but not the expectation) of getting something, while quietly working to agree things in Europe. Which may be what is actually happening.

I would much prefer we string Trump up. Do any of the palaces have any hidden corridors or rooms he could be disappeared into? Meanwhile his security detail are strung along with "he's in a private meeting with the King and the King has given instructions not to be disturbed"...

By the time they actually miss him, he's been transported to a remote place like the bottom of an old flooded mine... We would of course offer him a Chinese made life jacket and Chinese made torch (flashlight).

Note: the above is just some amusing thoughts, I'm not serious. Or am I?

 

[Gloster]

I would much prefer we string Trump up. Do any of the palaces have any hidden corridors or rooms he could be disappeared into? Meanwhile his security detail are strung along with "he's in a private meeting with the King and the King has given instructions not to be disturbed"...

By the time they actually miss him, he's been transported to a remote place like the bottom of an old flooded mine... We would of course offer him a Chinese made life jacket and Chinese made torch (flashlight).

Note: the above is just some amusing thoughts, I'm not serious. Or am I?

Or we could dig out that massive Trump balloon from the last visit, tie him to it so that he can see the bigly crowds welcoming him and…Up, up and away in my beautiful balloon… Just to rub it in, it was Pepsi, not his beloved Coke, that did the advert.

 

[edwin_m]

Perhaps we could impose a tariff on him. Call it an anti-Trumping measure.