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.

 

[brad465]

But is that soon enough?

Probably not, but I doubt the EU have time to do any serious stuff earlier, as they are also going to have a loaded agenda dealing with Trump from their point of view. Maybe we'll get some small side agreements before, but nothing massive.

 

[Three-Nine]

If we‘re going to deport Trump anywhere, surely El Salvador would be the ideal choice? After all, it is apparently completely impossible to bring anyone back from there…

 

[DarloRich]

think pushing to see how much they can get away with, like ignoring the supreme court,

Exactly what is - see how much he can get away with AND pick a fight with the evil judges. It is a very worrying time.

The fact they claim they cant get this bloke back from El Salvador is indicative of the direction of travel. They could get him back right now if they wanted. That they don't and that they ignored the court is indicative of what they want to do and what is coming.

Disappearing people is the sort of thing tin pot dictators do. If the shoe fits........

( btw - happy to throw wrong uns out of the country - lets try and do it lawfully!)

If anyone reckons this ends in 2028/29 with a harmonious transfer of power then I really don't think you've been paying attention.

Correct - it is going to be wild. Trump will try and stand again regardless of any legal niceties.

 

[najaB]

Correct - it is going to be wild. Trump will try and stand again regardless of any legal niceties.

That's assuming that cholesterol hasn't taken care of him by then.

 

[Cowley]

That's assuming that cholesterol hasn't taken care of him by then.

I do think that this is a strong possibility. He’s not in good shape despite what he the Dear Leader would like everyone to believe.

 

[3141]

I do think that this is a strong possibility. He’s not in good shape despite what he the Dear Leader would like everyone to believe.

I'd like to think that Trump's age or health, or an outbreak of reason within the Republican Party, would bring the present unpleasant situation to an end, but none of those things may happen. Even if he were forced to retire on health grounds there's J.D. Vance to succeed him, and a large number of other people with various causes they want to advance who would be likely to continue to support at least some of Trump's policies (if that isn't too strong a word). Trump didn't just happen out of the blue: there's a substantial movement of opinion that would continue to support many of his ideas if he were no longer there, and possibly in a more consistent and effective manner. I'm pessimistic about the whole situation. I hope that other forces within American society and politics can effectively prepare for a better future post-2029, or possibly sooner. Such people should be thinking hard and acting appropriately now, because the people within Trump's administration have a big advantage when it comes to maintaining the current trajectory of government, even if Trump himself wasn't active any more.

 

[jon0844]

JD Vance is more actively involved in Project 2025 than Trump, who probably doesn't even know half of what's in it - and just signs the Executive Orders handed to him like a useful idiot.

If and when Trump goes, Vance isn't likely to do anything to undo the damage.

 

[Gloster]

It is now three months since I started this thread: where are we? In my opinion, things are far worse than I expected. I reckoned that there would be an initial burst of changes, particularly high-profile ‘anti-Biden’ ones and a certain amount of vindictive revenge against those that had crossed the Trump. There would be some larger and more serious changes, but most of it would be in the background and their consequences wouldn’t become clear until later. And a lot of straightforward grifting…

Well, the grifting is there, but the sheer number and variety of the changes, some of them of major importance to the US and the world, and some of just minor, if often unpleasant, importance, is almost too difficult to follow. Unfortunately, although there is some clear popular opposition, it doesn’t seem to be very organised and is not having any real effect, nor will it overcome until enough people stand together. Meanwhile a great many of the MAGA faithful continue to support what is going on and, I feel, they will continue to do so until it becomes blatantly obvious that they are themselves seriously affected. Whether that will be enough to slow Trump is another question: he may just do what he has done before and dump those who are no longer of use to him and reckon the the former MAGA faithful will just sulk.

Could Trump really be Goldfinger? They both play on their own golf courses and use ‘gamesmanship’. They both have a strange tan. They both seem to want to destroy the USA’s economy. They are both greedy, unscrupulous and immensely rich. They are both power crazy and have weird ideas. I am just a little bit more worried about Oddjob Vance.

 

[sor]

In the US domestic context, the "DOGEification" of the public service is going to have very long lasting effects as experienced government employees leave or are pushed out, and those who are left are demoralised and literally unable to do their jobs (such as the disabling of gov credit cards). It makes Thatcherism and Cameron's austerity era look like minor cost cutting by comparison.

"DOGE" meanwhile is always revising their predicted savings downwards. Who knew that the government isn't as wasteful as the right wingers said it was? Well, aside from all those new contracts that the oligarchs' companies are picking up. Maybe it is more like post-soviet Russia.

 

[jon0844]

If they were finding all this fraud, why aren't they showing the evidence and bringing charges against the offenders?

 

[najaB]

"DOGE" meanwhile is always revising their predicted savings downwards. Who knew that the government isn't as wasteful as the right wingers said it was?

During the campaign it was $2T. After the election it was $1T. Three months in it's $150B (of which only about $50B is actual savings).

I think a government department that has only managed 2.5% of what it was supposed to do is probably a prime candidate for removal.

 

[3141]

It is now three months since I started this thread: where are we? In my opinion, things are far worse than I expected. I reckoned that there would be an initial burst of changes, particularly high-profile ‘anti-Biden’ ones and a certain amount of vindictive revenge against those that had crossed the Trump. There would be some larger and more serious changes, but most of it would be in the background and their consequences wouldn’t become clear until later. And a lot of straightforward grifting…

Well, the grifting is there, but the sheer number and variety of the changes, some of them of major importance to the US and the world, and some of just minor, if often unpleasant, importance, is almost too difficult to follow. Unfortunately, although there is some clear popular opposition, it doesn’t seem to be very organised and is not having any real effect, nor will it overcome until enough people stand together. Meanwhile a great many of the MAGA faithful continue to support what is going on and, I feel, they will continue to do so until it becomes blatantly obvious that they are themselves seriously affected. Whether that will be enough to slow Trump is another question: he may just do what he has done before and dump those who are no longer of use to him and reckon the the former MAGA faithful will just sulk.

Could Trump really be Goldfinger? They both play on their own golf courses and use ‘gamesmanship’. They both have a strange tan. They both seem to want to destroy the USA’s economy. They are both greedy, unscrupulous and immensely rich. They are both power crazy and have weird ideas. I am just a little bit more worried about Oddjob Vance.

Does Oddjob Vance eat cats? Maybe he doesn't entirely match the character! But that's not necessarily to be welcomed.

Seriously, it is alarming, I agree, just how far Trump has gone in a short time. He and the people at the top level who support him were much better prepared this time. The destructiveness of Trump's tariffs has serious potential consequences. When he first spoke in favour of tariffs (decades ago - I don't know precisely when) it might have made sense to take selective action to protect American production. It's a sign of his unimpressive intelligence combined with megalomania that he now introduces tariffs without appreciating how much the world has changed, and that what might have achieved a worthwhile objective then is having a very different impact today.

If tariffs were going to revive American industry it would take some time. The pain and disruption is much more immediate. He has not succeeded in bringing about peace in Ukraine or in Gaza. He must find these major blows to his ego difficult to handle. The following link to a YouTube item suggests what he may be planning next:

. (If that doesn't work, type Insurrection Act of 1807 into Youtube's search box and select the item by Richard Murphy.)

 

[Cloud Strife]

It is now three months since I started this thread: where are we?

It's a very good question.

I think we're in an interesting time, because Trump blinked when the markets stared him down, and we all know that he has zero chance against the ruthlessly optimised Chinese supply chains and business. He will get some small wins here and there, but I suspect there's more chance of Tesla imploding than a new American car manufacturer emerging. China is already taking out Tesla on European markets with reasonable, affordable cars, and Tesla has become a toxic brand in the US that is unaffordable for MAGA-types who want cheap trucks.

The Chinese are playing a waiting game as always, and I think they know fine well that MAGA-Republicanism is a short term thing that won't last in the long term. They've spent the best part of 50 years getting it all right, and that was with an economy that was controlled by a single party working to a common goal.

My gut feeling that the real long term consequences will be the slide into rural ruin in the US. Without federal programmes, many of these rural communities in places like Kentucky are in deep trouble, and their lack of social mobility will increase that even more. I wouldn't be shocked if we see the opiate crisis get even worse in many areas, because they will be starved of funds and they simply won't have the resources to do anything about it.

The real question will be what happens in 2-3 years time when there's simply no migrants to do the jobs. Regardless of where you stand politically, it's not a secret that Western capitalism depends heavily on migrant labour to do what the locals no longer want to do, and America is a very interesting test ground to see what happens when an economy heavily dependent on migrant labour suddenly cuts off the flow. I suspect that the policies will be quietly abandoned in terms of deporting many migrants, because economies such as Florida simply can't survive without them. We'll still see planeloads of prisoners deported for PR, but I don't think anyone will be going after Jose working in the orchards anymore.

 

[Magdalia]

Trump blinked when the markets stared him down, and we all know that he has zero chance against the ruthlessly optimised Chinese supply chains and business.

In the so called tariff war, China has the stronger hand. It also has more chips, both literally, with tech hardware, and metaphorically, with a pile of $750bn of US Treasury Bonds.

Internationally, the most significant development is US Treasury Bonds losing their status as a safe haven in financial crises. This is what made Trump blink, not what happened in the stock markets. There is a useful guide on the BBC News website here:

US bond markets: Why everyone is watching them closely

What is happening with US bonds, why Donald Trump cares and how ordinary Americans could be affected.

www.bbc.co.uk

Stock markets around the world have been relatively settled this week after a period of chaos, sparked by US trade tariffs.

But investors are still closely watching a part of the market which rarely moves dramatically - the US bond market.

Governments sell bonds - essentially an IOU - to raise money for public spending and in return they pay interest.

Recently, in an extremely rare move the rate the US government had to pay on its bonds rose sharply, while the price of bonds themselves fell.

The volatility suggests investors were losing confidence in the world's biggest economy.

You may think it's too esoteric to bother you, but here's why it matters and how it may change President Trump's mind on tariffs.

 

[jon0844]

OMG, the VP just killed the Pope!