The Trump Presidency...

In other breaking news Trump is now getting into it with Iran. The counter threat via tweet has been delivered. If this keeps up Russia won’t even be a memory by Friday. It’s like the Iranians just handed the man a get out of jail free card.
 
In other breaking news Trump is now getting into it with Iran. The counter threat via tweet has been delivered. If this keeps up Russia won’t even be a memory by Friday. It’s like the Iranians just handed the man a get out of jail free card.
Yes, I think the next drama will quickly supplant Helsinki.
 
In other breaking news Trump is now getting into it with Iran. The counter threat via tweet has been delivered. If this keeps up Russia won’t even be a memory by Friday. It’s like the Iranians just handed the man a get out of jail free card.
And there we can really see a huge shift in geopolitics - coming off the back of the Helsinki conference, this has to indicate that the US and Russia have done a deal on working with MBS to reign in Iran's influence in the region
 
Not sure I quite agree with that.

Certainly, the Labour Party is making its Great Leap Leftwards at a rate of knots, but the Conservative leadership is actually rather "Conservative", if not a reactionary throwback to a 19th century model.

PMTM considers herself to be a Disraeli style One Nation Tory. Their paternalistic social reforms could be confused with "social democracy", but the motives are different.

The Tories took their Great Leap Rightwards under Thatcher, and you could argue that it has taken this long to rock the party back to a more Centrist position.

There is a more Right Wing aspect to Tory politics that is represented by the nomadic faction that views Europe as their nemesis.

These were the faction that spawned UKIP, (or rather hijacked it, as it was originally a far more Liberal Left party under Alan Sked, before Farage hijacked it ), but rallied back to the Tories after the referendum, (causing UKIP to implode), and who are now migrating back to UKIP because they don't like the Exit on offer.

It is said that "Hard cases make bad law", so you could say that "Hard issues make bad policies".
Circumstances often force political parties to act against their normal nature.

For instance, Roosevelt's New Deal saw America more centrally planned and Federally run that you would ever have expected an American party to consider.

Trump's "Republican Party" is absolutely nothing like one, say, Ronald Reagan or even George Bush snr. would have recognised.
In his case, it is more like "Bad policies make hard issues".
The great leap leftwards is going to be the undoing of Labour, just like last time (the longest suicide note..etc), my issue with the conservatives is that there appears to be little desire to re-invigorate the free-market economy by taking a strong line on Brexit. We are leaving and must not be tied to a bloc whose share of the world economy is shrinking and will shrink further as the world economy grows and alternative customers with lower tariffs than the EU become viable.
 
The Tories took their Great Leap Rightwards under Thatcher, and you could argue that it has taken this long to rock the party back to a more Centrist position.
I agree if you are talking about social policy in isolation, but what Labour has always shut it's mind to, and the tories are increasingly coy about, is the need for robust, free-market capitalism to pay for their largesse.
The only sure way to hammer this point home is to cap gov't spending by law. Borrowing money is easy when someone else has to pay it back.
 
I agree if you are talking about social policy in isolation, but what Labour has always shut it's mind to, and the tories are increasingly coy about, is the need for robust, free-market capitalism to pay for their largesse.
The only sure way to hammer this point home is to cap gov't spending by law. Borrowing money is easy when someone else has to pay it back.
Free Trade?
You will be wanting to reform the Corn Laws next, and go back on the Gold Standard.

These are ancient issues, and point to the fact that nothing is ever new under the sun.
The problem is that they are not the same thing.

1)The EU was a very successful Free Trade zone.

We have chosen to leave it. This does not seem to be compatible with a desire for more free trade.

What you are seeing, especially under Trump, is a return to Protectionism, the exact opposite of Free Trade.

2) Government debt is a much more interesting problem.
It was the ability to raise money and spend it far in excess of what the economy generated that allowed the British to beat Napoleon, and spend the Nazis and Communists into the ground.

It is interesting that you consider the incredibly retrograde move of limiting Government spending to government income a wise one.

It smacks of the medieval period, where the "king must live of his own" and all day to day expenditure came from the Royal budget, and additional taxes had to be voted for wars.
This worked so badly that after the Civil War caused by King Charles trying to do exactly this, it was quietly binned in 1698 when the Civil List was brought in.

Capping expenditure by law was tried most recently in the States by the Tea Party Republicans Budget Control Act 2011.
It failed. Badly. The reason? Because it limits the Government's power to react to events, and its ability to reward it's voters.

It appears that the dominant political approach at the moment is to apply narrow and parochial microeconomic solutions to macroeconomic problems.
 
In other breaking news Trump is now getting into it with Iran. The counter threat via tweet has been delivered. If this keeps up Russia won’t even be a memory by Friday. It’s like the Iranians just handed the man a get out of jail free card.
No. It is like he has hysterically over reacted to a routine piece of Iranian windbaggery ("Death to the Great Satan", yawn...)
in order to distract people from his treasonous junket in Helsinki.
 

Pob02

LE
Book Reviewer
Ah yes, that fine institution with which everyone was satisfied with right up until "but Trump", when it became broken, corrupt, out of date and unacceptable.

That Electoral College?
Except that your above post is inaccurate. There has certainly been attempts to amend/ remove this system before.

Here you go, have some education: 2016 Article about Electoral College reform
 
Ah yes, that fine institution with which everyone was satisfied with right up until "but Trump", when it became broken, corrupt, out of date and unacceptable.

That Electoral College?
The Electoral College which most Americans have been dissatisfied with in the post war era but a few became more satisfied with when it punished a party which had had the temerity to sully the Oval Office with a blackamoor who wasn't just serving the coffee.

That Electoral College.
 
Free Trade?
You will be wanting to reform the Corn Laws next, and go back on the Gold Standard.

These are ancient issues, and point to the fact that nothing is ever new under the sun.
The problem is that they are not the same thing.

1)The EU was a very successful Free Trade zone.

We have chosen to leave it. This does not seem to be compatible with a desire for more free trade.

What you are seeing, especially under Trump, is a return to Protectionism, the exact opposite of Free Trade.

2) Government debt is a much more interesting problem.
It was the ability to raise money and spend it far in excess of what the economy generated that allowed the British to beat Napoleon, and spend the Nazis and Communists into the ground.

It is interesting that you consider the incredibly retrograde move of limiting Government spending to government income a wise one.

It smacks of the medieval period, where the "king must live of his own" and all day to day expenditure came from the Royal budget, and additional taxes had to be voted for wars.
This worked so badly that after the Civil War caused by King Charles trying to do exactly this, it was quietly binned in 1698 when the Civil List was brought in.

Capping expenditure by law was tried most recently in the States by the Tea Party Republicans Budget Control Act 2011.
It failed. Badly. The reason? Because it limits the Government's power to react to events, and its ability to reward it's voters.

It appears that the dominant political approach at the moment is to apply narrow and parochial microeconomic solutions to macroeconomic problems.
1. If this is true then why do we have a deficit with the EU, and a surplus with non-EU trade. Because it is not a free-trade area in services. In goods it suits Germany very well indeed.
2. Thanks for the history lesson, most of which I was aware of. I am not, of course, advocating a return to feudalism or an end to borrowing, merely a cap on GDP% available to Government as an incentive to prioritise growth over spending.
 
Last edited:
The Electoral College which most Americans have been dissatisfied with in the post war era but a few became more satisfied with when it punished a party which had had the temerity to sully the Oval Office with a blackamoor who wasn't just serving the coffee.

That Electoral College.
I thought you were above the "reductio ad blackamoor" argument.
 
1. If this is true then why do we have a deficit with the EU, and a surplus with non-EU trade.
Sigh. Because that is how trade works.
That is exactly the kind of zero sum thinking Trump does. "I win. You lose".

Here is a hint. You don't always run at a profit. If you try and rig the market through protectionism so that you always win, other people don't trade with you.

I suspect we run at a surplus in non EU trade because we import a lot of basics, but a lot of other stuff passes through us on its way to Europe.

Also our services sector is huge. We do a lot of business in the invisibles financial area. We aren't a global manufacturing colossus.
We are middlemen and Savile Row bespoke products.
 
In other news the economy is the most important mid term issue, and Trumps approval rating ticked up to 45 percent. Helinski what.....????

He screwed up Russia badly by all accounts, but the economy is his saving grace. Domestic issues first foreigners last.


NBC/WSJ poll: Public gives Trump thumbs down on Russia, thumbs up on economy

The media only helps the man.
As long as the economy chugs along good, people have jobs and are getting paid, other non-U.S. affairs don't really matter to your average Joe on the street. Most of the hand wringing is done by what your average person calls "the elite."
 
The Republicans can nominate anyone and for whatever reason, they chose Trump as their candidate. Hillary was the Antichrist for many - career politico who had an unlikeable personality. The Dems should’ve known better, but they misjudged the voter base and assumed Trump wouldn’t gain traction.

Nothing to do with the Dems, the fault lies squarely with those who voted for him, they can try and justify it all they want, the fact remains they voted for that moron.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top