President Trump & the USA

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

Re. John Cleese, he did go on to clarify what he meant (3 tweets embedded below, may need time to load):

I think there's enough in there for people of all political persuasions to find something they agree/disagree with.  For instance I disagree that knife crime is some non-English phenomenon.   It's shot up recently as a result of growing wealth inequality and diminished police budgets but using knives is a very English solution to the problem of arming oneself with something concealable (so cricket bats are out).  imo.

Cucumber sandwiches?

 

If someone threatened me with a cucumber sandwich I'd give them everything, vile things!

[Gamble92]

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Associating cream teas and cricket with the idea of 'Englishness' isn't taboo. It's not racist/offensive to associate baguettes and pétanque with French culture, nor is there a problem with linking Ramen and Sumo Wrestling to the Japanese one; Curry and Cricket (again) for Indian culture; Hot Dogs and Baseball for the USA; etc. ad infinitum.  Stereotypes exist for a reason and they're not intrinsically bigoted if they're factual.  Citing them in pejorative terms, sure; using them to condescend, absolutely; rejecting the idea that a subject can do or think outside of these stereotypes, absolutely.  None of which is what's happened here, I don't think.

Saying that about English people isnt offensive. Mockingly suggesting thats the only type of people that could possibly be disillusioned with how London is now is what extinguishes debate. 

 

On the one extreme you have the far left who shut down any type of person who questions any issues like this by claiming the person is racist, then you allow far right figures like Farage to convince the ordinary, middle grounded people to vote for him because he just happens to say a few things that no politician has dared say for decades. 

 

It is racist to suggest London is not English because it isn't predominantly white. But where the far left go wrong is not even acknowledge that there are genuine, ordinary people who have fears about the way their city has changed to such a degree in such a short space of time. That isn't racism, thats genuinely having concerns about things like jobs, school places and just simply culture and general living standards. 

[Otis]

Fist bumping the Queen...

 

[MC Prussian]

Not sure whether I should consider Sadiq Khan to be a mayor or an activist. Or both.

[Collymore]

13 minutes ago, MC Prussian said:

Not sure whether I should consider Sadiq Khan to be a mayor or an activist. Or both.

Believing women are equal shouldn't label you a feminist. 

 

[Carl the Llama]

Can someone explain why Corbyn's going to attend the Trump protest tomorrow?  He's one of a tiny handful of people who actually had the opportunity to speak their mind to Trump in person but he declined that and now he's going to stand outside in solidarity with... a bunch of people who are only outside because they can't speak to Trump in person.

 

If he wants to give a silent protest by not meeting Trump that's one thing, hypocritical given his past, but an understandable move, if not somewhat childish for someone who hopes to be PM. But if he's then going to join a protest as though he has some message to deliver when he had the chance to give it in person?

 

Imbecile.

[Lionator]

2 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said:

Can someone explain why Corbyn's going to attend the Trump protest tomorrow?  He's one of a tiny handful of people who actually had the opportunity to speak their mind to Trump in person but he declined that and now he's going to stand outside in solidarity with... a bunch of people who are only outside because they can't speak to Trump in person.

 

If he wants to give a silent protest by not meeting Trump that's one thing, hypocritical given his past, but an understandable move, if not somewhat childish for someone who hopes to be PM. But if he's then going to join a protest as though he has some message to deliver when he had the chance to give it in person?

 

Imbecile.

I hate the term virtue signalling but all of this outrage over Trump is daft when you consider the likes of King Abdullah and Xi Jinping had smooth running state visits, who actually head massively oppressive states. 

 

We all know that he's a piece of poo but he isn't the problem, the whole American system is something that we should be challenging more yet the likes of Khan support the likes of Hilary and will support Biden as if they're champions of the free world, when they're realistically highly capitalist driven, war mongers who are the exact same as Trump, just with slightly more liberal views (albeit still way more conservative than most of the UK conservative party).

[Grebfromgrebland]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

I hate the term virtue signalling but all of this outrage over Trump is daft when you consider the likes of King Abdullah and Xi Jinping had smooth running state visits, who actually head massively oppressive states. 

 

We all know that he's a piece of poo but he isn't the problem, the whole American system is something that we should be challenging more yet the likes of Khan support the likes of Hilary and will support Biden as if they're champions of the free world, when they're realistically highly capitalist driven, war mongers who are the exact same as Trump, just with slightly more liberal views (albeit still way more conservative than most of the UK conservative party).

I think the one of the differences is that normally we want something from them such as weapons sales or some political favour. This time they (Trump) wants something from us. Buy the NHS, reduce food standards, accept lower animal welfare, destroy our own industries while are the same time not getting any favours for UK businesses to trade in the US.

 

It's all very one sided. Plus he's interfering with our culture and politics by demonising Muslims, spreading hate, promoting racist and fascists, trying to choose the next prime minister and that's just a few things he's done.

 

He was also awful after the London bridge terrorist attack.

[leicsmac]

4 hours ago, Lionator said:

I hate the term virtue signalling but all of this outrage over Trump is daft when you consider the likes of King Abdullah and Xi Jinping had smooth running state visits, who actually head massively oppressive states. 

 

We all know that he's a piece of poo but he isn't the problem, the whole American system is something that we should be challenging more yet the likes of Khan support the likes of Hilary and will support Biden as if they're champions of the free world, when they're realistically highly capitalist driven, war mongers who are the exact same as Trump, just with slightly more liberal views (albeit still way more conservative than most of the UK conservative party).

It's a fair point - remember Obama's drones? Ditto there should have been more going on when the Saudi and Chinese delegations arrived as they are both more awful.

 

I guess people are clinging onto the idea that logically a level 5 shitheel is better than a level 6 shitheel (the recent brouhaha over abortion rights being just one example of that) and perhaps things can progress from there, though given that the US went from Obama to Trump (and more pertinently, those around him) I'm not sure the path of progress is all that linear in that way, sadly.

[Jattdogg]

3 hours ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

I think the one of the differences is that normally we want something from them such as weapons sales or some political favour. This time they (Trump) wants something from us. Buy the NHS, reduce food standards, accept lower animal welfare, destroy our own industries while are the same time not getting any favours for UK businesses to trade in the US.

 

It's all very one sided. Plus he's interfering with our culture and politics by demonising Muslims, spreading hate, promoting racist and fascists, trying to choose the next prime minister and that's just a few things he's done.

 

He was also awful after the London bridge terrorist attack.

Not to mention being a shitty neighbour.

American politics is rotten. But so are those in canada and britain etc to some degree. Nobody is truly for the people but rather their pockets. Just some tossers are more prominent.

 

That Duterte fella is something else

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/1327345001&ved=2ahUKEwiim8H83s7iAhWqmeAKHVqVDS0QiJQBMAF6BAgHEAg&usg=AOvVaw11GfDRfcxEQh4aVKxls0Ig&ampcf=1

 

 

[leicsmac]

Duterte and Bolsanaro are about tied for the title of biggest insecure narcissist in charge of a country out there, I reckon. But there's plenty of competition.

[Jattdogg]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Duterte and Bolsanaro are about tied for the title of biggest insecure narcissist in charge of a country out there, I reckon. But there's plenty of competition.

Lol, very much this.

[Guest MattP]

 

8 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Can someone explain why Corbyn's going to attend the Trump protest tomorrow?  He's one of a tiny handful of people who actually had the opportunity to speak their mind to Trump in person but he declined that and now he's going to stand outside in solidarity with... a bunch of people who are only outside because they can't speak to Trump in person.

 

If he wants to give a silent protest by not meeting Trump that's one thing, hypocritical given his past, but an understandable move, if not somewhat childish for someone who hopes to be PM. But if he's then going to join a protest as though he has some message to deliver when he had the chance to give it in person?

 

Imbecile.

Because that's what he is - a protestor masquerading as a politician.

 

The bloke is an absolute disgrace tbh, turns up for Xi, meets any terrorist group or antisemite going but the President of the US flying over for D-Day commemorations is a no-go just so he can virtue signal. 

 

The sympathy from the British media for Sadiq Khan is disturbing as well - barely any of them mentioned he started all this off by calling Trump a fascist. 

[Nick]

A state visit is about pomp and ceremony not politics or trade deals to any real extent. I think it’s right that people should stand up to Trump if this is their way to do it then I’m not sure it has the right impact but virtue signalling is a lovely line from Hunt but better than the reflective truth of the government who can get down on their knees to suck a guy off who’s meddling in British politics and has abhorrent and opposing views on immigration, environment, gun control, women, agriculture standards.... It’s pretty hypocritical. It’s also not like it’s a state visit to change attitudes like having a foreign dignitary over from a country that’s always had a regime of awful values.

 

We should expect more of America and demand more and any move in that direction without pandering to them because we’ve responded so well to their advice regarding screwing up Brexit in order to be in no other position than to leave with no deal and be subservient to any shite Trump offers as a trade deal is better than just pretending Trumps okay and banging the same old drum about Jeremy Corbyn. Let’s be honest where’s the ‘virtue’ - signalling or otherwise in the current government?

 

 

[Buce]

 

I think the reason Trump attracts such opprobrium is that - above and beyond politics - he is such a dislikable person. There are certain expectations of a statesman - particularly the so-called 'leader of the free world' - not least of which is dignity, something that Trump is completely devoid of. His predilection for conducting petty spats via Twitter is embarrassing and demeaning to his office and more akin to what you'd expect from one of Jeremy Kyle's guests. He is a racist, a liar and a self-confessed sex-offender and is capricious and unintelligent with little or no understanding of foreign affairs, a uniquely dangerous combination.

 

He is a vile piece of shit and I cannot think of a single politician that I have disliked so much - and I lived through the Thatcher years.

[Alf Bentley]

10 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Can someone explain why Corbyn's going to attend the Trump protest tomorrow?  He's one of a tiny handful of people who actually had the opportunity to speak their mind to Trump in person but he declined that and now he's going to stand outside in solidarity with... a bunch of people who are only outside because they can't speak to Trump in person.

 

If he wants to give a silent protest by not meeting Trump that's one thing, hypocritical given his past, but an understandable move, if not somewhat childish for someone who hopes to be PM. But if he's then going to join a protest as though he has some message to deliver when he had the chance to give it in person?

 

Imbecile.

 

Some on the Hard Left are very ideologically-driven. Some of Corbyn's advisers probably fall into this category, but not Jezza himself, I think.

 

I see 2 more common characteristics among people on the Hard Left, including Corbyn:

- A world view without nuance, divided into goodies & baddies, oppressed & oppressors: Palestine v. Israel, Irish republicans v. unionists etc.

- A desire to feel that they are on the side of righteousness / the oppressed, so as to feel good about themselves....more old-style virtue self-signalling, rather than virtue-signalling in the modern sense

 

That would be Corbyn's instinct in deciding to join the protest, I suspect. I agree that he should have attended the Trump event and expressed his views directly. Given the nature of the event, he could probably only have had a quick word - and it would have been counter-productive to cause a scene. But he could have called a press conference afterwards to explain what he'd said and done - respectfully expressed disapproval of Trump's policies, while respecting the USA as a nation and the Presidency as its supreme democratic representative. To be fair to May, I recall that she expressed polite disagreement with something Trump said when they last met, didn't she?

 

There may have been a bit of modern virtue-signalling in Corbyn's decision, too. There might also be an element of strategic advice from the goons around him (advisers, not politicians). They know that his Brexit stance has alienated a lot of the naive youth (& non-youth) who flocked to him in 2017 - the "Oooh! Jeremy Corbyn!" crew. Being seen in public, protesting against Trump, might win back some of them - people who share his goodie/baddie world view & self-righteousness.

[Countryfox]

59 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

I think the reason Trump attracts such opprobrium is that - above and beyond politics - he is such a dislikable person. There are certain expectations of a statesman - particularly the so-called 'leader of the free world' - not least of which is dignity, something that Trump is completely devoid of. His predilection for conducting petty spats via Twitter is embarrassing and demeaning to his office and more akin to what you'd expect from one of Jeremy Kyle's guests. He is a racist, a liar and a self-confessed sex-offender and is capricious and unintelligent with little or no understanding of foreign affairs, a uniquely dangerous combination.

 

He is a vile piece of shit and I cannot think of a single politician that I have disliked so much - and I lived through the Thatcher years.

 

Opprobrium ! ...   great word Bucey ...   Peaky would be proud of you.   

 

I agree with everything you say in your main paragraph and think it was very eloquently put ...   sadly the last paragraph let’s you down a bit ..   imo.   

[Alf Bentley]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

 

The sympathy from the British media for Sadiq Khan is disturbing as well - barely any of them mentioned he started all this off by calling Trump a fascist. 

 

Unless Sadiq Khan wrote more than one article, he did NOT call Trump a fascist. Here's the article: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/01/donald-trump-state-visit-red-carpet-unbritish

 

That's a very good article, in which Khan justifies his views in detail. He links Trump to Orban, LePen, Salvini & co as the "Far Right" - but cites Trump's policies & actions to justify doing so.

As far as I can see, he uses the word "fascist" once, alluding to those politicians, including Trump, using "the same divisive tropes of the fascists of the 20th century"......er, "Breaking Point" poster? "Mexican immigrants are criminals & rapists" (I paraphrase)? Separation of immigrant children from their parents? Blanket travel bans on half a dozen predominantly Muslim countries?

 

It's also disingenuous to suggest that Khan "started all this off". His criticism of the visit probably triggered Trump's tweet, but there's a longer history: 

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-06-03/how-long-has-the-feud-between-donald-trump-and-sadiq-khan-been-running/

 

- 2016: Trump called for a blanket ban on Muslim immigration into the USA. Khan disagreed. Trump subsequently said that he'd make an exception for him & Khan said he didn't want to be an exception.

- 2017: In the immediate wake of the London Bridge terrorist attacks, Trump openly disagreed with Khan, implying that the London public should be alarmed

- 2018: After the terror attacks and after Khan had declined to ban the Trump blimp (a free speech issue), Trump publicly criticised him for doing a terrible job and a bad job on crime....

[MC Prussian]

1 hour ago, Buce said:

 

I think the reason Trump attracts such opprobrium is that - above and beyond politics - he is such a dislikable person. There are certain expectations of a statesman - particularly the so-called 'leader of the free world' - not least of which is dignity, something that Trump is completely devoid of. His predilection for conducting petty spats via Twitter is embarrassing and demeaning to his office and more akin to what you'd expect from one of Jeremy Kyle's guests. He is a racist, a liar and a self-confessed sex-offender and is capricious and unintelligent with little or no understanding of foreign affairs, a uniquely dangerous combination.

 

He is a vile piece of shit and I cannot think of a single politician that I have disliked so much - and I lived through the Thatcher years.

The foreign affairs bit may be true, but he's got plenty of advisors to help him out there.

 

Don't really get your point regarding him being a "liar" - all politicians are to one extent or another, Trump is no different and shouldn't be vilified for that. It's utterly hypocritical. Hillary Clinton's just as bad, if not worse in that department.

We could equally get into the argument of what the media darling Barack Obama for instance did wrong and how bad a president he was, but that's beyond this thread by now.

 

See, I agree that you can dislike Trump as a person. The problem is is that nowadays, his opponents (and I count you as part of the flock) love to criticize him based on his character and get their knickers in a twist over Twitter, when he ought to be judged by his actions. There's some big divide there.

I also agree that boasting about his sexual preferences is a bit lame and ostentatious, yet I'd also like to know why so many women fall for that. There's guilt on both sides.

 

Explain the "racist" bit - citing false statistics or falsely accusing a different set of people of a crime don't automatically make you racist, mainly ignorant or stupid. There's borderline racism there, but he has yet to be found guilty of such charges. What remains is a vast amount of accusations, nothing more, nothing less.

 

I find the amount of hate he gets from a certain group of people plain bizarre. Aiming at the person instead of the politics is just as low as Trump can be at times.

 

[David Guiza]

1 hour ago, MC Prussian said:

The foreign affairs bit may be true, but he's got plenty of advisors to help him out there.

 

Don't really get your point regarding him being a "liar" - all politicians are to one extent or another, Trump is no different and shouldn't be vilified for that. It's utterly hypocritical. Hillary Clinton's just as bad, if not worse in that department.

We could equally get into the argument of what the media darling Barack Obama for instance did wrong and how bad a president he was, but that's beyond this thread by now.

 

See, I agree that you can dislike Trump as a person. The problem is is that nowadays, his opponents (and I count you as part of the flock) love to criticize him based on his character and get their knickers in a twist over Twitter, when he ought to be judged by his actions. There's some big divide there.

I also agree that boasting about his sexual preferences is a bit lame and ostentatious, yet I'd also like to know why so many women fall for that. There's guilt on both sides.

 

Explain the "racist" bit - citing false statistics or falsely accusing a different set of people of a crime don't automatically make you racist, mainly ignorant or stupid. There's borderline racism there, but he has yet to be found guilty of such charges. What remains is a vast amount of accusations, nothing more, nothing less.

 

I find the amount of hate he gets from a certain group of people plain bizarre. Aiming at the person instead of the politics is just as low as Trump can be at times.

 

My biggest problem with him is his attack on experts and the press, it's hugely damaging. He's somehow convinced large sectors of people, both in the US and beyond, that experts can't be trusted and shouldn't be listened to. People who spend their entire working lives dedicated to a particular field of work are tossed aside by the likes of Fat Bob down the pub who knows better because he watched a 2 minute YouTube video about it a couple of years ago. Trump has contributed massively to that ignorance and almost hatred of intellect, it's worrying. 

 

I also don't get the 'yeah but Obama, yeah but Hillary' boll*cks either. The whataboutism in politics and beyond doesn't solve anything. it's part of the reason that the two leading parties in this country are in such a mess, because they're so concerned with being slightly less sh*t than the other that they've not realised they're being bypassed. Similar to Derby and Forest in some respects fighting over the last chip whilst we dine out every night. Let's not pretend that Obama wasn't hated and ridiculed by many too, particularly in the mainstream press, it's only social media where he's lauded more because he's 'cool' and Trump looks like a pregnant frog and that's the vapid world that we live in. 

 

As for Trump's visit, I think Jo Swinson summed it up best for me when talking on 5Live the other day. She was asked whether she would shake his hand were she to be given the leadership position etc in future and she confirmed that she would, but that there is a world of difference between shaking hands, being respectful and talking business, and rolling out the red carpet and treating him like a Prince. 

 

 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

14 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

My biggest problem with him is his attack on experts and the press, it's hugely damaging. He's somehow convinced large sectors of people, both in the US and beyond, that experts can't be trusted and shouldn't be listened to. People who spend their entire working lives dedicated to a particular field of work are tossed aside by the likes of Fat Bob down the pub who knows better because he watched a 2 minute YouTube video about it a couple of years ago. Trump has contributed massively to that ignorance and almost hatred of intellect, it's worrying. 

 

I also don't get the 'yeah but Obama, yeah but Hillary' boll*cks either. The whataboutism in politics and beyond doesn't solve anything. it's part of the reason that the two leading parties in this country are in such a mess, because they're so concerned with being slightly less sh*t than the other that they've not realised they're being bypassed. Similar to Derby and Forest in some respects fighting over the last chip whilst we dine out every night. Let's not pretend that Obama wasn't hated and ridiculed by many too, particularly in the mainstream press, it's only social media where he's lauded more because he's 'cool' and Trump looks like a pregnant frog and that's the vapid world that we live in. 

 

As for Trump's visit, I think Jo Swinson summed it up best for me when talking on 5Live the other day. She was asked whether she would shake his hand were she to be given the leadership position etc in future and she confirmed that she would, but that there is a world of difference between shaking hands, being respectful and talking business, and rolling out the red carpet and treating him like a Prince. 

 

 

Is there? What difference?

 

So we should be civil but not smile at him? No small talk? No pleasantries because he isnt PC?

 

Who is treating him like a prince? 

He is the president of the US, voted in by the citizens. He is their representative and in a way how we treat him is how we treat them

[Foxin_Mad]

I still find it baffling that the leader of the opposition will meet terrorists, despot dictators of South American Socialist hell holes, Russians, Chinese and Iranian governments.

 

He wont however speak directly to the leader of the most powerful nation on earth. Bizarre. 

[David Guiza]

Just now, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said:

Is there? What difference?

 

So we should be civil but not smile at him? No small talk? No pleasantries because he isnt PC?

 

Who is treating him like a prince? 

He is the president of the US, voted in by the citizens. He is their representative and in a way how we treat him is how we treat them

Yes. I would like to think that there is perhaps a couple of subtle differences between a 41 gun salute and a banquet with the Queen in one of the most grand buildings on Earth and respectful talks with those who matter when it comes to trade negotiations etc. Surely middle ground can found betwixt a Travelodge on the M1 and Buckingham Palace? I didn't realise that there were only two options we could offer when hosting in this country, either package a whereby you do not smile or offer small talk and package b where as above. 

 

Ultimately I suppose It just boils down to another archaic ritual we, as a nation, can't let go of but that's another topic for another day.

 

As for your PC argument, please don't. Let's not pretend that the only reason many people don't like Trump is because he's not PC. He's not your Nan making an uncomfortable joke about the local Indian. 

 

To be honest I hate the whole 'PC' thing. It's just a lazy argument to throw at anybody who disagrees with somebody/something to belittle them. 

 

2 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

I still find it baffling that the leader of the opposition will meet terrorists, despot dictators of South American Socialist hell holes, Russians, Chinese and Iranian governments.

 

He wont however speak directly to the leader of the most powerful nation on earth. Bizarre. 

We know, you've said it word for word in another thread too. I don't think anybody beyond the people marching with him think he's correct. You have a far better chance of challenging him in person than you do with a homemade placard. 

 

[AlloverthefloorYesNdidi]

2 minutes ago, David Guiza said:

Yes. I would like to think that there is perhaps a couple of subtle differences between a 41 gun salute and a banquet with the Queen in one of the most grand buildings on Earth and respectful talks with those who matter when it comes to trade negotiations etc. Surely middle ground can found betwixt a Travelodge on the M1 and Buckingham Palace? I didn't realise that there were only two options we could offer when hosting in this country, either package a whereby you do not smile or offer small talk and package b where as above. 

 

Ultimately I suppose It just boils down to another archaic ritual we, as a nation, can't let go of but that's another topic for another day.

 

As for your PC argument, please don't. Let's not pretend that the only reason many people don't like Trump is because he's not PC. He's not your Nan making an uncomfortable joke about the local Indian. 

 

To be honest I hate the whole 'PC' thing. It's just a lazy argument to throw at anybody who disagrees with somebody/something to belittle them. 

 

We know, you've said it word for word in another thread too. I don't think anybody beyond the people marching with him think he's correct. You have a far better chance of challenging him in person than you do with a homemade placard. 

 

So you would be happy with a nice hotel and a nice meal but to forgo certain traditions because you dont like Trump?

Dont really see it. Are people really bothered by Trump getting that reception? Does it matter? Should we disrupt the relationship between the 2 countries because of political feelings?

 

Mayor of London calling Trump a nazi is much weirder than giving Trump a good reception

 

A lot of people dislike Trump based on very little. Youtube has plenty of clips of protestors who when questioned cant give a half reasonable answer as to why they hate him. So yes, its mostly PC bollocks. Even people on here who are fairly clued up politically fail to make a legitimate case against him when compared to other presidents

 

Trump is well supported in the US so disagreements about his policies are disagreememts with large portions of the American public. So to dismiss him on that basis is to dismiss them

 

 

[Foxin_Mad]

Its more the double standards that annoys me. 

 

If you don't meet the US President because of his views and are not prepared to have a grown up conversation with him then likewise you should not be meeting terrorists, despot dictators and Russian/Chinese/Iranian governments who treat their citizens terribly and have no standards on human rights/equality. 

 

Pretty much every country has/does make some questionable decisions and will continue to do so. 

 

You can not have it all ways.