Donald Trump Presidency: A Dawn of a New Age?

[Robbie 𝕏 @Robbie_NCFC]

At 5pm UK time Donald Trump will begin his second term as the 47th President of the United States.

Some British politicians have gone over to the States to witness his inauguration.

There will be one noticeable absentee from the event, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer.

Will Donald Trump's Presidency be the dawn of a new age of peace & prosperity or will his Presidency be a false dawn.

Suella Braverman is in Washington for the event and here are her thoughts.

 

[DangerousSausage]

4 hours ago, Robbie said:

Will Donald Trump's Presidency be the dawn of a new age of peace & prosperity

Short answer: no.

Starmer hasn't gone because he wasn't invited. Neither was the German chancellor or president, or indeed any other leading European politician apart from Georgia Meloni from Italy. In their place is a motley crew of brown nosers and cap doffers from far-right parties, including not one but two representatives from Germany's AfD, a party so extreme that even the French National Front refuses to work with them.

It's just as well in my opinion, the government shouldn't demean themselves by sucking up to him. We need to disentagle ourselves from the US in the same way as from Russia over the last few years.

Edit: It's no surprise to see Braverman attempting to milk him as well.

[Super_Danny_Allsopp]

1 hour ago, DangerousSausage said:

Short answer: no.

Starmer hasn't gone because he wasn't invited. Neither was the German chancellor or president, or indeed any other leading European politician apart from Georgia Meloni from Italy. In their place is a motley crew of brown nosers and cap doffers from far-right parties, including not one but two representatives from Germany's AfD, a party so extreme that even the French National Front refuses to work with them.

It's just as well in my opinion, the government shouldn't demean themselves by sucking up to him. We need to disentagle ourselves from the US in the same way as from Russia over the last few years.

Edit: It's no surprise to see Braverman attempting to milk him as well.

Very true about the AfD.

 

As for disentangling ourselves from the United states - I disagree. Who would we turn to? China? Certainly our current government will be more ideologically aligned with them - but I'm not comfortable with that. I know your answer will be Europe, but that's like mooring your boat to the titanic after it hit the iceberg.

[Piethagoram 𝕏 @piethagoram]

Suella dodging answers to questions. Well that is a surprise

Perhaps @Robbie would like to list all the names of British Prime Ministers that have attended previous inaugurations?

[Robbie 𝕏 @Robbie_NCFC]

@DangerousSausage

Why would the UK disentangle itself from the US. That would be absolute madness?

I would like to see the English speaking Countries have closer relations. 

The US, Canada, UK, Australia & New Zealand should work together more closely. As independent Countries yes, but a free trade deal between them & a closer military alliance would be beneficial to all five.

As for aligning ourselves closer to the EU instead of the US. I agree with @Super_Danny_Allsopp It would be like mooring your boat to the titanic after it hit the iceberg.

Good try at deflecting @Piethagoram but Donald Trump not inviting Starmer & most of the EU Countries leaders, is a complete humiliation for hapless Starmer & the rest of them.

[DangerousSausage]

@Super_Danny_Allsopp some interesting points there and the honest answer is that I don't know. China is obviously not trustworthy. The reflexive answer by many centrists is the EU, but looking at political developments there they're going to Trumpland very quickly. We're potentially heading into a world where the US and Europe are going down the road trodden by Russia and new allies will be needed.

As for disentangling @Robbie, Trump could very easily pass an executive order that causes serious harm to the UK simply because he's having a bad day or read something he didn't like on X. Nobody is able or willing to stop him. I'm not saying cease all trade and cooperation, but the less exposed we are to that man's whims the better. When Russia marched into Ukraine, Germany had a big job on replacing the gas supplies they'd previously received from Russia - the lights could very easily have gone off.

As for trade, the idea that the US favour us because of the "special relationship" is a fantasy. Trump sees the world in a transactional way and is fixated on reducing the US trade deficit. Previous administrations have tolerated it because they saw trade as a way to spread soft power, but not this one. Any trade deal struck with the US would be disadvantageous to us, otherwise they wouldn't bother with it. Do you like having food safety standards? And more military cooperation? Do you want to see British troops in Panama getting Trump his canal back? 

"More trade" sounds fine until you consider the details. Australia would want to export more meat to the UK, hurting British farmers that cannot operate on a level playing field - Australia has vast, fully automated farms the size of whole countries. There's a reason why tariffs exist. 

[Piethagoram 𝕏 @piethagoram]

14 hours ago, Robbie said:

@DangerousSausage

Why would the UK disentangle itself from the US. That would be absolute madness?

I would like to see the English speaking Countries have closer relations. 

The US, Canada, UK, Australia & New Zealand should work together more closely. As independent Countries yes, but a free trade deal between them & a closer military alliance would be beneficial to all five.

As for aligning ourselves closer to the EU instead of the US. I agree with @Super_Danny_Allsopp It would be like mooring your boat to the titanic after it hit the iceberg.

Good try at deflecting @Piethagoram but Donald Trump not inviting Starmer & most of the EU Countries leaders, is a complete humiliation for hapless Starmer & the rest of them.

"Deflecting"... the truth needs to be said, UK PM's and other world leaders are NOT generally invited to POTUS inaugurations.

 

Absolutely spot on @DangerousSausage by the way

[4everapie]

The chap that shot Trumps ear, was a terrible shot.

[Super_Danny_Allsopp]

19 hours ago, Piethagoram said:

"Deflecting"... the truth needs to be said, UK PM's and other world leaders are NOT generally invited to POTUS inaugurations.

 

Absolutely spot on @DangerousSausage by the way

This is genuinely what I hate about politics right now. It's so tribal both sides descend into stupidity in order to point score.

 

Trump has invited many world leaders. Whether this is a normal thing or not for US presidents is beside the point.

 

He's invited people you'd expect him to invite - Meloni, Milei, Orban. He's also invited leaders of China, India, Japan, central and Southern American countries. 

 

So who hasn't he invited? That should be of no surprise either - the new 'liberal' elite of Europe are shunned. Starmer, Scholz et al. In their place he invited populists / active opposition from each country, Boris, Farage, Weidel...

 

This should be of no surprise. It is quite obvious to anybody that Trump loves people who agree with him and praise him. The Labour party have actively opposed him and criticised him as loudly as possible - they were never going to be invited, despite people like chief IQ Lammy grovelling after previously calling Trump a nazi.

[Piethagoram 𝕏 @piethagoram]

 

[liampie]

i dont think donald trump will be any better or any worse than previous presidents in recent years. i just hope he puts effort in to do what he claimed about trying to end the russia and Ukraine war in a peaceful way. people said that joe biden was to old to run, i think its the same for trump.

if america wants to be great again, they need to stop fencing off different ethnicities and work together.

the saying "the american dream" is what built the us, being proud of their leading industries and being a safe place for people to start a new life. these days, it seems the us is more concerned about china, north korea than their own citizens wellbeing. 

[Robbie 𝕏 @Robbie_NCFC]

As much as people see a lot of change under a Trump presidency people need to bear in mind that the United States has a constitution, so Trump always has to do things with that in mind.

If a President strays from the Constitution the US Supreme Court will rain him in. He can't invade another Country unless Congress allows it.

Another important thing to consider is that Trump is effectively a one term President. He will probably only have less than 2 years to make a difference domestically.

The last two years of a US President with one term is usually described as lame duck.

I think that Trump will have more influence on the international stage, with his robust type diplomacy.

[DangerousSausage]

My last comment, as I don't really want to get dragged in. But I couldn't resist this one time.

5 hours ago, Robbie said:

the United States has a constitution, so Trump always has to do things with that in mind.

On his first day, Trump passed an executive order attempting to ban birthright citizenship, directly contradicting amendment 14 of the US constitution, hence lawsuits. Trump does what he wants to do; as ever, the constitution is cited only when it's convenient to him.

5 hours ago, Robbie said:

If a President strays from the Constitution the US Supreme Court will rain him in.

The Surpreme Court is dominated by judges loyal to Trump. This is the court that decided that a US president has legal immunity. Very convenient for a man with a, let us say, chequered past and allegedly (ahem) launched an attempted coup that cost several lives.

During his first term, there were old-fashioned Republicans around him who stood up to him and reined him in when necessary. He's had four years to weed those out and replace them with nutters who will do his bidding (the health secretary who wants to ban vaccines gets a special mention here).

5 hours ago, Robbie said:

Another important thing to consider is that Trump is effectively a one term President.

If he wants to, and is able to, govern for longer, he'll find a way. His friends in the judiciary will see to it. The Russian constitution also specified a maximum of two terms until it was no longer deemed connvenient.

It'll be interesting to see what happens next and I hope his bark is worse than his bite. I do think some of the most outlandish remarks were intended as a distraction. But I'm not so optimistic he can be stopped if push comes to shove.

[Robbie 𝕏 @Robbie_NCFC]

@DangerousSausage said

On his first day, Trump passed an executive order attempting to ban birthright citizenship, directly contradicting amendment 14 of the US constitution, hence lawsuits. Trump does what he wants to do; as ever, the constitution is cited only when it's convenient to him.

States rights come first. They can ignore Presidential executive orders if they go against the constitution. Already over a dozen states are already bringing his order to the supreme court. On constitutional matters Trumps executive orders will be thrown out by the Supreme Court. 

DS said. During his first term, there were old-fashioned Republicans around him who stood up to him and reined him in when necessary. He's had four years to weed those out and replace them with nutters who will do his bidding (the health secretary who wants to ban vaccines gets a special mention here).

DS said. If he wants to, and is able to, govern for longer, he'll find a way. His friends in the judiciary will see to it. The Russian constitution also specified a maximum of two terms until it was no longer deemed convenient.

Russia & the US are entirely different. To increase term limits it would need a two thirds majority in Congress to amend the constitution & the Dems will never agree to it. Even if they did, each State would have to ratify it by two thirds majority of States, so it won't happen.

Each of Trump's picks for his Cabinet have to be approved by Congress. Some of his picks may be rejected such as Musk.

Unlike the UK, the US has checks & balances. Congress & the Senate ensure that the President cannot act as a King. So he could never extend his term by force.. He could try, but all the individual States would oppose him. They have their individual national guards who are loyal to their state.

Trump has two years before he may lose the Senate & House of Representatives to the Dems after the mid term elections, so by then he'll be a lame duck.