President Trump 2.0

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Maybe it suggests they would have won the popular vote by a landside if Don Old wasn't the candidate, the fact they didn't probably means he's Done this time too

Don Old

[tweetiepooh]

I wonder what British politics would look like if we had the land mass of the US with highly populated and "wealthy" coastal areas and an hinterland that is more agricultural, sparsely populated and much "wilder" than anything in the UK. (Given other factors remain similar - monarchy, historic development etc.)
What I never get in US politics is the cost of running. Imagine if they reduced the cost to a smallish deposit, limited spending on TV advertising and so on and also limited campaigning and collecting funds to a brief election period.

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

I wonder what British politics would look like if we had the land mass of the US with highly populated and "wealthy" coastal areas and an hinterland that is more agricultural, sparsely populated and much "wilder" than anything in the UK. (Given other factors remain similar - monarchy, historic development etc.)
What I never get in US politics is the cost of running. Imagine if they reduced the cost to a smallish deposit, limited spending on TV advertising and so on and also limited campaigning and collecting funds to a brief election period.

The Electoral College also distorts things as does having each state - irrespective of size - return two senators. American politics would also look very different if California didn't have the same representation as North Dakota.

How would the UK look under an equivalent system? It would reduce London's influence.

The other thing is we're too small to support multiple media ecosystems, at least offline, so we can't be too alienated from each other. Most British people are frequently exposed to each other and have common experiences and cultural reference points. As much as we like to mock each other and play up differences most of us aren't so dissimilar in terms of culture that we can't relate to each other and that reduces the ability for too much division.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...755f474d967afa

The Republican presidential nominee addressed the Economic Club of New York on Thursday, and promised to slash “trillions” in federal spending, gut regulations, increase tariffs on imports and hire billionaire Elon Musk to identify where to make “drastic” cuts across the government.

Then he was asked the following question.“If you win in November, can you commit to prioritizing legislation to make childcare affordable, and if so, what specific piece of legislation would you advance?”

Trump responded: “Well, I would do that, and we’re sitting down, and I was, somebody, we had Senator Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that, because, look, child care is child care is. It’s, couldn’t, you know, there’s something, you have to have it. In this country you have to have it.”

He went on: “But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to — but they’ll get used to it very quickly – and it’s not gonna stop them from doing business with us, but they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care, that it’s going to take care.

“We’re gonna have — I, I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country, because I have to stay with child care. I want to stay with child care, but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just, that I just told you about.

“We’re gonna be taking in trillions of dollars, and as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s relatively speaking not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we’ll be taking in. We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people, and then we’ll worry about the rest of the world. Let’s help other people. But we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It’s about Make America Great Again. We have to do it because right now we’re a failing nation, so we’ll take care of it.”

Where is our resident translator trumpslator ?

[Pierre]

CNN call out Kamala Harris for using Trump’s border wall in campaign

https://youtu.be/TW4AW4AqLC4?si=yz2UBiPTn-BuxwVY

---------- Post added at 19:47 ---------- Previous post was at 19:45 ----------

Harris steals Trumps policy on taxing tips..

https://www.axios.com/2024/08/11/kam...ervice-workers

---------- Post added at 19:52 ---------- Previous post was at 19:47 ----------

Assessment of Harris’ softball CNN interview, in which she failed to answer convincingly on any issue.

https://www.timesfreepress.com/news/...dly-in-harris/

---------- Post added at 19:52 ---------- Previous post was at 19:52 ----------

Originally Posted by Paul

Where is our resident translator trumpslator ?

Hold my beer

---------- Post added at 20:12 ---------- Previous post was at 19:52 ----------

Trump responded: “Well, I would do that, and we’re sitting down, and I was, somebody, we had Senator Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It’s a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I’m talking about, that, because, look, child care is child care is. It’s, couldn’t, you know, there’s something, you have to have it. In this country you have to have it.”

Child care is very important, I had Senator Rubio and Ivanka work on it in my last administration

He went on: “But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I’m talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they’re not used to — but they’ll get used to it very quickly – and it’s not gonna stop them from doing business with us, but they’ll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we’re talking about, including child care, that it’s going to take care.

I’m going to put tariffs on imports, not crippling, but increase tariffs, that will more than cover an increase in any child care proposals

“We’re gonna have — I, I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country, because I have to stay with child care. I want to stay with child care, but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I’m talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just, that I just told you about.

I’m going to reduce the deficit to zero, and eliminate waste and fraud, I’m going to free up so much money there’ll be plenty to fund childcare.

“We’re gonna be taking in trillions of dollars, and as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it’s relatively speaking not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we’ll be taking in. We’re going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people, and then we’ll worry about the rest of the world. Let’s help other people. But we’re going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It’s about Make America Great Again. We have to do it because right now we’re a failing nation, so we’ll take care of it.”

Childcare is expensive, but in the great scheme of things I’m going to generate so much cash, trillions, that it’s not that expensive. We’ll look after our own first, we need to MAGA, because we’re currently in the crapper. I’ll sort it out.

The Cato Institute, an American libertarian think tank, has this to say about Trump's tariff proposals.

https://www.cato.org/blog/trumps-tar...-170-years-ago

Trump’s tariff plan is “economically ignorant, geopolitically dangerous, and politically misguided,” says Scott Lincicome, head of Cato’s Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies. He adds that Paul Winfree, Trump’s Domestic Policy Council deputy in 2017, has denounced the tariff proposal, saying it “would impose a massive tax on the folks who it intends to help.”

According to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the Trump tariffs “would reduce after-tax incomes by about 3.5 percent for those in the bottom half of the income distribution,” and “would cost a typical household in the middle of the income distribution at least $1,700 in increased taxes each year.”

The Center for American Progress reports that Trump’s tariffs “would amount to a roughly $1,500 annual tax increase for the typical household, including a $90 tax increase on food, a $90 tax increase on prescription drugs, and a $120 tax increase on oil and petroleum products.” .

Erica York, senior economist at the Tax Foundation, says Trump’s 10 percent tariff ring “would amount to a $300 billion annual tax hike, reducing the size of the US economy by 0.7 percent and eliminating 505,000 jobs.” That’s before we even consider foreign retaliation.

Originally Posted by Pierre

I’m going to put tariffs on imports, not crippling, but increase tariffs, that will more than cover an increase in any child care proposals

He has been saying for days now that tariffs are a tax on foreign countries, which he will force them to pay. Catnip to MAGA idiots naturally, because it’s unlikely they will understand what is actually going to happen (i.e. what tariffs actually are, who actually pays them).

Your translation is … ah … lacking nuance.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Chris

He has been saying for days now that tariffs are a tax on foreign countries, which he will force them to pay. Catnip to MAGA idiots naturally, because it’s unlikely they will understand what is actually going to happen (i.e. what tariffs actually are, who actually pays them).

Your translation is … ah … lacking nuance.

Just translating what was in front of me.

---------- Post added at 22:41 ---------- Previous post was at 22:38 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

The Cato Institute, an American libertarian think tank, has this to say about Trump's tariff proposals.

https://www.cato.org/blog/trumps-tar...-170-years-ago

How much revenue would these tariffs raise from imports though?

The article doesn’t say?

Not the greatest article in regards to detail is it?

The signals that he thinks he’s going to lose just keep getting stronger. This is a man in a panic.

[denphone]

And that is music to my ears.

[pip08456]

Trump: "I better win or you're gonna have problems like we've never had. We may have no country left. This may be our last election. You want to know the truth? People have said that. This may be our last election."

https://x.com/AccountableGOP/status/1832515102081204410

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Chris

The signals that he thinks he’s going to lose just keep getting stronger. This is a man in a panic.

This is the voice of a sad loser who has picked up a Monopoly card that says "Go directly to jail. Do not pick up $200" and he's trying to knock the board over to end the game.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

This is the voice of a sad loser

well he hasn't lost yet.

Tomorrow night should be a popcorn event.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...f3af1c77&ei=30