The Chronicles of Narcissist

[Maxperson]

The UK has no problem with free speech. They have a problem with any political personages whose speech they deem detrimental to international relations between their country and ____________. That's one way diplomats get ejected.

Trump, as a candidate for the highest political office in the UKs most important ally, has proven himself to be someone they don't feel comfortable talking to in a political dialog. So they're keeping him out.

A subtle message from them to us.

And it's a message that they'd eat with some tea if he got elected. I doubt they would alienate the U.S. over it.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Don't count out the resolve behind diplomatic resolutions. See the cycle of hot & cold US-Israeli relations.

And politically, I don't think the UK would be alone if they did bar him. Prominent, powerful people in Australia, Canada, France, South Africa, Korea, Germany, Thailand, etc., are reacting with a range of emotions from concern to horror regarding Trump as POTUS. I don't blame them.

One of the functions of the POTUS is "Diplomat in Chief", and Trump is about as incapable of diplomacy as any would-be politician I've seen. And I live in Texas, where we occasionally have politicians advise women to "lie back and enjoy" rape.

 

[Maxperson]

Don't count out the resolve behind diplomatic resolutions. See the cycle of hot & cold US-Israeli relations.

US-Israel is a different dynamic than US-England. England won't alienate the US over Trump.

And politically, I don't think the UK would be alone if they did bar him. Prominent, powerful people in Australia, Canada, France, South Africa, Korea, Germany, Thailand, etc., are reacting with a range of emotions from concern to horror regarding Trump as POTUS. I don't blame them.

One of the functions of the POTUS is "Diplomat in Chief", and Trump is about as incapable of diplomacy as any would-be politician I've seen. And I live in Texas, where we occasionally have politicians advise women to "lie back and enjoy" rape.

For sure. Trump would make us the laughing stock of the world, but that's about all the damage he can do. He'd be impotent as President because Congress wouldn't work with him.

I'd vote for him before I'd vote for Hillary, though. I'd rather have a impotent laughing stock President than one that can and will do true damage to the country. Personally, I rather like O'Malley. He's the only one on either side of the isle that I'd even consider voting for.

 

[billd91]

US-Israel is a different dynamic than US-England. England won't alienate the US over Trump.

Don't bet on it. They'd be OK with letting things cool down a term because relations would probably bounce back with any responsible president.

 

[tuxgeo]

. . . and I think any responsible president should, at some point, humbly request that the UK re-donate to us that sculpture of Winston Churchill that Obama sent back across the pond. (Winnie was a true statesman.)

Would The Donald think to do that? I have my doubts.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

Personally, I rather like O'Malley. He's the only one on either side of the isle that I'd even consider voting for.

Yeah, good luck with that guy even being on the ballot.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah, good luck with that guy even being on the ballot.

I agree. It's a shame that we get only people who would be horrible Presidents to choose from. 16 years of the worst Presidents in US history and it looks like we're going to have 4-8 more with Hillary.

 

[Umbran]

US-Israel is a different dynamic than US-England. England won't alienate the US over Trump.

The US president typically only goes to the UK a couple times each term anyway. We might question whether they'd actually be losing anything by keeping him out.

Moreover, would Trump push his luck? What if he tried, and they *did* stick by their guns? How *embarassing* would that be?

 

[Maxperson]

The US president typically only goes to the UK a couple times each term anyway. We might question whether they'd actually be losing anything by keeping him out.

Of course they would. They would anger the US. I don't often go to Victoria Secret, but if I was told never to come back I would be upset with them.

Moreover, would Trump push his luck? What if he tried, and they *did* stick by their guns? How *embarassing* would that be?

He never has to try. Just them saying that the President of the US is not welcome there is enough.

 

[Umbran]

Of course they would. They would anger the US. I don't often go to Victoria Secret, but if I was told never to come back I would be upset with them.

Yes, but would the rest of your extended family really care?

Cheesing off Trump, himself, is just cheesing off Trump. They wouldn't be cheesing off Democrats at all. They wouldn't be cheesing off establishment GOP, who don't like Trump. Some significant number of folks are going to be voting for him just because they don't like Hillary (or Bernie, whoever of them gets the nomination) - and even those people aren't likely cheesed off, as they view Trump as the lesser of evils.

So, I don't know how much real alienation would occur.

He never has to try. Just them saying that the President of the US is not welcome there is enough.

They probably don't say so until he tries, though. It isn't like, just after our election day, the Prime Minister will have a press conference saying, "By the way, he's not welcome here!"