US Election 2020

[Nearly Sane]

Of course what Trump says and does has an effect on us and the rest of the planet, when it comes to him threatening to take military action, or nuke a country like he did with North Korea, it ratchets up the tension no end.

But sometimes threats will lead to peace - Obama never managed to meet with Kim - Trump has. Is there anything concrete that you can point to that Trump has done that has adversely affected the UK that would be addressed by one of the Democrats?

[Roses]

But sometimes threats will lead to peace - Obama never managed to meet with Kim - Trump has. Is there anything concrete that you can point to that Trump has done that has adversely affected the UK that would be addressed by one of the Democrats?

Hmmmmmmmmmm!

[Nearly Sane]

Hmmmmmmmmmm!

Ok, I'll give you some help. Trade tariffs. The question is whether a Democrat would have done much the same.

[Roses]

Ok, I'll give you some help. Trade tariffs. The question is whether a Democrat would have done much the same.

Are US trade tariffs a good thing, I have heard otherwise?

[Nearly Sane]

Are US trade tariffs a good thing, I have heard otherwise?

I didn't say they were. I was offering something that you might use to make the argument about something Trump had done that had been bad for the UK, see link below. It's difficult to know what Clinton would have done here though as tarfiifs had been used by Democrat presidents as well.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/whisky-bears-brunt-of-eu-us-trade-war-that-s-nothing-to-do-with-it-ian-mckendrick-1-5028388

[Udayana]

Depends what trade war you are engaged in.

Trump has also affected the UK (as a European nation) on:

- Brexit, flaunting offers of trade deals
- Climate change
- Iran deal and trade sanctions
- Syria, handing over power to Russia
- China trade war/ Huawei
- Lying about London governance

We can never know what Clinton would have done or what would have resulted - so not worth considering?

[Nearly Sane]

Depends what trade war you are engaged in.

Trump has also affected the UK (as a European nation) on:

- Brexit, flaunting offers of trade deals
- Climate change
- Iran deal and trade sanctions
- Syria, handing over power to Russia
- China trade war/ Huawei
- Lying about London governance

We can never know what Clinton would have done or what would have resulted - so not worth considering?

Which then surely makes any statement about him being bad as opposed to Clinton, or whomever might win next time worthless? It means that we can only argue about the individual policy, and Trump essentially becomes irrelevant.

[Udayana]

Which then surely makes any statement about him being bad as opposed to Clinton, or whomever might win next time worthless? It means that we can only argue about the individual policy, and Trump essentially becomes irrelevant.

Yes, I think so.  Though there are some actions only taken because of Trump's individual misconceptions, errors, quirks or foolery - eg. N Korea rapprochement/disengagement, abandonment of the Kurds... policy is key, but events can directed or triggered by individual actions/statements - just like Scottish Independence refs.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes, I think so.  Though there are some actions only taken because of Trump's individual misconceptions, errors, quirks or foolery - eg. N Korea rapprochement/disengagement, abandonment of the Kurds... policy is key, but events can directed or triggered by individual actions/statements - just like Scottish Independence refs.

I think as you note there is more uncertainty about what Trump's actions will be but I'm not sure if that makes things worse or better. In individual cases like the Kurds we can say that they are worse off because of Trump's actions but despite that, I'm not sure that Democrat policy and whatever quirks Clinton would have brought, or whoever might get elected next time's quirks, would mean that we would be substantially in a different place. The biggest effect of this and next presidency, if it is Trump,  vs the Democrats, is I think the Supreme Court but that's just a Republican v Democrat thing, not specifically a Trump thing.

[Nearly Sane]

Meant to put this up a couple of days ago. Bloomberg enters the race. Feels despite it still being months away from any actual primaries  etc to be too late.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50539242

[Roses]

Bloomberg is 77, I would have thought the inevitable strain of putting himself up as a candidate at that age could have a deleterious affect on his health.

[Nearly Sane]

Bloomberg is 77, I would have thought the inevitable strain of putting himself up as a candidate at that age could have a deleterious affect on his health.

Isn't that up to him?

[jeremyp]

But sometimes threats will lead to peace - Obama never managed to meet with Kim - Trump has. Is there anything concrete that you can point to that Trump has done that has adversely affected the UK that would be addressed by one of the Democrats?

Sticking his fingers up at environmental protection, in particular not taking climate change seriously.

[jeremyp]

Ok, I'll give you some help. Trade tariffs. The question is whether a Democrat would have done much the same.

The answer is no.

[jeremyp]

Bloomberg is 77, I would have thought the inevitable strain of putting himself up as a candidate at that age could have a deleterious affect on his health.

It's not just that. Your faculties inevitably fade with age. Biden and Sanders are also too old and Elizabeth Warren is marginal.

[Nearly Sane]

Sticking his fingers up at environmental protection, in particular not taking climate change seriously.

What would Clinton have actually done that would make a difference?

[Roses]

It's not just that. Your faculties inevitably fade with age. Biden and Sanders are also too old and Elizabeth Warren is marginal.

At present the Democrats don't seem to have a suitable candidate who will appeal to the voters.

[jeremyp]

What would Clinton have actually done that would make a difference?

Not sticking up her fingers at environmental protection.

No trade war with Europe.

Not thrown the Kurds under the bus.

Not withhold military aide from Ukraine in exchange for smearing her opponents.

 

[Roses]

Clinton stated the other week that she might consider standing as candidate at the coming election.

[Nearly Sane]

Not sticking up her fingers at environmental protection.

No trade war with Europe.

Not thrown the Kurds under the bus.

Not withhold military aide from Ukraine in exchange for smearing her opponents.

what would she have actually done on the environment that would have made a difference?

[Outrider]

what would she have actually done on the environment that would have made a difference?

Stayed in the Paris Accord, not cleansed the EPA of scientists in favour of coal and oil lobbyists, not censored the output of government agencies trying to inform the electorate about the realities of climate science and climate change, not approved tax breaks for coal mining, not removed the protected status of environmentally protected areas to permit oil drilling...

She could have made a difference by just sitting on her hands and not actively working to undermine the individuals and agencies working to protect the American people (and everyone else) from themselves.

O.

[Nearly Sane]

Stayed in the Paris Accord, not cleansed the EPA of scientists in favour of coal and oil lobbyists, not censored the output of government agencies trying to inform the electorate about the realities of climate science and climate change, not approved tax breaks for coal mining, not removed the protected status of environmentally protected areas to permit oil drilling...

She could have made a difference by just sitting on her hands and not actively working to undermine the individuals and agencies working to protect the American people (and everyone else) from themselves.

O.

And would this have meant that climate change was in any sense less likely to happen?

[Outrider]

And would this have meant that climate change was in any sense less likely to happen?

Climate change is already happening - these would have lessened the speed and severity of it's development, giving us more time to develop the political and technological solutions to the ongoing escalation, and to better prepare for the impacts that already can't be avoided.  It wouldn't have 'stopped' climate change, but it would have been a better position going forward.

O.

[jeremyp]

what would she have actually done on the environment that would have made a difference?

Not dismantling the EPA. Not leaving the Paris Climate Accord. Do you need more?

[Nearly Sane]

Not dismantling the EPA. Not leaving the Paris Climate Accord. Do you need more?

Yes, would that actually have made a difference?