Tag Archives: donald trump

George Cunningham

Trump’s steal deal with Russia on Ukraine

By George Cunningham | Tue 18th March 2025 - 1:52 pm

This weekend, the party will be debating the F14 motion “The UK’s Response to Trump” at conference.

Recent statements by our party and the motion itself pretty much encapsulate the UK public’s feeling about the Trumpist revolution in the United States. The Lib Dems, as an opposition party, can more easily be the voice of reality, saying what the UK government dares not to say as it seeks in vain to seek some shred of common ground with Washington, especially over the future of Ukraine.

The reason for Trump’s partiality towards Putin is simply that the business opportunities are too tempting for making money for his family, associates and MAGA agenda.

Here Trump’s model is a reflection of Putin’s, with his entourage of compliant oligarchs. The US context however makes Trump’s oligarchs not quite as beholden to him, having mostly made their own money rather than looted it.

Trump’s long business relations with Russia are well-documented.  That they are alive and well was recently reinforced by the reported presence of long time Trump associate Russian oligarch Dmitry Rybolovlev acting as a go-between at the US-Russia talks in Saudi Arabia.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 7 Comments
Tom Arms

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 16th March 2025 - 8:30 am

Ukraine

The Ukraine ball has bounced from Ukraine’s court to Russia’s court and now back into America’s court.

Donald Trump has always claimed a special relationship with Vladimir Putin– “He listens to me…the war would never have started if I had been in office…I can stop this war in 24 hours.”

Not if Vladimir can help it. As I write this Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff is flying back to Washington after exhausting talks in the Kremlin. He went asking Putin to agree to a 30-day ceasefire. Ukraine had already—under pressure from Trump—said yes.

Putin said…I’ll think about it. Actually he was a bit more diplomatic. He prefaced his hesitation with the normal flattery that must precede any exchange with the American president. He said that he is “aligned” with Trump and “expressed solidarity” with the man in the White House.

Then the Russian leader said: “I need more information,”which is another way of saying “I’ll think about it,”which is another way of stalling.

Putin is stalling because at the moment he is on the offensive. It looks as if he might soon push the Ukrainians out of their Kursk salient. He continues to inch forward in the Donbas and every captured inch improves his negotiating position.

That negotiating position has not changed for three years: Ukraine out of NATO and EU and demilitarised. International recognition for the annexation of the Donbas and Crimea. Sanctions lifted. Zelensky replaced by a Russian puppet.

Trump, however, is not focused on Putin’s long-term aims. He wants a ceasefire now. He has demanded it and has threatened renewed sanctions if his ultimatum is not met. It hasn’t been and Trump’s next move will reveal more about his role as honest broker.

Trump’s tariff rollercoaster

Tariffs up, down, off, on. Markets crave certainty. They fear uncertainty and they panic at chaos.

Trump’s muddled tariff policy is causing the stock market to dive. And according to Trump’s past statements, the stock market is the best judge of his economic policies.

He started off well. His election in November was followed by big rises. Nasdaq and the Dow Jones reached record highs in December. The S&P 500 two months later. American business was anticipating an economic boom fuelled by a bonfire of government regulations. It didn’t believe that Trump would actually follow through with threats of tariffs.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 11 Comments
Paul Hindley

Starmer is living in a dreamworld. Britain must choose between Europe and Trump’s America

By Paul Hindley | Sun 2nd March 2025 - 12:43 pm

What a difference a day makes. On Thursday, the Prime Minister Keir Starmer went to Washington DC to meet with President Donald Trump. There, in the White House, Starmer had a jovial and good-spirited meeting and press conference with the new US President. The press hailed the Prime Minister’s visit as a triumph referring to it as a “love-in” and a “bromance”. It appeared to vindicate Starmer’s strategy of walking a delicate diplomatic tightrope between Europe and the new American administration.

But then came Friday. President Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s wartime leader, who is viewed by many to be a modern Churchill, sat in the same seat in the Oval Office as Starmer had done. However, Zelensky’s meeting with Trump could not have represented a greater contrast to that of Starmer’s a day earlier. There, Zelensky was subjected to berating and bullying from Trump and his Vice President JD Vance. Trump and Vance brought absolute shame on to the Office of the Presidency by goading and bullying Zelensky. All of which played into the hands of Vladimir Putin and his fascist attempt to conquer Ukraine.

Starmer’s dream day in the Oval Office has quickly turned into a living nightmare. Trump’s treatment of Zelensky reveals an uncomfortable truth. That in this increasingly divided and polarised world, Britain cannot continue to walk a diplomatic tightrope between Europe and Trump’s America. Britain will have to decide who it stands with. Do we stand with most other European democracies in defending what remains of the liberal rules-based order, or do we stand with Trump in forging a harsh world of realism, authoritarianism and post-truth politics?

In the EU, the likely next German Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, has called for greater European independence from America. There are even serious considerations about the creation of a common European army, especially as Trump’s America is no longer seen as a reliable NATO partner. Britain, along with the rest of Europe, must free itself from its dependency on America, especially on matters of defence. We Europeans must stand on our own two feet. We must embrace being the leaders of the free world, a position that Trump vacated on Friday when he sided with Putin against Zelensky. 

There are significant risks for Britain in choosing to side with Trump over Europe. A cutthroat trade deal with Trump’s America that forced us to reduce our trading standards and economic regulations would be bad for our economy. It would also kill any hopes of getting a stronger trading relationship with the EU. Britain should not allow Trump to bully us into accepting an unfavourable trade deal through the threat of increased tariffs. The Trump Administration has also taken aim at Britain’s attempts to combat hate speech and discrimination. To reduce such protections would only embolden the far-right even further. In short, if we side with Trump, then Britain risks being reduced to a vassal state of Trump’s America.

However, it is far from certain that Starmer will take Britain closer to Europe. Take for example, the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, rebutting the idea of a youth mobility scheme with the EU. Ed Davey has rightly called for Britain to join a customs union with the EU. Yet, even this proposal, one that would bring clear economic benefits, has not been supported by Labour. The fact that Labour cannot support even the most reasonable and modest proposals for strengthening our relationship with Europe is a cause for concern.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 18 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: A British Knight in King Donald’s Court

By Tom Arms | Sat 1st March 2025 - 9:20 am

The British Foreign Office set a low bar for Sir Keir Starmer’s trip to America—Don’t fall out with King Donald. He succeeded.

That is not to say that substantive issues were not discussed. They were and included:

Tariffs – and the possibility, nay probability,  of reviving the Johnson era US-UK trade deal that could exempt Britain from the crippling tariffs that Trump has threatened to impose on the EU.

The Chagos Islands – Trump is inclined to go along with the British position.

And Ukraine – On this top of the agenda item Sir Keir failed. Trump was immovable – No backstop. No security guarantees and total confidence in the honesty of fellow dissembler Vladimir Putin.

The tete a tete started with a cringe-making pantomime when in front of the world’s media the prime minister reached into his suit pocket and drew out a letter from King Charles III.

It was the expected invitation to Trump to make an historic second state visit to Buckingham Palace.

Royal Family fan Donald evinced childlike surprise and delight at the expected letter and the friendly tone was set for the private talks in the Oval Office. The first box was ticked.

An Anglo-American trade deal has long been one of Trump’s priorities. Not because of any love for the royal family or the homeland of his mother. No, Donald Trump wants a trade deal with Britain because he hates the EU. It is a threat to American trade hegemony. Trump wants to encourage its break-up and insure that Britain does not return to the European fold by pulling it closer to America.

In any upcoming trade talks the British public will be focused on chlorine-washed chicken, hormone-fed beef and higher prices for NHS drugs. The attention of Trump’s negotiators will be on coordinating regulations across a wide-range of goods and services to make it more difficult for Britain to negotiate re-entry into the European single market and/or customs union.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 1 Comment
Tom Arms

The End

By Tom Arms | Sat 1st March 2025 - 7:00 am

February 28, 2025 may well go down in history as the day that the Western Alliance ended and the world was suddenly thrown into an unknown future by a White House bully and his initialled sidekick.

The undynamic duo’s treatment of the president of a country which has sacrificed thousands upon thousands of lives in the cause of the protection of the West shamed the United States and countries who have been in alliance with America.

“Say thank you. Say thank you,” shouted J.D. Vance when he should have been thanking Zelensky for the ultimate sacrifices his countrymen and women have made.

“You are not showing any respect,” said Donald Trump, sounding more like a mafia don then the leader of the Free World. It was draft dodger Trump who should have been respecting wartime leader Zelensky who has—against all odds—held out against the Russian war machine for three years.

Several times Zelensky tried to say thank you and explain his position, but each time he was shouted down by Vance and/or Trump.

At one point Trump pursed his lips shook his head back and forth and repeated in a childishly petulant mocking voice: “I don’t want a ceasefire. I don’t want a ceasefire.”

Again, Zelensky tried to explain that he wants an end to the war but that any ceasefire must come with security guarantees because Putin has broken every ceasefire, treaty and agreement that Ukraine has negotiated with the Russian dictator.

Zelensky flew to Washington to sign a deal which would hand over a major chunk of his country’s mineral rights. Trump said the rare earths that American companies would mine was compensation for the aid that America has given Ukraine. Zelensky agreed to that but also wanted assurances that included in the deal would be future security guarantees. A deal which gave away billions worth of mineral rights in perpetuity without protecting Ukrainian territorial integrity was worthless.

But Trump and Vance were determined to secure the rights and at the same time withdraw American support and bully Zelensky into effectively surrendering to Russia. And it was done before a television audience of billions in what appeared to be an attempt to humiliate the Ukrainian leader. The result was possibly the most disgraceful scene in diplomatic history.

European leaders, Democrats and officials from the first Trump administration seemed to regard it as just that.

John Bolton, Trump’s former National Security Adviser, said on X: “Trump and Vance have declared themselves to be on Russia’s side in the Russo-Ukraine war, This is a catastrophic mistake for America’s national security. And let’s be clear: Trump and Vance now personally own that policy. It is not the view of a majority of Americans of either or no political party.”

>H.R. McMaster another former national security advisor in the first Trump administration, said it is  “impossible to understand” why Trump and Vance “seem determined to put more pressure on President Zelensky while they seem to be coddling Putin—the person who inflicted this terrible war in Ukraine.”

Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in a post on X said the “outrageous display” from Trump and Vance was “disgraceful” and “downright un-American.”

French president Emmanuel Macron said: “We should respect those who have been fighting since the beginning,”

“Ukraine, you’ll never walk alone,” Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda said via X. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said, “Ukraine, Spain stands with you.” Friedrich Merz, the likely incoming German leader, also said he stands with Zelensky before adding that the “aggressor and victim in this terrible war” must never be confused. Top diplomats for the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and Finland issued similar messages of support for Kyiv and the Ukrainian president.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen praised Zelensky for his “dignity” and said the bloc will continue working with him “for a just and lasting peace.”

Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna said: “Estonia’s support for Ukraine remains unwavering. It is time for Europe to step up. We do not need to wait for something else to happen; Europe has enough resources, including Russia’s frozen assets, to enable Ukraine to continue fighting,”

The diplomatic meltdown at the White House comes as European leaders—including Zelensky—are preparing to meet in London on Sunday to discuss their next moves in the Ukrainian imbroglio. Host Sir Keir Starmer sees Britain as bridge between Europe and America. The problem is that Trump and Vance appear to be intent on burning that bridge.

Here is the transcript of Trump, Zelensky, and Vance’s contentious exchange. It has been edited for length and clarity.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 11 Comments
Caron Lindsay

Ed: This is thuggery from Trump and Vance

By Caron Lindsay | Fri 28th February 2025 - 9:58 pm

Well. There’s a danger to thinking that Donald Trump can’t get any worse. He will inevitably disappoint you by sinking even lower.

Tonight’s row with Zelensky in the Oval Office was a case in point. It was always going to be a set-up for the brave Ukrainian leader but I don’t think any of us had quite anticipated the appalling scenes we saw. How he managed to handle himself with such calmness and dignity in the face of that barrage is beyond me.

One of many lowlights from Trump was him saying that he couldn’t condemn Putin because he couldn’t slag him off and then bring him in to a deal. But it was fine for him to call Zelensky a dictator? A fact he seemed to have forgotten when pressed on it yesterday by the BBC’s political editor Chris Mason.

It seems very much like it’s Trump and Putin vs Europe now. Who would have thought that we would need to increase defence spending to defend ourselves FROM the US.

I grew up during the Cold War. I was born after those 13 days in 1962 when everyone was terrified that the Cuban Missile Crisis would bring about a nuclear war. While there was a sort of perpetual anxiety, it was at least relatively stable. There was nothing as unpredictable as a US President who can be nice as pie one minute and as nasty as you can get the next.

Donald Trump has been in office for 39 days and so far it’s been much, much worse than I had feared. I hadn’t had “Mar – a – Lago on Gaza” and while we knew he was going to throw Zelensky under the bus, I don’t think anyone expected tonight’s scenes.

While I know that Keir Starmer is doing his best, I felt like there weren’t enough vomit emojis in the world last night to describe the camaraderie in the White House. It was just really uncomfortable. And the contrast with tonight is still making my blood run a bit cold.

Ed Davey has been quick to show support for Zelensky. He said:

This is thuggery from Trump and Vance, plain and simple. They are bullying the brave true patriot Zelensky into accepting a deal which effectively hands victory to Russia. Unless the UK and Europe step up, we are facing a betrayal of Ukraine.

Continue reading »
Posted in News | Also tagged , , and | 19 Comments
Kevin Langford

We should be spending 4% of GDP on defence

By Kevin Langford | Fri 21st February 2025 - 9:09 am

As Liberal Democrats our first task is to keep our society as fair, free and open as we can.

This society is threatened by a more aggressive Russia and a less reliable USA. This threat has to be right at the top of our thinking. The external environment has changed a lot and will require us to spend more on defence.

Determining how much more should be based on what it will cost to meet the threats we face.  It shouldn’t be based on what Rachel Reeves thinks we can afford in order to balance the books, or on what we spend now plus a little bit, or on what Donald Trump tells us. We need to defend the country, rather than make a spreadsheet add up.

The currency for the debate has been defence spend as a % of GDP. This isn’t a good way of working out what we need, but is a helpful shorthand for the debate. In 2024 this was 2.3%, and our spring conference motion on The UK’s Response to Trump urges the government to set a timetable to get this to 2.5% – a task the government is already committed to. Kemi Badenoch said this week that she would love to be able to get to 3% but that the party couldn’t ‘make the numbers work’ – the spreadsheet again. Reform set a target of 3% within 6 years in their 2024 election manifesto.

None of this sounds enough. There is ample evidence that the current defence budget is not sufficient even to support yesterday’s needs. The threat has increased and the support from across the Atlantic is decreasing. When we last faced an aggressive Russia in the 70’s and 80’s, we were spending just over 4% of GDP on defence. And that was with a supportive USA.  It is hard to see why the requirement would be less than this now.

This is a substantial increase – around £45bn a year. But it is likely to be the price of freedom.  After allowing for inflation, GDP per head today is roughly twice what it was in 1980, and we were able to afford this level of spend then.  There is pressure on public finances but we cannot let this stop us having the right conversation and making the right choices.

Supply chain and other constraints stop an immediate increase to this level of spend. But lead times are long and we need to commit to a plan quickly (and pray for breathing space in the meantime).

Somebody needs to call this out. The government has hemmed itself in to a narrative that is all about balancing the books. The Tories aren’t stepping up to the plate; they are still a shower.  And Reform is in hock to Trump and inconsistent on Putin.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 33 Comments
Paul Hindley

In the shadow of Trump, Britain requires a seismic shift in tax and spend

By Paul Hindley | Wed 19th February 2025 - 10:55 am

Harold Wilson once famously said that “a week is a long time in politics”. Well, the last week feels like an eternity in international politics. Last week, NATO member states received a scolding from the new US Defence Secretary, Pete Hegseth, who warned them not to treat Uncle Sam like “Uncle Sucker” on defence spending. While at the weekend’s Munich Security Conference, US Vice President, JD Vance spouted the ridiculous claim that immigration and tackling hate speech, such as through having safe zones around abortion clinics, were a bigger threat to European democracies than Russia or China.

The wavering of Trump’s America on its security commitments to Europe poses immense questions for Britain. Keir Starmer was right to commit British peacekeepers to Ukraine as part of an international mission. While Ed Davey was right to call for Labour to reverse the Conservatives’ 10,000 troop cutback to the British Army. It is clear that defence spending will have to increase considerably beyond NATO’s 2% of GDP requirement, even beyond the new government target of 2.5%.

But defence is not the only area that requires a considerable increase in public spending. Britain needs new and improved hospitals; the social care crisis needs to be addressed; several local councils are facing bankruptcy; welfare cuts, such as the two-child benefit cap, need to be reversed; and climate change needs to be tackled. All of this heralds a seismic shift in how we as a country facilitate tax and spend policies. In a nutshell, public spending in Britain will need to increase across the board.

One option to increase state spending is by making cutbacks elsewhere. However, after years of austerity, this is unwise. But what could we cut anyway? We cannot cut NHS spending or defence spending. Some schools and prisons are already crumbling, so education and justice are off the table. The welfare, local government and international aid budgets have already experienced deep cutbacks. Finally, we cannot cut back on green policies when we are facing a climate crisis.

What about funding the additional spending through borrowing? Borrowing can offer part of the answer. We should be borrowing to invest in the construction of vital infrastructure projects. Borrowing should also be used in the short term to immediately address the NHS crisis. While some EU nations, such as Spain, are calling for EU-wide borrowing to fund Europe’s necessary defence spending increases. However, we should be cautious. Borrowing is not a silver bullet. We have to be aware of the economic risks of relying too much on borrowing and the potential for a future debt crisis.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 30 Comments
Vince Cable

Vince Cable writes…Standing up to Trump

By Vince Cable | Mon 17th February 2025 - 7:29 am

I know from experience that leading the Liberal Democrats is a frustrating job; marginalised in the media and patronised by the two traditional parties. But periodically we hit on a message which resonates in the country, as with Charles Kennedy’s opposition to the Iraq war.  Ed Davey may have found another: ‘Stand up to Trump’. 

These are early days in the second Trump administration, but a political, economic and cultural revolution is under way. The MAGA movement is also much bigger than its capricious, unpredictable leader. Trump’s apostles like JD Vance and Hegseth are ideologically extreme but also articulate, smart and superficially plausible. And they regard Britain with contempt: our secular and liberal values; our diverse society; our democratically elected government. We need to understand that the sentimental nonsense about the ‘special relationship’ is over. We are under attack.

I have some sympathy for our government. Starmer is being understandably cautious recognising that there is much uncertainty and danger.  The resulting passivity has however created a leadership vacuum. The Tories and Reform vie to be mini-Trumps. They are also skirting around the edge of treacherous collusion with people who openly declare their wish to overthrow our legitimate government. Nor will leadership come from the lazy anti-Americanism of the far left which sees Trump as merely a cruder spokesman for American imperialism than Clinton or Obama.

Step forward the leader of the Liberal Democrats to provide a focal point for resistance. The fact that Ed Davey has attracted the abuse of Trump’s outrider, Elon Musk, is to his credit. Being described as a ‘snivelling cretin’ tells us less about him than about the deranged people who insult him: the MAGA folk who think that Tommy Robinson is the authentic voice of the British working class; that London is a Muslim city; and that ‘free speech’ has been outlawed in the UK. The irony of using ‘freedom’ as a dividing line with Britain appears to be completely lost on people whose idea of personal freedom is ownership of offensive automatic weapons, facilitating mass killings. As for the decadence and decay of Europe it pays to point out that, in Trump’s macho USA, male life expectancy is five years or so less than ours and less than in China or Ecuador.

But apart from firing verbal projectiles, what does ‘standing up to Trump’ look like?  Tariffs?  We will be dragged down like everyone else by a global trade war.  But in relation to Trump’s irrational obsession with bilateral trade balances, the UK is in the clear albeit with some minor quibbling about the statistics. Britain’s exports are, any event, skewed to services and other items which don’t carry tariffs. An exception is steel, and the remnants of this once great industry are set to take another beating. Outside the EU, Britain does not have the clout to retaliate, and, in any event, the Americans will point out that for British exporters to complain about tariffs is a bit rich since Britain unilaterally raised tariffs against itself when it left the EU customs union.

More reassuringly, the USA is no longer quite the power in world trade it once was, or Trump thinks it is.  The EU is the dominant power in trade in goods and services combined, China in goods. Though relatively declining, the US is still the world’s largest importer with around 15% of world imports narrowly ahead of the EU and China. It can damage its trade partners, as it clearly intends to do, but there is nothing to stop them trading more with each other. America, of course, runs big trade deficits.  It has the privilege of being able to consume disproportionately by issuing dollar IOUs (which may soon lose their appeal as a store of value). Trump’s particular genius has been an ability to translate this self-indulgence into victimhood. We have no reason to fuel this national self-pity.  We should ignore it; diversify away from the USA; re-build trading relationships with our European neighbours; and prioritise emerging markets including those that annoy the Americans as with China, Mexico and Vietnam. Hedging is the best response to uncertainty.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , and | 34 Comments
Tony Vickers

Trump, Taxes & Tariffs

By Tony Vickers | Tue 11th February 2025 - 9:55 am

Those of us who know of Henry George and his “Single Tax” on land values may not know that he was also against tariffs. I didn’t until in 1998 I was appointed Chief Executive at the Henry George Foundation (HGF) of Great Britain and learned that it was part of a federation of such bodies called The International Union of Land Value Taxation and Free Trade (or “The IU” for short). The same year ALTER was founded to revive a Land Campaign in the Lib Dems.

I was reminded how George’s thinking linked tax and tariffs when reading a piece by Jonty Bloom in my favourite weekly journal The New European recently. 

I am neither an economist but it seems common sense that tariffs hurt the countries which impose them most. Bloom’s piece reminds us that the inter-war Great Depression was made far worse when America’s action in isolation to impose tariffs was met tit-for-tat by most other trading nations.

In contrast, Trump Mark 1’s tariffs post-2020 were largely ignored by the rest of the world and hence largely only affected America: more jobs were lost there than in countries hit by tariffs.

The reason, according to Professor Michael Gasiorek, is that tariffs raise the imposing county’s domestic price of imports of a product. This allows its domestic producers to increase their price to just below the newly raised price of the imports, assuming the importer doesn’t absorb the tariff. “Capitalist greed”, according to current logic, ensures that prices rise for consumers in the tariff raising country, thereby reducing spending power and/or causing inflation there. 

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 18 Comments
Tom Arms

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 9th February 2025 - 8:30 am

Germany

Germany’s Friedrich Merz is gambling big. The leader of the centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) is gambling with the upcoming elections, his political career, his country’s future and Europe’s future.

He is gambling that by opening—ever so slightly—the door to the German far-right that he will be able to slam it shut again after winning elections on February 23.

Ever since the end of the Second World War the mainstream political parties have maintained a firewall (or “Brandmauer”) between themselves and any far-right, neo-Nazi party that might undermine the political consensus that Germany maintain a sense of contrition for its Nazi past.

In recent years that has meant no coalitions, no deals, no talk of parliamentary support with the far-right Alternative for Deutschland (AfD).

Merz blew a hole in the Brandmauer at the end of January when he used AfD votes in the Bundestag to push through the first reading of an anti-immigration bill.  The “Influx Limitation Law” would have tightened existing immigration laws and grant police powers to detain people due for deportation and to deport immigrants at the border.”

The move provoked a stern protest from Merz’s predecessor, elder statesperson Angela Merkel. “I consider it wrong,” she said in a statement, “to abandon this commitment (the firewall) and, as a result to knowingly allow a majority vote with AfD votes in the Bundestag for the first time.”

The vote also sparked off a series of anti-AfD and pro-immigration demonstrations over the weekend.

The result was defeat for the bill at its second reading this week as 12 members of Merz’s own party voted against him.

Merz was unrepentant and has vowed even tougher anti-immigration laws if he wins the election. At the moment his party is predicted to win 30 percent of the vote. The AfD is projected to secure the number two slot with 20 percent of the vote while the opposition coalition of the Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals is likely to come in third with 29 percent.

Merz is gambling that his politics will steal some of the AfD’s far-right clothes and push up his share of the vote. But he also risks losing the centrist votes that were secured by Angela Merkel’s moderate positions. And his defeat at the second reading undermines Merz’s leadership of the CDU and runs the risk of pushing Germans concerned about immigrants into the arms of the AfD.

Europe

“Europe,” Trump recently warned, “you are next.”

The newly-elected American president was referring to those “lovely, lovely tariffs” that he is imposing left, right and centre, especially on those who dare to disagree with him.

Trump has never liked the EU. With half a billion reasonably well-off people, it is the world’s largest trading bloc, and trading bloc’s exist to protect the economic interests of their members, and they use the leverage that their size gives them to negotiate the best possible trading terms.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 7 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: Death of the Two-State Solution

By Tom Arms | Sat 8th February 2025 - 9:51 am

The two-state solution is dead. Or, at the very least, it has been reduced to the one and a half state solution. But then the other Palestinian half is likely to be killed off in the next few weeks.

The concept of a Jewish and Palestinian state living side by side cannot work without American backing. No other state has the international clout or sufficient leverage over Israel.

The Palestinian state was envisaged as existing in two distinct halves—the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Donald Trump’s proposal that the US take control of Gaza, move out all the Palestinians, bulldoze it and turn Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East” means that the US has in one press conference eliminated the Gazan half from the political equation.

The other half is expected to soon follow suit. Trump has promised a statement on the West Bank “in a matter of weeks.” In his first term he declared Israeli settlement was no longer—in his opinion—a breach of international law. He also recognised Jerusalem—which is part of the West Bank—as the capital of Israel. In his second term he quickly lifted Biden-imposed sanctions on violent Israeli West Bank settlers.

It is extremely likely that he will announce approval of Benjamin Netanyahu’s long-held wish to annex the West Bank. That means an estimated 5 million Palestinians would be forced out of their homes. Where do they go?

“They should go to new homes,” said President Trump. “Someplace where they live and not die.” Specifically, the president has suggested Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and possibly Saudi Arabia. They have all responded with an emphatic: “No way!!!”

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 17 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: And So It Begins

By Tom Arms | Sat 25th January 2025 - 8:58 am

At the end of the first week of Trump 2.0 the world is left shell-shocked trying to find a way through an artillery barrage of presidential decrees.

He promised the decrees. He promised action. He didn’t lie. Not enough people believed him.

In less than a week Trump has—among other things—announced that he is going to end the right of citizenship for those born in the United States; closed America’s southern border and dispatched the army to help  guard it.

Because Trump clashed with Anthony Fauci—the man who coordinated America’s response to covid—he has ordered that the websites for the National Institute for Health, Centre for Disease Control and Federal Drug Administration to stop issuing health advisories.

Department of Justice lawyers who worked on his prosecution plus the DoJ’s International Division and Criminal Division, are to be sacked and replaced with MAGA loyalists

Federal employees have been told that they will suffer “adverse consequences” if they refuse to turn in colleagues who “defy orders to purge” their departments of diversity, equity and inclusion measures and personnel.

The Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act were signature achievements of the Biden Administration and universally welcomed by the American business community. But they were Biden’s. Trump has scrapped them at the cost of tens of billions of dollars.

Tariffs have yet to be imposed. They are slated to be slapped on Canada and Mexico—at the 25 percent level—from 1 February. On Thursday Trump told the Davos Economic Forum that unless foreign companies moved their businesses to America they would suffer “trillions of dollars in tariffs.”

But perhaps the most disturbing of Trump’s decrees was the 1,500 pardons for the January 6 Capitol Hill riots. Not even his own vice president—JD Vance—thought he would go that far.

The Fraternal Order of Police—America’s largest police union, asked: “What happened to Republican Law and Order? This completely undermines the rule of law and is a stain on Trump’s legacy.”

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | 16 Comments
Lord William Wallace

How do we defend free speech from absolutists and others?

By Lord William Wallace | Thu 23rd January 2025 - 12:40 pm

Elon Musk has declared himself an absolutist on free speech.  It’s a declaration which defines the enemy as ‘the woke virus’, which is condemned as shutting off criticism of minority opinions and groups and shouting down those who express views outside their permitted consensus.  It’s also a demonstration of how far the concept of ‘free speech’ has been weaponised by the right and twisted in in its meaning.   If we want to defend free speech from those who twist the principle to fit their prejudices, we need to be clear about it meaning and its limits.

Liz Truss has just told the Voice of America that ‘The left-wing media of Britain including the BBC, including organizations like the Times and the Guardian and the Financial Times, do not like free speech, free market policies, and they don’t like the status quo in this country being challenged and I will take them on.’  Mark Zuckerberg has declared that his fact-checking teams were ‘politically biassed’, and moved a reduced team from California to Texas, to encourage them to check ‘facts’ in a more Trump-friendly way. Free speech is being redefined as part of the ‘anti-woke’ culture war – to insist on the right to express uncomfortably reactionary opinions, and to bend facts to suit different types of right-wing narratives.

Free speech is central to democracy and to liberal values.  But the right to free speech is not the right to say anything to anyone, regardless of evidence, context or consequences.   Laws against libel and slander protect reputations – though often misused to protect the rich and powerful against criticism. SLAPPS (strategic litigation against public participation) have allowed media magnates and offshore oligarchs to stifle hostile comments.  Misinformation, or worse deliberate disinformation, is on the line between legal but antisocial and illegal because of its harmful consequences in promoting disorder.  Holocaust denial is banned in some countries; medical disinformation can be prosecuted in others. Language that stirs up disorder or promotes criminal or terrorist acts is, rightly, prosecuted.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 15 Comments
Geoff Reid

Consign Trump’s “God” to the dustbin of nonsensical religiosity

By Geoff Reid | Wed 22nd January 2025 - 8:44 am
In 1963 an Observer headline “Our image of God must go” rocked organised Christianity in these islands, primarily because the call came from John Robinson, the Anglican Bishop of Woolwich. He was addressing the problem of “anthropomorphism”, making God into a person, a quasi-human who sat above the clouds, waiting to catch us out like a grumpy and arbitrary tyrant. Many people spoke about God as a being who could simply turn on or off hurricanes, earthquakes or serious illnesses. Robinson’s take on God seemed eminently refreshing to many of us studying theology at the time. A couple of decades later, many liberal/radical Christian thinkers would come to see John Robinson as relatively conservative, particularly with regard to the authorship of books in the New Testament.
In the sixties, at the cutting edge of exploratory approaches to Christian faith was “Christian/Marxist dialogue”, which was the backdrop to my spending three weeks behind the Iron Curtain with a group of youngish people training for ministry in the churches. Fifty-five years later that all seems like a world away, not just because of the implosion of Soviet style Marxism, but also because we live in a time when engagement with secular issues going hand in hand with the development of interfaith relationships informs the agenda of the mainstream Christian denominations.
So what do we make of Donald Trump’s claim to have God on his side and that he was saved by the said God to make America great again? I am not going to say that Trump’s image of God must go. I’m not sure that he has any notion of image or religious symbolism. It is tempting to think of a traditional God being humbled in the presence of the Donald but let’s put that to one side!
Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 8 Comments
Mark Valladares

20 January 2025 – today’s press releases

By Mark Valladares | Mon 20th January 2025 - 10:30 pm
  • 40 new hospitals: Shoddy attempt to bury bad news on day of Trump’s inauguration
  • Farm incomes in Wales fall by 34% – Liberal Democrats call for Government reset
  • Trump inauguration shows importance of close ties with Europe

40 new hospitals: Shoddy attempt to bury bad news on day of Trump’s inauguration

Responding to the Health Secretary’s announcement that there will be significant delays to the completion of the New Hospital Programme, Liberal Democrat Health and Social Care spokesperson Helen Morgan MP said:

This is a double betrayal. The Conservatives shamelessly made promises they never intended to keep to countless communities served by crumbling hospitals.

Now this government uses the day of Trump’s inauguration in a shoddy attempt to bury bad news, showing an outrageous disregard for patients.

Instead of ducking scrutiny, the Health Secretary needs to publish the full impact assessment of these delays.

Patients have a right to know just how at risk they are, and how many more delays they will have to suffer as a result of the government’s decision.

Farm incomes in Wales fall by 34% – Liberal Democrats call for Government reset

The Welsh Liberal Democrats have called on Labour to reset their relationship with farming and the countryside following the release of statistics showing farming incomes in Wales have fallen by 34% for the period April 2023 to March 2024.

David Chadwick MP, the Liberal Democrats Wales spokesperson in Westminster has said that recent policy failures by both the Welsh Labour Government in Cardiff Bay and the UK Government are damaging agriculture and the wider rural economy in Wales and risk making the situation even worse.

Continue reading »
Posted in News, Press releases, Scotland and Wales | Also tagged , , , , and | Leave a comment
Mark Valladares

18-19 January 2025 – the weekend’s press releases

By Mark Valladares | Sun 19th January 2025 - 10:30 pm
  • Patel on Trump: “naive and dangerous”, say Lib Dems
  • Davey: Trump presidency “deeply worrying for millions”
  • Pressure rises on Govt as two in three Labour voters back closer ties with Europe given Trump presidency
  • More than 11,000 malicious calls to ambulance service in past decade
  • 2024 the worst year on record at A&E

Patel on Trump: “naive and dangerous”, say Lib Dems

Responding to Priti Patel’s comments about the Trump presidency on Laura Kuenssberg’s programme this morning, Calum Miller MP, Liberal Democrat Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs, said:

Priti Patel’s comments on her ‘trust’ in Trump are naive and dangerous. The incoming US administration will be one to watch carefully, to deal with critically – not one in which we should put blind faith.

Her desire to rush into a free trade deal between the UK and US – one that could sell British farmers and food standards down the river – reminds us of where her and her party’s true alliances lie: with the Mar-a-Lago clan, not with constituents here in Britain.

The Conservatives are competing with Reform to be most submissive toward Trump, but we should be approaching the new President from a position of strength.

The Liberal Democrats will continue to push for a fair deal for British people – beginning with a new UK-EU customs union that boosts UK growth.

Davey: Trump presidency “deeply worrying for millions”

Commenting as Trump’s inauguration takes place today , Ed Davey, Leader of the Liberal Democrats, said:

Donald Trump returning to the White House will be deeply worrying for millions of people in the UK and around the world. With a President who promises trade wars, undermines NATO and praises Vladimir Putin, the threats to our national security and our economy are clear.

The UK must lead on the world stage again, standing up for our interests by working closely with other countries – above all our European neighbours.

While Nigel Farage toadies up to Donald Trump and Elon Musk in Washington, Liberal Democrats are working hard for our communities here in the UK. We will press the Government to be far more ambitious and positive in fixing our relationship with Europe, to strengthen Britain’s hand when it comes to dealing with Trump.

Pressure rises on Govt as two in three Labour voters back closer ties with Europe given Trump presidency

A two-thirds majority (64%) of 2024 Labour voters agree that the UK should build closer “economic and security ties with Europe” given Trump’s incoming presidency, polling commissioned by the Liberal Democrats has revealed – piling pressure on the Government to accelerate talks on UK-EU relations as the new presidency gets under way.

Continue reading »
Posted in News, Press releases and Scotland | Also tagged , , , , , and | 5 Comments
Tom Arms

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 19th January 2025 - 9:41 am

United States

Trump’s run of good luck continues. It seems likely that all but one of his cabinet nominations will be confirmed by the Senate. Congressman Matt Gaetz was the longest of long shots for Attorney General. The Ethics Committee investigation into his drug-fuelled sex antics ruled him out.

Fox News presenter Pete Hesgeth was also expected to fail in his bid to become America’s next Secretary of Defense. A seedy past and lack of experience worked against him. But Hesgeth put up a good show against tough questioning from the Democratic members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. There is nothing the Republican senators like more than a conservative who successfully fights his corner. He is expected to be confirmed on Tuesday.

The same with Pam Bondi who replaced Matt Gaetz as Trump’s choice for Attorney General. Ms Bondi sort of mollified senators when she denied that there was a “enemies list” compiled of people Trump wants prosecuted. But she then qualified this by refusing to rule out taking action against Jack Smith, the Special Prosecutor appointed to investigate the president-elect.

Smith, for his part, is clearly angry that he will not be able to drag Donald Trump into court. This week he released a partially redacted set of documents which clearly stated that if Trump had not been elected president he would be seeing his tailor for an orange onesie. The documents claimed that Trump was guilty of election interference, disrupting an official proceeding of Congress, stealing and hiding classified documents and, almost certainly, trying to overthrow the US government.

Jack Smith is, according to FBI nominee, Kash Patel, at the top of his “enemies list”. Patel has yet to be questioned by a Senate Committee, but he has publicly said that there is an enemy list. Patel, however, will be reporting to Pam Bondi.

Trump meanwhile has insisted that there is a “patriot’s list.” That is an unidentified number of people who were prosecuted for invading the Capitol Building on January 6, 2020. He has promised that he will pardon them. He does not need the assistance of Patel or Bondi to do so. He just needs a pen and paper.

Russia

They call it hybrid warfare. Russia is becoming a master practitioner across Europe and beyond. It involves, misinformation campaigns, cyberattacks espionage and sabotage of military facilities and critical infrastructure, damaging undersea pipelines and electricity cables and interfering in democratic elections.

This week Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said that the Russians were even plotting to blow up airliners, “not just against Poland, but against airlines across the globe,” he insisted.

Meanwhile the German government this week ordered police and the air force to shoot down the growing number of drones flying over German and American military bases and critical infrastructure. The Interior Minister said they were suspected of sabotage and espionage.

But the most disturbing incidents have involved undersea cables and pipelines in the Baltic. They carry gas supplies, electricity, 95 percent of the internet traffic and $10 trillion worth of annual financial transactions.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , and | 6 Comments
Samuel Jackson

Labour’s potentially hazardous approach to Donald Trump

By Samuel Jackson | Thu 2nd January 2025 - 12:20 pm

Come 20 January 2025, Donald Trump will be inaugurated as the President of the United States, again. This is not an outcome that we Liberal Democrats desired, but it cannot go unrecognised, particularly as it was part of an anti-incumbency wave that characterised the ‘year of elections’. However, it does not mean that we should accept the actions of his incoming administration without question or complaint, especially those which have a direct impact upon the United Kingdom.

Several newspapers, principally of the right of the UK’s news landscape, have reported two prospects that would constitute likely hazards. The first is the spectre, as raised by Ambassador-designate Lord Peter Mandelson, of Nigel Farage being invited to serve as a bridgebuilder between Labour and Trump during talks for a UK-US trade deal. And the second is the possibility that Donald Trump will be offered an invitation to a state visit to the United Kingdom, including a royal reception.

While Farage’s potential role in trade talks has been dismissed by Downing Street insiders, Labour’s approach to engaging with Trump diplomatically may be too ingratiating or enabling. This may be best demonstrated when David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, walked back his comments that Trump was ‘no friend of Britain’, a ‘tyrant’, ‘a woman-hating, neo-Nazi-sympathising sociopath’, and ‘deluded, dishonest, xenophobic, narcissistic’, seemingly having been swayed after one dinner with him.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 11 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: One Down

By Tom Arms | Sat 23rd November 2024 - 9:36 am

One down. A lot more to go.

The infamous and totally unsuitable Matt Gaetz on Friday withdrew his name for consideration as Donald Trump’s Attorney General.

The world heaved a sigh of relief. Trump must have been furious. Gaetz was just the sort of MAGA loyalist he wanted as the nation’s top cop. As Gaetz has demonstrated repeatedly in the past, he would do whatever Trump told him to do.

The demise of former Congressman Gatez wasn’t a real surprise. He is one of the most unpopular lawmakers on Capitol Hill. He is regarded as a bombastic egotist tainted with allegations of drug abuse and under-age sex.

He resigned his seat from Congress in order to prevent publication of the Congressional Ethics Committee report which detailed his nefarious activities. The committee is not supposed to publish reports on former members of Congress. He withdrew from the Attorney General’s job when he heard that old and new allegations were about to surface anyway.

Gatez, however, is only one of many potential Trump appointees who expose the president-elect’s contempt for social norms and the rule of law. He sees his election as a mandate to disrupt the American government and then rebuild it again in his image. His choice of appointments reflect this.

Total control of the Department of Justice and the FBI is a top Trump target – Gaetz as Attorney General would have been in charge of both institutions who by convention work independently of the executive branch. The Department of Defense is another because he wants a loyal military to be used – if necessary – for domestic security.

That is why he has nominated Peter Hesgeth, a Fox News presenter, whose two qualifications for the job was that he served as a National Guard officer in Iraq and Afghanistan and – more importantly – he is a far-right Trump loyalist.

Donald Trump had problems with the military during his first term. They refused to become embroiled in politics. The generals, admirals and other senior officers, argued that their loyalty was to their personal oath to the US constitution rather than to an individual.

Hegseth wants to change that. He has proposed sacking generals who are not right-wing enough. In the Hesgeth playbook everyone who is not a Trump loyalist is a “Marxist” and must be “annihilated.” In his book American Crusade Hesgeth wrote chillingly: “The hour is late for America. Beyond political success, her fate relies on exorcising the leftist spectre dominating education, religion, and culture – a 360-degree holy war for the righteous cause of human freedom.”

And as for democracy, well Hegseth claims that the founding fathers did not want the United States to be a democracy and their views – or his interpretation of those views – should be respected.

Like Trump and Gatez, Hegseth has a sex charge allegation hanging over him. In 2017, a woman accused a drunken Hegseth of sexually assaulting her. She dropped the charges after being paid $10,000, but rest assured the issue will be raised during his Senate confirmation hearings.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | 6 Comments
Lord William Wallace

Europe or USA: do we now have to choose?

By Lord William Wallace | Fri 22nd November 2024 - 9:59 am

The UK’s image of its place in the world since the Second World War has rested on the claim to act as the ‘Atlantic bridge’, as Tony Blair used to put it.  We were the USA’s closest ally within Europe, and one of the major players, alongside France and Germany, within Europe.  The end of the Cold War weakened that claim, as American attention turned towards the Pacific.  Brexit weakened it a great deal further.  But now Trump Republicans and their British supporters are insisting that we have to choose: follow America, or slide back towards Europe.

The Times on November 16th headlined the statement by Stephen Moore, advising Trump at his Florida base, that ‘Britain must decide – do you want to go towards the European socialist model or do you want to go towards the US free market?’  If the latter, then a free trade agreement would be available to avoid the tariff war Trump is threatening to engage in with the EU and others; if not, no deal.  This wasn’t a surprise; Daniel Hannan had an Op-ed in the Mail three days before, making the case for Britain accepting a trade deal with the USA and the extra-territorial regulations (on food additives and hygiene, etc.) that would go with it rather than moving closer to the EU Single Market.  There are even reports that some in the Trump camp want to extend the North American Free Trade Area to Australia and the UK, to form an Anglo-Saxon grouping (with Mexico as an anomaly) under American leadership.

Brexit was never really about re-establishing British sovereignty.  For romantics like Hannan about the superiority of ‘the English-speaking peoples’ and the ‘special relationship’ which was thought to offer Britain continuing global status it was about following the USA and accepting its economic and social model rather than what was seen to be the European alternative – yielding sovereignty to the USA rather than sharing sovereignty with our European neighbours.  Boris Johnson’s Churchill fixation pushed him towards the idea that Britain and America were and remain ‘special’ partners.  Nigel Farage is an even stronger advocate of Anglo-Saxon solidarity – assuming that the USA will continue to be run by Republican Administrations promoting free markets and a shrunken state.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 22 Comments
William Francis

Preparing for Trump Presidency Two Electric Boogaloo

By William Francis | Fri 8th November 2024 - 11:56 am

Many of us felt despondent at the results of the 2024 Presidential election. Bitterness, despair, disgust and fear. It is only natural given how the world’s most powerful country has elected a dangerous, destructive demagogue.

But it is not enough to fall into moral outrage. We must prepare for the coming storm and what could be an end to Atlanticism.

Liberalism has not faced a more powerful foe since the Cold War. The underpinnings of our national security strategy have been thrown into question. Our access to international markets has been thrown into doubt, undermining our prosperity. The threat of climate change has become even more menacing. Meanwhile, our politics threatens to be overrun reactionaries embolden by Trump’s example.

To be complacent is to invite economic, political, ecological and social ruin. To hope that fawning over Trump and his courtiers, in hope of being spared the worst of his mercurial nature, is a high-stakes gamble. Given Trump’s longstanding admiration of autocrats of their perceived strength, our best bet to project strength.

The good news is that we are not alone in this. Most of America’s many allies face the exact same dilemma. As Sir Ed Davey has said, its imperative that we rebuild our relationship with the EU and seek further integration. High tariffs on all our American exports will halve our anaemic and much need economic growth. Greater integration with the single market would offset some of effects of these tariffs, whilst giving us a stronger bargaining position with Trump over the incoming trade talks.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | 16 Comments
NewsHound

LibLink – Christine Jardine: How the UK should deal with four more years of Donald Trump

By NewsHound | Wed 6th November 2024 - 8:00 pm

Christine Jardine has written for the Scotsman about how the UK should deal with the second Trump presidency.

Like most Lib Dems, she has focused on the need to strengthen our relationships with our European partners.

The news from the US dampened the mood at Westminster:

Wednesday morning too was cloaked in a cloud of gloom as MPs considered the prospect of an American president whose protectionist instincts and apparently dismissive attitude to Nato and European defence leaves us worried for the future. I do not want contemplate the dread that must have been felt in Ukraine about what it might mean for the support on which their war effort depends.

Then, of course, there are the implications for so many American women and their right to choose what is best for them and their bodies.

We need to work together, at home and with Europe:

Continue reading »
Posted in LibLink | Also tagged | Leave a comment
Lord William Wallace

Defending Liberalism in a Trumpian world

By Lord William Wallace | Wed 6th November 2024 - 6:36 pm

World politics is going to be rough in the next few years – and British politics will be increasingly difficult, too.  Trump’s victory means that the USA’s role in global affairs will be highly unpredictable.  But we can predict that American influence will not be constructive on a range of global issues, from combatting climate change to managing the world economy and containing conflicts, and is unlikely to be affected by consideration for British or European concerns.  So how do we respond?

Ed Davey’s first response to Trump’s victory was spot on.  We need to defend and promote liberal values and prioritise rebuilding closer relations with our European neighbours.  Neither of those are easy.  Illiberal movements are gaining ground in many democratic countries, including within the EU.  Liberal democracy gains most support when economies are growing, societies are stable and international relations are peaceful.  Even without the added complications of an incoherent and unfriendly US Administration, the challenges of preventing catastrophic climate change, of coping with the mass movement of people that climate change and regional conflicts are already driving, of moving towards a sustainable global economy and resisting Chinese and Russian expansionism would be hard to manage – and harder to persuade the British electorate to share the cost.

There will no doubt be a flood of analyses of why a majority of American voters supported Trump.  But discontent at the economic and social disruption of their lives, and disillusion with the ‘elites’ who – as they see it – allowed disruptive change to sweep from outside through their communities, were major factors.  Those discontents are widespread in Britain as well.  The ‘left behind’ in northern and coastal towns feel similarly abandoned by educated elites and multinational corporations.  You Gov tracker polls show that the answer to the question ‘Are members of Parliament in touch with the public or not?’ has consistently shown around 70% answering ‘out of touch’ and 10-12% ‘in touch’ over the past five years.  Those in the Brexit Referendum who were saying ‘I want my country back’ were expressing a similar sense of loss to Trump supporters who want to ‘Make America Great Again.’

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 32 Comments
Paul Walter

US election – be ready for a long wait

By Paul Walter | Tue 5th November 2024 - 8:15 am

Liberal Democrat Voice will be covering the US election results tonight and during subsequent days, giving you the chance to add your comments as the results unfold.

Concerning the US presidential and congressional elections, there are two things I can be relatively sure of:

1. The initial vote counts (because unlike the UK, the USA vote counts are released on the web as they are counted and before a state result) are likely to show that Trump is winning. This is because the postal votes (or “absentee ballots”) are generally counted after election day ballots, and they tend to favour the Democrats. Conversely, electyion day ballots tend to favour the Republicans. So the election day ballots, which tend to be counted first, could show Trump ahead.

2. Donald Trump will come out very early, perhaps as early as an hour after polls close, and declare that he has won, and say that if the count shows that he has lost then there has been Democrat fiddling with the results. Worryingly, this sets the scene for potential street violence.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 3 Comments
Caron Lindsay

A scary week ahead

By Caron Lindsay | Sun 3rd November 2024 - 11:59 am

American presidential elections in days of yore were pretty simple. We all went to bed at our usual time and then when we woke up in the morning, we knew who was going to be President.

And then Bush v Gore 2000 happened and it all took a bit longer as we learned about things like “Hanging Chads” and how they affected the vote counts in Florida. It took until 12 December until the Supreme Court stopped the recount and Gore conceded the next day.

In 2020, we spent four long nights and three and a half long days constantly refreshing CNN and agonising in WhatsApp chats before it was clear to everyone except Donald Trump and his followers that Joe Biden had won.

This year I’m not sure I have a big enough cushion to hide behind as the results come in. But before we get too absorbed in the details, take a minute to have a good laugh at Kamala’s appearance on last night’s Saturday Night Live. Pitch perfect:

We are probably not going to know for a while after the polls close whether the US will have a President who will respect women’s rights, put more money back in the hands of the poorest and grow the economy, or someone who will give to his billionaire mates, pursue policies that see more women die because they can’t get medical treatment if they have a miscarriage, and threaten US democracy itself.

The conventional wisdom amongst commentators at the moment is that Donald Trump will get his second term in the White House. Let’s hope they have it as wrong as they had it in 2016 when they all thought Hillary was going to win. We have to remember that part of the reason for the Democrats losing back then was because they were so convinced they were going to win that they stopped spending money in the swing states while Donald Trump spent a fortune on wall to wall advertising.

The Democrats are not making that mistake again. The Harris/Walz campaign has been concentrating on the swing states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, North Carolina, Georgia, Nevada and Arizona. The election will likely be decided on tens of thousands of votes in those places. It’s a bit like how our elections are decided in 100 or so marginal seats across the country except on a bigger scale.

She’s had some help in the past week from Scottish Lib Dem Leader who went out there with some friends (at their own expense) to knock on doors. It’s not the first time he has been out. He turned out to be a good luck charm for Obama in Virginia in 2008. He made some observations on Twitter this week about his trip an the prospects in the election:

The field campaign team there are exceptional but they are utterly exhausted and driving hard for the finish line, I’m proud to know them. They certainly put me to work in getting out the vote.

With over 1k doors knocked across 9 communities in Lackawanna county, PA, I got to see a lot of the Scranton area in stunning autumnal beauty. These are warm, resilient communities, but in many ways they have cause to feel left behind.

This is an exceptionally tight election, everyone knows that, but I’ve never seen tribalism run quite so deep before. Those houses without partisan lawn signs are in the minority and this election is dividing communities and even families, like never before.

A standout highlight for me was getting to meet Tim Walz in person, but above that I will never forget the warmth of the people I met on the doors of Pennsylvania.

My assessment? She can absolutely do it, but turnout is everything.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , and | 4 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: Foreign Policy Impact of US elections

By Tom Arms | Sat 2nd November 2024 - 10:02 am

A Kamala Harris win this week is not good news for the UK and Europe. A Trump win is much, much worse.

Trump’s “America First” campaigns has fed a latent US isolationism which has forced the Democrats to adopt some of his policies, because, like it or not, America is a democracy and the president elected to represent all Americans.

According to one poll, only 22 percent of young Americans support involvement in the Middle East. Half of Republicans think that the US is supplying too much aid to Ukraine and only 44 percent of Republicans think that the US should play a leading role in the world. Democrats are more internationally minded with 65 percent in favour of an active foreign policy. The good news is that NATO has popular support with a bipartisan 70 percent approval rating. The fact is, however, that America is moving into its shell at one of the most dangerous periods for the world since the end of World War Two.

America’s diplomatic corps would be hard put to meet expectations even if there was a swell of opinion in favour of increased global involvement. It is still reeling from the Trump years when budgets were cut by 30 percent, ambassadorial posts were left empty and 60% of the diplomatic corps left either in protest or cutbacks. Biden has increased budgets but the damage done by Donald Trump will take years to repair.

Trump, of course, regularly threatens to withdraw from NATO. Biden and Kamala Harris have recommitted to the alliance but it was a Democratic president—Barack Obama—who first attacked NATO allies for failing to spend at least two percent of their GDP on defense. He also unveiled the “Asia Pivot” which shifts the military focus from Europe and the Middle East to East Asia. Trump, Biden and Harris have embraced the Asia Pivot.

Defense costs money and the policies of Trump, Biden and Harris are undermining the economies of UK and Europe. Trump, again is the worst. His tariffs on all imports—possibly as much as 20 percent on British and EU exports will hit exports. It will, of course, also lead to a tit for tat tariff war in which everybody loses—especially the consumer.

Kamala Harris will continue Biden’s $738 billion Inflation Reduction Act” which is peppered with isolationist policies. The IRA includes such things as a $7,500 handout for the purchase of US-made-only electric vehicles, and tax credits only for products made in America. The EU has protested and threatened to take America to the World Trade Organisation. But the WTO has been rendered useless by America’s 7-year refusal to agree to new judges for its appellate body.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 3 Comments
Tom Arms

Observations of an Expat: Trump Told You So

By Tom Arms | Sat 26th October 2024 - 10:17 am

Dear Trump Supporters,

I thought of writing this open letter after the elections. But I decided that would be pointless because you really needed to read it before you voted.

Also, if I wrote it after the election, it was going to be an I-told-you-so missive which is never a nice thing to do, although it is very satisfying to the writer.

So, having dismissed the two options above, I thought the best thing to do is write a “Trump Told You So” letter or, as the election is yet to happen, “Trump Is Telling You So” letter.

The thinking behind my letter is that all you have to do is believe the words coming out of the man’s mouth to decide to cast your ballot for Kamala Harris. If you can’t bring yourself to do that, don’t vote at all, write-in your mother-in-law’s name or put an X next to the name of a third party candidate.

This letter will also include the actions of Donald Trump as well as the words because, as we all know, actions speak much, much louder than words.

Let’s start with the hot topic of immigration. Trump has said he wants to deport 20 million immigrants. Think about it. Twenty million people, some of which are certain to be your friend, neighbour, colleague, maybe even a relative.

And where will these 20 million be kept while waiting to be flown to the countries they fled. Rest assured, they won’t be staying at the local Hilton.

Finally, what about the cost? Twenty million people will be taken out of the economy. That it is twenty million people who produce and buy goods and services. If all they earned was $30,000 a year that means $600 billion would be taken out of the economy. But that is nothing compared to the price tag for police and enforcement agents to implement Trump’s plans.  It is estimated that will cost the taxpayer $850 billion.

As we are talking about money, how about Trump’s wider economic policies the key points of which are tariffs and taxes. Trump wants a 10-20 percent tariff on all imported goods and tariffs ranging from 60 percent to 500 percent (depending on which rally you attend) on Chinese goods.

Continue reading »
Posted in News | 14 Comments
Lord William Wallace

Are we ready for US election chaos, or for President Trump?

By Lord William Wallace | Wed 23rd October 2024 - 2:22 pm

Liberal Democrats will be hoping that the nightmare of the US presidential campaign will be over on November 5th, with a clear win for Kamala Harris, accepted by Donald Trump, leading Republicans and state and federal courts.  But at present that looks the least likely outcome.  More likely by far will be either a contested result, after chaotic events during the voting and state counts, or a narrow Trump victory with chaotic consequences for US politics and foreign policy.  Either will have major implications for British politics and foreign policy.

The continuing rumble of opinion polls suggests a virtual tie between Harris and Trump, with the outcome dependent on who turns out among the small minority of undecideds.  Challenges to names on voting registers are under way in several states.  Counting may well be disrupted; there were some assaults on election counts four years ago, and the atmosphere has become more fraught since then.  Republican local organisations are ready to use the courts to challenge any contestable declaration or hint of malpractice.  We may not be sure who has won for some time.  And the consequences of a Trump win are as uncertain as the candidate’s utterances have become.  So how should we react to what will be an assault on the principles of liberal democracy and on the transatlantic partnership which has been at the core of the UK’s position in the world since 1941?   

One Liberal Democratic theme, I suggest, must be to remind disillusioned citizens in this country of the importance of constitutional institutions and limited government, and the dangers of sliding down the road towards populist rule.  Britain has just emerged from several years of chaotic government, with a populist prime minister attempting to prevent Parliament from returning from a recess when he had been in office himself for only s few months.  We have witnessed right-wing attacks on our supreme court, an Elections Act that lifted constraints on political donations and restricted the autonomy of the Electoral Commission, and Conservative ministers supporting conspiracy theories about ‘liberal elites’.  We now have a Labour government which has won the most disproportional parliamentary majority since 1832: 63.4% of MPs from 33.7% of the votes cast, on a worryingly low turnout of 58%.  Public trust in ‘Westminster politics’ has sunk to the lowest recorded point since opinion surveys began.  The potential for an anti-democratic backlash, if this government fails to improve both economic growth and public services, is high.

Continue reading »
Posted in Europe / International and Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 8 Comments
Tom Arms

Tom Arms’ World Review

By Tom Arms | Sun 13th October 2024 - 10:25 am

France

As I sat down to write, French Prime Minister Michele Barnier was making last minute adjustments to his budget before presenting it to the National Assembly.

So, there may be a few unintentional omissions from this piece, but not too many because the problems of the French economy have been widely circulated in advance of the Barnier budget.

On Friday morning Barnier was widely expected to introduce an austerity budget of cuts and higher taxes totalling $66 billion – or two percent of the French GDP. Two-thirds will come in cuts in government spending and one third in tax increases.

The savings will come from a six-month delayed pension increase and $20 billion in cuts to government departments. The newly-appointed Barnier also wants to cut local government subsidies for businesses. To raise money, Barnier plans to introduce a temporary super tax on firms with more than a $1.1 billion turnover and households with earnings over $547,000.

The super tax is likely to have no problem in the French legislature. There is very little sympathy in France – or most everywhere else – for the rich. Pensioners are another problem. National Rally leader Marine Le Pen has already accused the government of “stealing from the elderly.” As for government cuts, the devil is in the detail and those details will only become clear in the coming weeks of debate.

It is clear, however, that something must be done to deal with the government deficit which is expected to exceed six percent of GDP in 2024.

President Emmanuel Macron had a reputation as a good money manager. And back in January 2020 he appeared to have the economy under control. Then the pandemic struck. Macron pledged to “protect” the French people “whatever it costs.” Government spending leapt to 59 percent of GDP – more than Germany or Spain or any other OECD country.

As the pandemic eased, Russia invaded Ukraine and the price of oil and grain rapidly rose along with almost every inflation marker. Macron’s economic plans went out the window.

But the parlous state of the French economy is not Barnier’s only problem. He is prime minister of a minority government with France’s left and right wing parties broadly united in their opposition. But not completely, Le Pen’s RN favours cuts in government but not cuts in pension payments.  The left joins them on behalf of pensioners but also opposes any cuts in government spending.

Barnier’s hope is to gain broad support from the Gaullist parties and then play off the left and right over specific aspects of France’s finances.

The budget has to be agreed by December. If Barnier fails to win the support of a majority of the National Assembly then he has the option of using emergency measures to push it through. But that is highly unpopular and could easily lead to the collapse of his government.

United States

Trump may have broken the law – again. This time the law in question is known as the Logan Act.

The Logan Act was passed in 1799 shortly after the creation of the United States. It makes it illegal for private individuals to conduct diplomacy or negotiations with foreign governments without authorisation from the federal government. Breaching it can cost a fine and three years in prison

The law makes sense. The Secretary of State – or any of his officials – don’t want their efforts being contradicted or undermined by an individual negotiating with a different agenda.

According to the latest book by investigative journalist Bob Woodward, Donald Trump spoke with Russian president Vladimir Putin at least seven times since leaving the White House. Of course, they may have just been exchanging recipes or discussing when to send Putin the latest health care products. That, however, seems unlikely given wars in Ukraine and the Middle East.

Continue reading »
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , , and | 19 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Mick Taylor
    As I understand it, the problem lies not with who is responsible for candidate selection, but the lack of volunteers to deliver it. There is a chronic shortage ...
  • Peter Davies
    @Graham Jeffs There will always be plots with planning permission but no homes. Large developers like to build slowly. They can have one team doing all the roof...
  • Andrew Tampion
    Simon R "Taxing 2nd homes would probably have only a marginal impact, and besides, 2nd homes would tend to be in holiday and rural areas, whereas the shortage o...
  • Stephen Yolland
    Good article. Trump is an inherently dictatorial leader. He is destroying American democracy, and in particular the rule of law. We should implacably oppose ...
  • Joseph Bourke
    Michael Wolff in his second Trump biography claimed that Trump's business interests formed part of a "semi-criminal enterprise." He quoted the Trump confidante ...