Cont: Brexit: Now What? 9 Below Zero

[P.J. Denyer]

At least it will be a quick and simple agreement to get in place.

All we'll have to negotiate is how high we have to jump...

...or how many toes we have to touch.

 

[Darat]

The Independent: Trump threatened UK with 25% car tariffs unless it agreed to accuse Iran of breaking nuclear deal
The Independent: Trump threatened UK with 25% car tariffs unless it agreed to accuse Iran of breaking nuclear deal.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-nuclear-deal-france-germany-eu-a9286496.html

 

[lomiller]

Of course I I don't expect a trade deal between the UK and the EU to be as "good" or as comprehensive as being inside the EU - the EU is determined that cannot be the case lest they see the rapid departure of other EU member countries.

This has nothing to do with it. If the UK would agree to:
- Adopt EU product standards
- Adopt EU trade rules
- No side deals on trade
- A common customs area
A trade deal that is as good as being in the EU is certainly possible. Not agreeing to these would make the new deal a net negative for both sides and there is no way the EU is just going to absorb all the losses resulting losses.

But you have to factor in the cost to the UK of being in the EU - when the net payments by the UK to the EU (the cost of membership) are taken into account, then the existing "free" deal is nowhere near free.

This is like the naïve 20 year old who things living at home isn’t a good deal if they have to pay rent, but has no idea how expensive it is to live the way they are accustomed.

 

[lomiller]

and the UK, once freed from the EU, can expect to do at least as well, and probably much better.

What makes you think Trump would even honor a trade deal with the UK? Canada and Mexico are part of a comprehensive free trade deal with the US yet he unilaterally imposed tariffs on Steal and Aluminum imports in order to protect the US Steel industry.

 

[Darat]

What makes you think Trump would even honor a trade deal with the UK? Canada and Mexico are part of a comprehensive free trade deal with the US yet he unilaterally imposed tariffs on Steal and Aluminum imports in order to protect the US Steel industry.

You only have to look above to my previous post to see how Trump is going to deal with the UK. Trump is acting exactly as people warned.

 

[lomiller]

You only have to look above to my previous post to see how Trump is going to deal with the UK. Trump is acting exactly as people warned.

There are 2 issues.
1) What Trump would demand as part of a deal
2) Whether Trump would even honor the US side of the deal even if UK made the compromises he demanded.

 

[a_unique_person]

Come on people. Trump will be gone at the end of the year.

 

[The Don]

Come on people. Trump will be gone at the end of the year.

I'm not so sure, I reckon that he's got a better than even chance of being reelected unless one or more of the following happens:

• There is a significant economic downturn before the election - though at this stage that cannot happen
• The Democrats find an exciting and charismatic candidate - have you seen the candidates ?
• Trump's base abandons him en-masse - ain't gonna to happen ever
• The GOP grows a spine - ain't gonna happen any time soon

 

[McHrozni]

I'm not so sure, I reckon that he's got a better than even chance of being reelected unless one or more of the following happens:


There is a significant economic downturn before the election - though at this stage that cannot happen

Marginally possible, it doesn't even need to be that significant a downturn.

The Democrats find an exciting and charismatic candidate - have you seen the candidates ?

Largely impossible, true.

The GOP grows a spine - ain't gonna happen any time soon

Won't happen in this late stage, true.

Trump's base abandons him en-masse - ain't gonna to happen ever

Herein lies a weakness. Trump has a massively loyal base, but that base is only about 20-25% of the electorate. All the other support he might get at the polls are people voting Republican out of habbit or against the Democrat candidate or some other reason like that. Trumpian base is fanatical and literarily won't abandon Trump is he took a gun and shot up a school. "Dems made him do it, he has my vote against those baby killers" is what they'd say.

That said, the obnoxious nature of his fanatics alienated many other potential supporters. To defeat Trump you don't need his base to abandon him, you primarily need to get people who usually vote Republican to sit the election out or vote for someone else. Most won't vote Democrat but they might vote third party or else leave at least the presidential part of the ballot blank. You don't need all of them either, 10% of such people are plenty and enough for a narrow Electoral College victory. Then of course there are the independents who might favor the challenger and of course the people who usually vote Democrat but sometimes sit the elections out to come out and vote.

Trump's base helps the Democrats in all of those. The deplorable vote is too small to win elections by themselves and they chase away good candidates and the sane electorate, at least some of the time. His base is also his weakness.

Trump has a chance to get reelected because he's an incumbent in good economy and those tend to hold their seats - but no party that faced impeachment of a sitting president managed to hold on to the White House in the next election.

I wouldn't be so quick to grant him another term. If he lives that long, that is. Have you seen him walk lately?

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

That said, the obnoxious nature of his fanatics alienated many other potential supporters. To defeat Trump you don't need his base to abandon him, you primarily need to get people who usually vote Republican to sit the election out or vote for someone else. Most won't vote Democrat but they might vote third party or else leave at least the presidential part of the ballot blank. You don't need all of them either, 10% of such people are plenty and enough for a narrow Electoral College victory. Then of course there are the independents who might favor the challenger and of course the people who usually vote Democrat but sometimes sit the elections out to come out and vote.

You're right, if Trump's base causes other GOP voters to vote Democrat or simply not turn up then that would significantly damage President Trump's chances of reelection.

The thing is that there's been precious little evidence of this. His approval rating seems to be where it was 3 years ago; there was a "blue ripple" in the House elections but no sign of electoral tectonic plates shifting (the GOP increased its grip on the Senate); GOP senators and House representatives - who are likely very sensitive to any changes in the electoral winds - are still steadfastly behind him.

Of course all of this is off topic for a Brexit thread

 

[The Don]

Once again the EU is demonstrating how unsporting and utterly foreign they are by preparing for the trade negotiations in advance and publishing their workings:

The EU negotiating team is gearing up for talks with the UK about the post-Brexit relationship by holding a series of seminars for diplomats from the 27 member states.

The presentations are being published online. Stuffed with jargon and seriously lacking in inspirational clipart, they provide important clues about how things might play out.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51133846

Every year I read the same book "Scott And Amundsen: The Last Place on Earth". The author is a complete Amundsen fanboi and spends a lot of time comparing and contrasting Amundsen's meticulous preparation to Scott's "have a go" approach. I think the results speak for themselves.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Once again the EU is demonstrating how unsporting and utterly foreign they are by preparing for the trade negotiations in advance and publishing their workings:



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51133846

Every year I read the same book "Scott And Amundsen: The Last Place on Earth". The author is a complete Amundsen fanboi and spends a lot of time comparing and contrasting Amundsen's meticulous preparation to Scott's "have a go" approach. I think the results speak for themselves.

Indeed, Scott is a national hero, and Amundsen was a sneaky Norwegian cheat.

 

[Lothian]

Once again the EU is demonstrating how unsporting and utterly foreign they are by preparing for the trade negotiations in advance and publishing their workings:

Yes but there are 27 of them. It is so much easier for counties if they can share resources and expense........ Oh.

 

[The Don]

Indeed, Scott is a national hero, and Amundsen was a sneaky Norwegian cheat.

The book I mentioned is vehemently criticised for being a hatchet job on Scott and those same people praise Ranulph Fiennes' book to the rafters. Fiennes' book focuses on how brave and dogged Scott was - but that was never in doubt. He still used the wrong tools and was woefully under-prepared.

It reminds me of the recent Current Events thread about some guy who had to be rescued from the wilds of Alaska when he burned down his shelter, killed his dog and ruined most of his food supply trying to light a fire.

Some in the thread are saying that we fail to understand the survivalist mentality and that all he did was make one tiny mistake and he recovered from that brilliantly. My opinion was that he lacked critical skills, equipment and knowledge and was relying on luck far too much.

 

[McHrozni]

You're right, if Trump's base causes other GOP voters to vote Democrat or simply not turn up then that would significantly damage President Trump's chances of reelection.

The thing is that there's been precious little evidence of this. His approval rating seems to be where it was 3 years ago; there was a "blue ripple" in the House elections but no sign of electoral tectonic plates shifting (the GOP increased its grip on the Senate); GOP senators and House representatives - who are likely very sensitive to any changes in the electoral winds - are still steadfastly behind him.

Given the nature of the election and the prevalence of gerrymandering the 2018 election was quite a blow to the Republicans. Yes they increased their grip in the Senate - but given the nature of the seats at play in 2018 that was a given. The Republicans also lost a number of state legislatures that will now re-district without Republicans drawing the districts. The losses will sting the party in the decade to come. Of course it's not very visible just yet, but that's actually because the 2012 election went so well for the Democrats in the Senate, not because the 2018 went so poorly.

Second of all, GOP Senators and House representatives staunchly defend Trump because his base is strong enough to dominate Republican party primaries. That will continue into 2020 of course but the point is their hands are tied. They either support Trump or else seek unemployment benefits, thus far most of them prefer the latter. The long-term effect is that people who might wish to run for office for the Republican party are now shying away, depriving the party as a whole of quality candidates. Lack of quality candidates does hurt your overall vote.

Third, Trump's base is mostly older people. The most loyal GOP voters are Silent and Boomer generations. Silent generation halved since 2016 as the share of total voters, Boomers decreased ever so slightly. About 1.5% of the electorate is changed every year and the change does not favor the GOP.

All of these and more against what? An incumbent with an economy that is doing somewhat okay? Not great, but kind of okay.

Trump has a chance to win in 2020, but his odds are poor. Bloomberg promised to spend up to $1 billion at defeating Trump - regardless of who's the Democratic candidate.

Of course all of this is off topic for a Brexit thread

In part, but since BJ is strongly banking on Trump helping him out, not really

McHrozni

 

[catsmate]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...at-unless-iran-stance-changes-says-trump-ally

Can anyone say "poodle"?

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Can anyone say "poodle"?

How long before we bail you all out of some calamity with IMF loans that serve as puppet strings when "conditionalities" and "structural adjustment policies" are imposed?

Don't worry too much, we've been doing it to other countries for decades and you don't hear anyone complaining.

>:9

 

[catsmate]

I know exactly what it is. I was attempting to get Ian Osborne to do some research and realize that the USA and EU don't currently have a comprehensive "trade agreement".

Like many remainers he assumed that the EU already has a wonderful trade deal with the USA which the UK could never expect to equal by itself.

the UK, once freed from the EU, can expect to do at least as well, and probably much better.

 

[Klimax]

How long before we bail you all out of some calamity with IMF loans that serve as puppet strings when "conditionalities" and "structural adjustment policies" are imposed?

Don't worry too much, we've been doing it to other countries for decades and you don't hear anyone complaining.

>:9

Maybe one shouldn't be trying to bankrupt country if they don't want to be on short leash...

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Once again the EU is demonstrating how unsporting and utterly foreign they are by preparing for the trade negotiations in advance and publishing their workings:

"All over the world every nation's the same
They've simply no notion of playing the game
They argue with umpires, they cheer when they've won
And they practice beforehand, which spoils the fun."

Flander & Swann predicting post Brexit negotiations with everyone by several years.

Although with Johnson in charge Brabbins and Fyffe might be a better fit.