To worry about America?

Also, if you look at what countries he is aligning himself with, you have to think twice. The people he wants to deal with are all billionaires ruling their countries like their personal fiefdoms. A lot of those countries are exporting a great number of economic migrants to Europe. Where do you think people are represented the best? In medieval kingdoms with gagged and unequally educated masses or in Western Europe with overall prosperous populations (yes, there are issues with CoL but on average we are still way ahead of most places in the Global South)? Trump and his oligarchs hate Europe because its countries have rules that hinder unbridled exploitation by corporations and corrupt rulers. It's a tragedy for the developed world that the world's top economy has fallen to the dark side. For me the dark side is ruling for and by the 0.0000001%

But that's exactly the problem: 'quickly but orderly' is pure wishful thinking. And I disagree that going Trump is the only way - if only because he is a billionaire in service of other billionaires and that his agenda is unlikely to promote the well-being of us plebs.

No need to go Trump and smash everything. Let's do it quickly, but orderly.
I really do not thinkbwe have other options. Or that any other option will combine economic growth, security and environmental benefits comparable.

I know, I have seen them indeed.

Yes, that is what Trump said he wanted. Then he has started this smashing of everything. You can apply policies without crashing the previous one. I think he has bitten more than any country can chew, even the US. Or even the US allied with Russia.
It will not be easy for any of us, but in my opinion is the only way. You cannot choose an easy way out of everything. That will trap you in an ally without exit.

I didn't say it was. She gave up her passport many years ago in order to join the navy. She is now applying to get it back so that she can, if necessary, move back to the UK - due to what is happening in the US now. It's really not that difficult to follow the quote history. 🙄

@AlisonDonutI understand your frustration, just reading posts.

Do you still think this is the case? It seemed to be Labour spin given Starmer is no longer part of negotiations.

And the deal that he likely pushed Z not to sign the first time in a push for guarantees is looking way worse now with the new one.

Yes, I'm worried. A major power electing a poisonous and stupid government like this is always a worry. Though it's interesting (to me) that I still had an unconscious view of the US as somewhere I looked up to, a beacon of freedom and rule of law etc. Turns out they're just bozos like the rest of us.

We'd planned a big trip of a month to the US in 2026 to see family and celebrate a big personal milestone. We're going elsewhere now.

If you reread the previous post you'll see that the point being made is that the poster's friend now has a good reason for reapplying for that British passport. Whereas before it wasn't worth the bother.

Sure, that’s okay. I did say “other posters”, not me, that might have trouble with your posts, though. I tend to skip past them myself.

I didn't write the law.

I am explaining why people were against it.

I've explained time and again that I personally don't have issue with the technicality, but it is why SOME PEOPLE did. And many of those people were in positions of power.

And again the DEMOCRATS could have sorted this out decades ago. Go and ask them why they allowed this to happen, it isn't my doing.

I think this is why other posters have trouble with your posts.

If you “research” like you say you do, you’ll know there is no such thing as ‘abortion’ in the third term of gestation. It’s ‘delivery’. From week 27, a foetus is technically viable. No babies are ‘aborted’ at this point unless there are irretrievable medical issues with the child or continuing the pregnancy would cause death to the mother.

This talking point was flavour of the month sometime last year with RW pundits. It has no basis in fact. You’ve been told this before but you keep repeating it.

American women are already dying due to the repeal of Roe vs. Wade, even in situations where they wanted to keep their pregnancies. Maternal care suffers when abortion is heavily restricted or made illegal.

Abortion is techinically legal up until the point of birth for very rare, tragic scenarios in which the mother's life is at risk and/or the foetus isn't viable.

Nobody is aborting a healthy pregnancy in the third trimester.

Sure, it's called 'Roe Vs Wade'.

People want democracy, well they got it

"I found out that many Americans opposed abortion because technically, it was legal up until birth. So they are against abortion even though if there was a much smaller window they would probably agree with it."

Source please @AlisonDonut

I tend to do this weird thing called 'research' to find out why people are against such ideas as 'abortion'.

I found out that many Americans opposed abortion because technically, it was legal up until birth. So they are against abortion even though if there was a much smaller window they would probably agree with it.

These aren't 'right wing theories'. Just the situation at the time of research.

In time, such 'facts' get memory holed and washed over and explained away as 'it never happens' and so when people get incensed with rage about something, yes I will tend to point out the inconvenient uncomfortable and overlooked facts.

For doing so I am called nazi, bigot, right wing, yada yada yada. Whatever.

And again, the DEMOCRATS had ample opportunity to legislate federally on this, and they have hung it over the nation for votes for decades. But I suppose that's another 'right wing theory'?

I’m in agreement that Alison isn’t a bot, but I think the PP was commenting primarily on Alison’s tendency to repeat right-wing theories. (Such as ‘abortion’ up to 9 months gestation.)

Giving up a foreign passport is always required to hold a military security clearance. That has always been true and has nothing to do with the current administration.

In the US, the Heritage Foundation and people like Scwab, Vernon Hill and particularly Thomas D. Klingenstein. The man behind the National Conservatism movement and JD Vance, and who Suella Braverman, Badenoch and the other right-wing libertarians endorsed at conference.

Their links to the "think-tanks" in Tufton Street are pretty clear, even if their is an effort to keep it quiet.

https://goodlawproject.org/a-good-cause-how-charities-funnelled-28m-into-rightwing-think-tanks/

No one has said that Europe should be responsible for what goes on in the USA. Far from it. Trump's administration has made it clear that Europe cannot trust the US.

I doubt whole of Europe is going to end up with right wing people in charge because everyone is sick of the current situation. When they saw the damage Brexit did to the UK, the European right became quieter wrt to leaving the EU. Now Trump's craziness is destroying the USA for everyone to see.

Europe is pretty centralist and democratic. The right have had a bit of a resurgence recently, but it has proven to be a disaster for those living under it. Post Brexit UK proved that. Trump's America is confirming it.

Who are these people?