Petition calling for Donald Trump's state visit to be banned smashes 100,000 signatures

[Louisa]

Lynne Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So, we don't approve of his banning people, so we

> ban him. Perhaps someone could explain the logic

> of this to me?

There is no logic. Just blustering from students and attention seeking social democrats, grieved that they're losing control of the world order.

Louisa.

[nxjen]

Petition isn't seeking to ban him visiting the UK in an official capacity, just that he isn't accorded the full pomp and ceremony of a State Visit which is when the Head of State of the overseas country is entertained by the Head of State of the UK who is the Queen.

[rendelharris]

Is it worth noting that there is no call for a ban on Trump visiting or having dialogue with him, just a call for him not to be accorded the honour of a state visit? ETA posted while nxjen was making the same point above.

Actually I've changed my opinion in the last day or so and have come to the conclusion that rescinding the offer now would be unnecessarily provocative. However, it is good that the issue has been raised and so perhaps in future governments will not immediately rush to offer state visits in this way: as the former permanent secretary at the FO said yesterday, it would have been far wiser to wait a few months to see what sort of president he was going to be. Offering a state visit straight away was as foolish as it was to give Obama the Nobel Peace Prize before he'd done anything.

The "we don't approve of him banning people so we're banning him" is perfectly logical, people weren't calling for him to be banned because of his nationality, race or religion (as he has done) but because of his actions; had he issued an order banning people because of their illegal actions then there would have been no grounds for complaint. Doing the same thing as someone you oppose is not necessarily illogical: we would disapprove of someone who imprisoned another person, so much so that we would imprison them. Perfectly logical.

[red devil]

Louisa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is no logic. Just blustering from students

> and attention seeking social democrats, grieved

> that they're losing control of the world order.

>

> Louisa.

And what do you think of the new 'world order' Lou? Do you have any concerns or worries and what it might lead to? All you seem to be concerned with is throwing clich?d barbs at those who do have worries...

[????]

Poll in You Gov today shows more of UK in favour of not cancelling Trump State visit over those in favour of cancelling it - so does show the Echo Chamber effect.

Anecdotally I'd say 90% of Trump posts on my various timeline are veri-anti Trump and therefore you'd *think* everyone feels the same until reality Social Media *meets* reality (see also last GE/Brexit)

I have spoken to a quite a few people who are OK with the state visit as a great 'canvass' to protest though so lots of nuances.

Edited as strictly not a majority

[rendelharris]

Just heard an interesting thing on World at One: of all US presidents, ever, only Reagan, Bush jnr and Obama have been given state visits, and all of them were over two years plus into their presidencies. Which puts the offer of a state visit to Trump, which was apparently proposed just two weeks after his election, two months before he was even sworn in, in some perspective.

[rendelharris]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Poll in You Gov today shows majority of UK in

> favour of not cancelling Trump State visit - so

> does show the Echo Chamber effect.

49% in favour, 36% against, 15% don't know. Is 49% now a majority?

[red devil]

I thought we'd learnt our lesson about polls Quids...

[????]

Nope - the polls were marginally out on share (and even spot on in some cases) in their recent high profile failures - many of these were well within margin of errors but they then called the results wrong. And The You Gov poll Exit poll at the GE was nearly spot on if you remember - although Ashdown hasn't eaten his hat yet . The problem was mainly extrapolation onto Seats won/Whatever the yanks do etc from the overall share of vote - Plus they weren't that far out anyway ( I think Brexit was the worse) - small margins make a big difference in terms of these precise measurements.

For a general opinion poll they are pretty good indicators of the way the wind is blowing....

Experts eh?

[????]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Poll in You Gov today shows majority of UK in

> > favour of not cancelling Trump State visit - so

> > does show the Echo Chamber effect.

>

> 49% in favour, 36% against, 15% don't know. Is

> 49% now a majority?

Well, i was going off memory, but it's 1.1% off a majority anyway and is a majority of those that expressed an opinion if i was really bothering about wriggling.

[nxjen]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have spoken to a quite a few people who are OK

> with the state visit as a great 'canvass' to

> protest though so lots of nuances.

I'm guessing HM is practising her most withering stare right now

[????]

:)....I also liked the "make him sit next to Prince Charles" comment, that I think came from this forum (but I get confused)

[Loz]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Poll in You Gov today shows majority of UK in favour of not cancelling Trump State visit - so

> > does show the Echo Chamber effect.

>

> 49% in favour, 36% against, 15% don't know. Is 49% now a majority?

I've wondered this before. The dictionary has a number of definitions of majority. The best answer I've come up with is 'maybe'.

[JohnL]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> :)....I also liked the "make him sit next to

> Prince Charles" comment, that I think came from

> this forum (but I get confused)

Climate Change ... Trees ... Plants... Camilla

blah blah blah blah blah.

He'd go home :)

[Earl Aelfheah]

Ken Clarke for leader of the Labour party!