**** Elections thread *****

[Poopadoop]

Because even I know it.

Not a good reason. And I bet you never actually thought about it until today for that matter. Just like Trump.

[Poopadoop]

What I meant by subservient is that it would be akin to saying 'here's the guy you asked for, sir'. Not a good move.

Basically, by saying what he did, Donald just guaranteed Farage will never get the job. His chances went from < 1% to 0.

[OngBonga]

What I meant by subservient is that it would be akin to saying 'here's the guy you asked for, sir'. Not a good move.

Basically, by saying what he did, Donald just guaranteed Farage will never get the job. His chances went from < 1% to 0.

It went from 0% to 0%.

[Poopadoop]

It went from 0% to 0%.

Either way you get my point. If you start letting other countries choose your ambassadors, you might as well let them set your foreign policy for you as well.

[Poopadoop]

What I would love to see the May gov't do now is make a statement recommending some democrat be appointed US ambassador in London.

[Poopadoop]

I have to give Trump credit for one thing: His last little speech he put on twitter actually sounded pretty reasonable for the most part.

[wufwugy]

What I would love to see the May gov't do now is make a statement recommending some democrat be appointed US ambassador in London.

I totally get your position on this. Trump is asserting dominance. I wouldn't ask a member of the UK to like it. However, implicit in what Trump said is that the UK will get a better deal overall by making Farage the US liaison. This puts May and fam in a pickle. I think it actually raises the probability that Farage gets the post, because, let's be honest, there ain't no way he would get it otherwise.

As for the idea that Trump doesn't know what he's doing, he has been more productive than any other modern President-Elect so far. Plus he's bringing the bust of Churchill back into the White House (the one Obama shat on). Did you read the story on how that happened? Farage asked Trump to do so and Trump was delighted to comply. Perception-wise, Farage is already putting the UK in a better position in the eyes of the US.

It may be the case that May is in a position where not putting Farage up for Ambassador to the US is a lose-lose situation.

[OngBonga]

Either way you get my point. If you start letting other countries choose your ambassadors, you might as well let them set your foreign policy for you as well.

I actually gave this some thought before responding to this point, because I wasn't really sure if I agreed or not. I don't think I do.

I mean I get your point; it can be perceived as an act of obedience. But it can also be an act of friendship, of trust, of respect. An ambassador is basically a go-between. It makes sense, if you value your relationship, to have a go-between that the other party is agreeable with. It's a potentially mutually beneficial relationship. If you send someone who the President doesn't like, that can be seen as an act of hostility, which can negatively impact on relations.

If May wants to work positively with Trump, she could send Farage to USA, while requesting an individual that she respects gets sent to the UK. It can work both ways, and if I were determined to ensure that my act of agreement wasn't seen as obedience, then that's how I would play it. I'd make sure that USA is sending my recommendation to the UK in return.

I don't expect Farage will get sent to USA. However, I don't feel that to do so would imply obedience, and even if it did, it wouldn't take long before it became clear that wasn't the case.

[Poopadoop]

I actually gave this some thought before responding to this point, because I wasn't really sure if I agreed or not. I don't think I do.

I mean I get your point; it can be perceived as an act of obedience.

Exactly why it isn't done. It's actually demeaning to the visiting country. If, for one of the good reasons I stated in the above post, the current guy was seen as inappropriate to the post, he could be replaced. But just saying 'we'd prefer you sacked this guy and sent someone on our wavelength, never mind that he's not on your wavelength' and thinking we will do it, is just delusional.

But it can also be an act of friendship, of trust, of respect.

That goes both ways. An act of friendship, trust, and respect would be not requesting a specific person but trusting the visiting country to send you someone professional and amenable (or in this case, that they already have). Trump already blew the opportunity to show those qualities to us, but you think we should show them to him?

An ambassador is basically a go-between. It makes sense, if you value your relationship, to have a go-between that the other party is agreeable with. It's a potentially mutually beneficial relationship. If you send someone who the President doesn't like, that can be seen as an act of hostility, which can negatively impact on relations.

Again, someone is already there. There's no reason to think he's incompetent or in any way impeded from talking to the US about foreign affairs.

If May wants to work positively with Trump, she could send Farage to USA, while requesting an individual that she respects gets sent to the UK. It can work both ways, and if I were determined to ensure that my act of agreement wasn't seen as obedience, then that's how I would play it. I'd make sure that USA is sending my recommendation to the UK in return.

Sure that's one solution. But the issue is that Trump didn't raise the possibility in private which would be showing us some respect. He made his view public and put our gov't in an embarrassing position.

I don't expect Farage will get sent to USA. However, I don't feel that to do so would imply obedience, and even if it did, it wouldn't take long before it became clear that wasn't the case.

He could be the greatest ambassador we ever had. It's irrelevant though since he's never going to be offered the job.

[OngBonga]

Not a good reason. And I bet you never actually thought about it until today for that matter. Just like Trump.

You're just talking out of your arse now. Have you stolen my weed?

I never thought about whose responsibility it is to employ ambassadors? Of course not, I'm not a government minister. That doesn't mean I am totally clueless as to how these things are done. My favourite blogger is a former ambassador.

Our ambassadors are employed by the government. Therefore, it is the government's responsibility to employ those they deem fit for the role. Maybe the Queen can technically have a say, I'm not sure about that. But it's obviously not a decision for foreign governments.

[Poopadoop]

My favourite blogger is a former ambassador.

That right there probably means you know more about how it works than Trump.