world

Trump's visit to UK still on as online petition opposing it tops 1.5 million signatures

83 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

83 Comments
Login to comment

1.5 million now and still growing. Yuuuge.

15 ( +17 / -2 )

Please take him and keep him. I hear there's a travel ban on people who are considered a threat to the U.S.

13 ( +15 / -2 )

So skip The UK and head to Russia instead. They will cheer him there.

13 ( +16 / -3 )

"Please take him and keep him. I hear there's a travel ban on people who are considered a threat to the U.S."

In recent years the UK has become a notorious haven for rabble-rousing hate preachers and tax dodgers.

Another crumpet, Mr Trump?

9 ( +11 / -2 )

They tried that with Bush, didn't work. Yaaawn, wait until the dust is settled and then Trump will go and be allowed in again, No worries. Gonna eat some Cheerios now.

-19 ( +3 / -22 )

Its not just Donald Trump the UK would be barring but also the Office of the President of the United States of America. Demonstrate peacefully.

Of course let Mr Trump know that a large number of Brits find his immigration policies discriminatory, and divisive.Baring Mr Trump would neither be objective or commensurate to Great Britain's historic tradition of confronting world leader face to face if felt obliged to do so.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

It is nice to see all are signing petitions or posting comments. The amount of people signing is good! But the kind of revolution we need requires action, not just words. Until enough people are in the streets and causing the necessary obstruction things will not really change. The Vietnam war was stopped by action of the people - this is plain and simple. This is much worse and much bigger and will require more action and larger demonstrations.

I hope these signatures are matched by demonstrations so that the message is clear.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The Vietnam war was stopped by action of the people

That was a long time ago and very different circumstances. Liberals, the media and Democrats tried to stop Trump, didn't work, so....

this is plain and simple. This is much worse and much bigger and will require more action and larger demonstrations.

Good luck with that, remember, it goes both ways, there are millions supporting Trump's actions as well.

I hope these signatures are matched by demonstrations so that the message is clear.

We shall see.

-17 ( +0 / -17 )

Let him in but don't let him anywhere near the queen.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

@bass there are millions supporting Trump's actions as well.

And as the popular vote showed, they constitute a minority. In a turnabout of John Adam's warning, the majority now fear a tyranny of the minority.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Brit comic Dom Joly (via FB):

Trump: The less immigrants we let in the better.

Pence: The fewer.

Trump: Shhh! Don't call me that in public yet.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

wow blinders full on and full speed ahead, what could possibly happen? UK is on the wrong side of the US people. The vote that has to happen will increasingly embarrass their blindness might change their minds but when you keep the binder on full and dig down you dig faster

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Sense,

I don't often actually laugh out loud, but I did just now. Thanks for passing that on.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

And as the popular vote showed, they constitute a minority. In a turnabout of John Adam's warning, the majority now fear a tyranny of the minority.>

Its a majority on this issue. 57% for the immigration policy and only 33% against in the latest Rasmussen poll. Other polls show the same.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316914-poll-over-half-back-trumps-refugee-ban

So its not a popularity contest in the UK if they like Trump or not and they are not allowed to vote on it. He is the US president and their government will be dealing with him.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

He should be let in but it would be high treason by May to allow Trump to taint the Crown by meeting the Queen

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I'm waiting for some more laughable "alternative facts" from Trump's team.

Parliamentary petitions are overrated.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I dont know why these people in the UK are so concerned about Trump visiting. He is the President of the United States and has already been visited by their leader, so it is just a reciprocal visit.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Cheerios are actually made in Cedar Rapids, IOWA USA. (But the oats are grown in Manitoba, Canada). oh ok grown in Canada / packaged in the US. or until President Orange and get his tariffs on Canadas imports as well.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I dont know why these people in the UK are so concerned about Trump visiting.

I think the message is that while you guys may be ok with having such a person representing your country, they aren't ok with you sending such a person as a representative of your country.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

"The vast majority of welfare recipients in the UK are British and white."

And working for crap wages.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

I dont know why these people in the UK are so concerned about Trump visiting.

It's probably because they have been raised with some kind of moral education with a strong dislike of racism. You know, the kind of people that accept someone for who they are and don't cut someone out due to their colour or religion.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

misleading headline the patition is for not allow Trump to visit the UK as a state visit which means if the patition is upheld he cant visit the queen but still can come into the UK and see the PM

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I think the message is that while you guys may be ok with having such a person representing your country, they aren't ok with you sending such a person as a representative of your country.>

Well thats simple, YOU dont get to choose who represents MY country. We do, and we chose Trump, so Trump will be coming. I am glad at least the UK government can understand that concept.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

"I dont know why these people in the UK are so concerned about Trump visiting"

He lowers the tone.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

And as the popular vote showed, they constitute a minority.

But that's not our system, so we don't need to worry about that.

In a turnabout of John Adam's warning, the majority now fear a tyranny of the minority.

I have No doubt the left will jeer up fear and upheaval at the smallest chance.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

A majority of the British ruling class has always had a complex about America ever since George III blew it and lost the colony. Although anti-American in their hearts, they have long faked an affection for the country invoking the "special relationship", deluding themselves that the emotional ties are reciprocal. The ethnic composition of the country has changed since 1945 and most Americans today couldn't care less, having no special ties to the "motherland". For too long UK governments have willfully supported the immoral foreign policy of the USA. Perhaps it is now time for the British to call out the knavish tricks of Trumpelstiltskin and distance themselves from his self-destructive behavior. The British Street is already on the march and giving notice.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

YOU dont get to choose who represents MY country. We do, and we chose Trump, so Trump will be coming. I am glad at least the UK government can understand that concept.

Incredible. Are you not embarrassed by this? I am glad that you are so proud of YOUR country. Your country just elected a racist who makes sexual locker-room chat about children in shopping malls and with no political experience whatsoever - as President of the US..!

8 ( +8 / -0 )

TigersTokyo DomeJAN. 31, 2017 - 02:26PM JST I am glad that you are so proud of YOUR country. Your country just elected a racist who makes sexual locker-room chat about children in shopping malls and with no political experience whatsoever - as President of the US..!

Trump’s isolationist ideology has three components, opposition to U.S. alliances, opposition to free trade and support for authoritarianism. If translated into policy in a Trump administration, could do away with the liberal international order that the U.S. helped design after WWII and has led ever since.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I doubt that Trump has looked far ahead enough to call it ideology. He is just playing on uneducated concerns linking unemployment with immigration and terrorism with Muslims. Both of which are myths, as there was enough western terrorism in Muslim countries. A billionaire who gives Saudis free passes into the US cannot be an authority on either unemployment or terrorism.

I for one, having seen the alternative, have no issues with a liberal international order. Hilary or not.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

YOU dont get to choose who represents MY country. We do, and we chose Trump, so Trump will be coming.

You get to choose your president (along with a little help from the Russians), but that doesn't mean we have to accept your choice into our countries. On the contrary, letting him come without saying anything gives weight to the argument that such a choice for leader is an acceptable one. He will be let into the UK, and into other countries as well, but it's important that the people in these countries make their voices said, and not just be sheep and let it happen without a sound.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Basically sulking because things have not gone their way.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

TigersTokyoDome JAN. 31, 2017 - 02:42PM JST He is just playing on uneducated concerns linking unemployment with immigration and terrorism with Muslims.

His poll is close to 56 percent approval. America ask almost nothing of immigrants any more. People do not care whether they come legally and will obey the law once they’re here. They have no concern whether they can support themselves, or whether they will become wards of the state. They can hate or love America. If an immigrant commits a crime against his hosts, they would commit a greater crime by sending ungracious guest home. Remember, Obama send 36,000 home three years ago. Citizenship as a cherished privilege has utterly vanished. So has any idea of gratitude. A hallowed notion of legality, of being more law-abiding even than native-born Americans, has disappeared among immigrants.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Blacklabel: "YOU dont get to choose who represents MY country. We do, and we chose Trump"

Actually, the majority did NOT choose Trump, and that's proven fact. What's more, the man Trump set up to investigate his made up voter fraud is actually enrolled to vote in three states! hahaha.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

The Brits refused entry to that Dutch nut Gilders so why not Trump? His views are equally toxic.

Britain is clearly insignificant these days. Watching the Conservative government grovelling to the Trump Lord is sickening, but what else can they do after the brexit madness they themselves instigated?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

His poll is close to 56 percent approval.

Where are you seeing that?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Strangerland JAN. 31, 2017 - 03:07PM JST Where are you seeing that?

New Rasmussen Poll Reveals Silent Majority Approves Of Immigration Ban

While vocal, and often violent, disaffected Hillary protesters may get a lot of media attention, a new Rasmussen poll out today reveals that the silent majority of Americans, men and women who don't have time to protest 24 hours a day because they actually go to work to provide for their families, support Trump's temporary immigration ban from 7 mostly-Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa. In fact, per the new poll, 57% of likely U.S. voters actually approve of the ban while only 33% were opposed.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until the federal government approves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Thirty-three percent (33%) are opposed, while 10% are undecided.

Similarly, 56% favor a temporary block on visas prohibiting residents of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States until the government approves its ability to screen for likely terrorists. Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose this temporary ban, and 11% are undecided.

This survey was taken late last week prior to the weekend protests against Trump’s executive orders imposing a four-month ban on all refugees and a temporary visa ban on visitors from these seven countries.

Source: www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-30/new-rasmussen-poll-reveals-silent-majority-approves-immigration-ban

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Actually, the majority did NOT choose Trump, and that's proven fact.>

Irrelevant. A majority is not required in order to be elected. I wonder how many more months or years people are going to keep throwing that out there. A majority does agree with this Executive Order on immigration, however.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

a new Rasmussen poll out today reveals that the silent majority of Americans, men and women who don't have time to protest 24 hours a day because they actually go to work to provide for their families, support Trump's temporary immigration ban

That's not what the poll results said. The article you are reading is fake news. Try reading the actual poll results:

"57% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen"

That's voters, not Americans. See, you're reading MSM, and it's fake news.

And if people agree with what he's doing, why has his disapproval rating shot up in the past few days: http://fortune.com/2017/01/29/donald-trump-approval-rating-gallup/

Stay away from that fake news.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Strangerland JAN. 31, 2017 - 03:39PM JST And if people agree with what he's doing, why has his disapproval rating shot up in the past few days: http://fortune.com/2017/01/29/donald-trump-approval-rating-gallup/

So your source is from 1,500 adults via telephone poll? I understand your problem. Trump's disapproval rating has increased 6 points in the last 4 days, according to the poll. As of Jan. 28, about 51% of Americans polled disapproved of Trump, up from 45% on Jan. 22 — six days prior to the most recent results. By contrast, about 42% approve of the job he's doing, a more moderate change compared to the 45% who approved of him on Jan. 22.

To obtain its results, Gallup surveys about 1,500 adults daily via telephone, and has a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Stay away from fake news.

So your source is from 1,500 adults via telephone poll?

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

His poll is close to 56 percent approval.

You mean the same polls that were convinced that Clinton was a shoe-in for president the day before the election?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

1,612,027 signatures now, including mine.

Keep President Twitter Troll out of the UK. Not that it will happen but it's nice to show him we don't eat his bread.

Already more hated than W Bush and only days into his presidency.... heckuva job!

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Money talks... watching the debate on TV after work yesterday and all Boris kept saying was that Trump WILL come because we need the trade basically. He could shoot someone in the middle of Nebraska and he would still be accorded a state visit because thanks to Brexit we're running out of friends.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

New Rasmussen Poll Reveals Silent Majority Approves Of Immigration Ban

Oh, I believe that without a doubt.

While vocal, and often violent, disaffected Hillary protesters may get a lot of media attention, a new Rasmussen poll out today reveals that the silent majority of Americans, men and women who don't have time to protest 24 hours a day because they actually go to work to provide for their families, support Trump's temporary immigration ban from 7 mostly-Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa. In fact, per the new poll, 57% of likely U.S. voters actually approve of the ban while only 33% were opposed.

Well, it's just like the election, at the time, everyone laughed at the silent majority and who would have thought Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania would turn red. The silent majority, it's no different here.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 57% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on refugees from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen until the federal government approves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Thirty-three percent (33%) are opposed, while 10% are undecided.

I think Trump could do a little. Y adding Saudi Arabia and even Pakistan to that list.

Similarly, 56% favor a temporary block on visas prohibiting residents of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States until the government approves its ability to screen for likely terrorists. Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose this temporary ban, and 11% are undecided.

This survey was taken late last week prior to the weekend protests against Trump’s executive orders imposing a four-month ban on all refugees and a temporary visa ban on visitors from these seven countries.

I understand if Trump were being racist and would outright ban Muslims, that would be wrong, but it's a delay and NOT a ban, but to take extra preliminary precaution especially from hot bed countries that harbor a lot of radical jihadists seems like a very smart thing to do, works for Israel, so no difference here.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

I understand if Trump were being racist and would outright ban Muslims, that would be wrong, but it's a delay and NOT a ban

Sounds like Donald himself is here on JT. You are so blind. Trump has BANNED any immigration from those countries. 3 months or not, it is an outright ban on Muslims, and racist to the extreme.

but to take extra preliminary precaution especially from hot bed countries

Ah,ha,ha! We all know which country is number one in the hot bed country stakes. With a history of bombing smaller nations and crime in cities such as Chicago out of control.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

1,621,247 signatures now, ten thousand people signed it in the space of minutes.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928

Heh, page auto refreshes, it's going up like the US debt clock.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

"I understand if Trump were being racist and would outright ban Muslims"

When Trump first barked out his idea of a temporary ban on Muslims entering the US, the whoopers were absolutely delirious.

Some posters here agreed with it at the time. Do you remember them?

My question is would the Trump voters here prefer his original plan or this diluted version of it?

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Trump has BANNED any immigration from those countries. 3 months or not, it is an outright ban on Muslims, and racist to the extreme.

3 months? Is that it? The horror! So you are saying what he's doing is racist, even if there is no evidence of it. So in 2011 when Obama banned Iraqis from entering the country for 6 MONTHS which is a BAN, it was equally RACIST and I didn't one peep or outcry from you libs. No, what it is you guys and everyone on the left oppose Trump because...he's Trump, just say we oppose him No matter what, but please don't insult the rest of us and make it that Trump's temporary ban is racist, when it's not, if you think so, then Obama was equally as racist and complicit in demonizing Muslims, so which is it?

Heh, page auto refreshes, it's going up like the US debt clock.

And then what? Wait until the Brits calm down and then let him in? You do know, it's good newsclick, but he'll be sitting next to the Queen sooner rather than later. I give it a month or two tops!

When Trump first barked out his idea of a temporary ban on Muslims entering the US, the whoopers were absolutely delirious.

I was for it, yes and after they are properly vetted and green lighted, please come in and we welcome you with open arms, provided you follow our customs and laws, we are always happy to have new immigrants

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Some people are also saying why did no-one protest the Chinese leader's visit to the UK... they did. However the same excuse was used by the Government... we need the trade.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

@Bass

You didn't directly address my question. I asked if you'd prefer a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the US regardless of country of origin - a temporary ban based solely on religious allegiance. That's what Trump's original statement outlined.

It seems you prefer the original approach to this diluted version of it. Yes?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

n 2011 when Obama banned Iraqis from entering the country for 6 MONTHS which is a BAN

Fake news.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

You didn't directly address my question. I asked if you'd prefer a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the US regardless of country of origin

No

a temporary ban based solely on religious allegiance. That's what Trump's original statement outlined.

I want a ban on the countries that are outlined in the ban and would go a step further in banning Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as well.

Fake news.

Yeeeaaah ok...the media also said in the fake news that Trump could never win, come on....LOL

(The Federalist) Although the Obama administration currently refuses to temporarily pause its Syrian refugee resettlement program in the United States, the State Department in 2011 stopped processing Iraq refugee requests for six months after the Federal Bureau of Investigation uncovered evidence that several dozen terrorists from Iraq had infiltrated the United States via the refugee program.

After two terrorists were discovered in Bowling Green, Kentucky, in 2009, the FBI began reviewing reams of evidence taken from improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that had been used against American troops in Iraq. Federal investigators then tried to match fingerprints from those bombs to the fingerprints of individuals who had recently entered the United States as refugees:

www.wnd.com/2017/01/2011-obama-paused-iraq-refugee-program-for-6-months/#sAuuB56iC9BC3Fri.99

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Perhaps the Queen can just pretend to be seriously ill and check herself into hospital when Trump comes around. It worked for Barbara & George Bush Sr when they didn't want to be seen at the inauguration. Nobody dares challenge a lie like this once you reach a certain age. However, Trump and Prince Phillip might actually get along rather well.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

I asked if you'd prefer a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the US regardless of country of origin

No

That's not what you said when Trump proposed a Muslim ban during his campaign. Why the change of opinion now?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

That's not what you said when Trump proposed a Muslim ban during his campaign. Why the change of opinion now?

I wanted ANY muslim to be banned or at least detained until properly vetted especially from countries that send the most Jihadists and pose a serious threat to the nation and as I said before, I would have added Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to that list, but I'm still content with the list.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

I wanted ANY muslim to be banned

But that's not what you said earlier in this thread. Why the change of opinion?

I asked if you'd prefer a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the US regardless of country of origin

No

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@Bass

So you're content with the list but you'd like to see more countries added to it. Your ideal would be an outright temporary ban on all Muslims entering the US, as Trump initially declared, and with which you agreed.

Okay.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Your ideal would be an outright temporary ban on all Muslims entering the US, as Trump initially declared, and with which you agreed.

falling under that ban That have flagged the system, on a watch list or deemed to be a potential risk to the nation and to be detained until cleared, if not, they should be refused entry

Exactly! Hope that clarification clears up any confusion.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

@Bass

Cheers. An outright temporary ban on all Muslims would be ideal for you.

Clear as day.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Which to be fair, Bass supported from day one when Trump announced it. I don't understand why he said earlier in this thread that he doesn't support a ban by religion though. But at least he has cleared up that he does support a ban by religion.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I don't know why libs have a problem with the truth or with words, I'm so mystified about it. As I said before, liberals are just teed off because now they can't control the situation and for once I am so happy about it. I think Trump is doing the right thing and I hope he double downs on it, the delay is only temporary and once these people have cleared the system, if they clear it, they can be on their way. I support the ban or if you really want to put it in more correct terms "a delay" on Muslim nations that have flagged the system, on a watch list or deemed to be a potential risk to the nation and to be detained until cleared, if not, they should be refused entry.

And yes, they are Muslim, NOT because a hate for the religion, but because radical Islam is at war with the West and I could be here all night giving examples after examples of every terror attack that has happened over the last 10 years and 99% of them were from Jihadists. So yes, the people that are subjected to the temporary delay are practicing a radical form of Jihad and they shouldn't be allowed in if they flag the system or have a dubious past.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

@Strangerland

I just wish people would say what they mean. If you support a ban based on religion, just say it.

It's amazing that the people who rail against the wishy-washy, wooly, PC liberals are usually the most evasive of all.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

I just wish people would say what they mean.

Jim, I promise you, I will so honest, it'll blow your mind!

If you support a ban based on religion, just say it.

Which is not wrong, especially if its practiced by a group of people that would cut off your head without batting an eyelash.

It's amazing that the people who rail against the wishy-washy, wooly, PC liberals are usually the most evasive of all.

LMAO liberal humor is the funniest!

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Oh my.

Nigel Farage "Trump Row is Storm in a Tea Cup"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sslPSAYHMc

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

bass4funkJAN. 31, 2017 - 01:40PM JST

"And as the popular vote showed, they constitute a minority."

But that's not our system, so we don't need to worry about that.

GOP legislators might have to in a couple of years.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

"Nigel Farage "Trump Row is Storm in a Tea Cup"

Farage is basically Trump with more intelligence and sophistication. He was also unable to win a parliamentary seat in an area extremely sympathetic to his views. Trump, who as I stated is less intelligent and sophisticated than Farage, was able to win states.

Think about those ideas and understand why Trump is regarded as revolting by the many UK citizens who signed this petition. Trump is trash of a level lower than we are generally used to in top level politics.

Just imagine a man who hasn't bathed for a month, wears a string vest and crocs, blows smoke in your face, breaks wind and talks about p___y sitting in your living room for an image.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

It looks like Trump and GOP supporters are clinging on to the false position that there is no vetting. As long as they believe that, they will support a ban.

What Trump needs to do is make any kind of change to the current system, even if it's superficial, and say he did something. Then Trump fans will be able to sleep at night and we can put this mess behind us.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

GOP legislators might have to in a couple of years.

Doubt it, I guarantee you 99.9% it won't happen, truth be told, neither side wants it, when the Dems had majorities, the conservatives didn't cry and moan like this, they just waited for the perfect moment and if that day ever comes for the Dems to take control again (LOL, good luck) they will definitely approve of the system as long as if can be beneficial to them.

It looks like Trump and GOP supporters are clinging on to the false position that there is no vetting.

Of course there was vetting, but NOT EXTREME vetting at least the way the Israelis do it, big difference!

As long as they believe that, they will support a ban.

They should support the ban/delay because it makes sense.

What Trump needs to do is make any kind of change to the current system, even if it's superficial, and say he did something.

He did, that's why liberals, open borders people, Hollywood, tree huggers, business people that are too cowardly to admit they are happy about it, but worry about their businesses are all over the place losing their minds.

Then Trump fans will be able to sleep at night and we can put this mess behind us.

Most people I know sleep like babies, in fact, I overslept today.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Baring Mr Trump would neither be objective or commensurate to Great Britain's historic tradition

But it might give the Queen a giggle. ("Phillip, you were right about men with short fingers.")

I'm fairly sure the State visit will go ahead. PM May was perhaps premature in making the invitation, but she made it, and it would be difficult to backtrack. It won't be the first controversial state visit to the UK. Anyway, we pay the Queen well enough to occasionally deal with this sort of thing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What Trump needs to do is make any kind of change to the current system, even if it's superficial, and say he did something. Then Trump fans will be able to sleep at night and we can put this mess behind us.

He doesn't even need to do that. He can wait out the 90 days, then list the vetting process that was in place before it, and say 'we have this vetting process in place' and take credit for it. Basically like it appears he intends to do with Obamacare.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

bass4funkFEB. 01, 2017 - 01:18AM JST

"GOP legislators might have to in a couple of years."

Doubt it, I guarantee you 99.9% it won't happen, truth be told, neither side wants it, when the Dems had majorities, the conservatives didn't cry and moan like this, they just waited for the perfect moment and if that day ever comes for the Dems to take control again (LOL, good luck) they will definitely approve of the system as long as if can be beneficial to them.

You don't actually know what I was referring to, do you.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

You don't actually know what I was referring to, do you.

Yes, sir, I most certainly do!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

when the Dems had majorities, the conservatives didn't cry and moan like this

You yourself just spent eight years crying and moaning about Trump, and still do even after he's gone. So the above quote is entirely ridiculous coming from you.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

You yourself just spent eight years crying and moaning about Trump,

For one thing, Trump has only been on the political scene for about two years and the other six? I think you meant Obama, but it's ok, yes, I complained, but I didn't go on the streets and cried my eyes out, I just waited and well, now I'm ecstatic!

and still do even after he's gone. So the above quote is entirely ridiculous coming from you.

Hey, you still angry at Bush?

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

I think you meant Obama

Yeah, I'm still on my first coffee. That's who I meant.

yes, I complained, but I didn't go on the streets and cried my eyes out

No, you just did it here instead.

Hey, you still angry at Bush?

Sure, but I'm not the one who made the claim that we aren't and haven't been complaining. You are.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

No, you just did it here instead.

That's good enough, I can complain and eat my donuts and workout at the same time, but I'm not on the streets protesting and whining or getting on TV annoying the public on the streets. Big difference.

Sure, but I'm not the one who made the claim that we aren't and haven't been complaining. You are.

You've been complaining about Bush since, I don't know when, but it doesn't matter, you can complain about him and I can do the same about Obama's liberal policies. Fair is fair.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

That's good enough, I can complain and eat my donuts and workout at the same time, but I'm not on the streets protesting and whining or getting on TV annoying the public on the streets.

Yeah, you just do it here instead.

You seem to think there is some difference. There isn't.

You've been complaining about Bush since, I don't know when

The guy collapsed the economy, started a war based on lies, and put that war on the country credit card. Plenty to complain about. And unlike the huge majority of your complaints about Obama, mine are actually based in reality.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Never let a barbarian into such a nice country, he might shock every English person to .........................................

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I'll finish it for you.

Never let a barbarian into such a nice country, he might shock every English person to realize they're just as barbaric selling billions in weapons to countries like Saudi Arabia.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bass4funkFEB. 01, 2017 - 07:39AM JST

"You don't actually know what I was referring to, do you."

Yes, sir, I most certainly do!

So what's all this about the Democrats (not) wanting to change the "system," then? I wasn't thinking about anything like that.

No, I really don't think you do know what I meant. Or you're pretending not to.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

1.5 million now and still growing. Yuuuge

Trumps visa delay affects only 13% of the worlds Myslims. But don't let facts get in the way of your hysterical conspiracy theory. Isn't it about time to send out the Lefts black-clad storm troopers to teach Trump how facism is really done.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Trump's visit to UK still on as online petition opposing it tops 1.5 million signatures.

Big deal.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Let him come, if he dares... I can't wait. Just imagine all the demonstrations, marches, placards,rotten eggs, tomatoes, riots... Oh the humiliation, the embarrassment, the shame. The Brits will wipe that smug, manic, narcissistic, megalomaniac smirk off his bright orange mug once and for all. I just feel sorry for poor old Lillibet, in her 90's, who will have to "entertain" this moron. She'll just have to throw a sickie, catch another cold. Leave it to Charlie and Camilla to show him around- maybe visit Birmingham or Bradford, places with large Muslim populations. That'd be a laugh. Mind you they'd probably ban him from entering! Bring it on!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

trump should stay in his place at home, in case, he suffers from the air of breathe by all kind of nationalities in England or worst, he could be attacked and he will blame the attack on non americans. u know, he is a child of a single thought.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites