Trump

[PFVA]

Uau! Letters are getting bigger.

Reg the queueing issue:

I think Obama used 'back of the queue' on purpose to attract attention just as teachers do when they use a certain word to grab the students attention. Out of the EU = Back of the Queue. The US would not like to see the UK out fo the EU, not because of their nuclear weapons but due to the question of balance inside the EU. There is a worry, shared by the US that if the UK gets out it would be easy for Germany to take over total control of the EU and that means a very powerful Germany. It's not because of Nazism and so, actually because the Nazists were too dictatorial and too nuts to lead Europe for a long time. A democratic Germany very powerful economically and scientifically however would be able to assume the total control of the whole of Europe. The UK is very needed in there to help balance things out specially because of the UK tendencies to do things their own way.

As for Churchill in the White House:

As it was said it was there since Bush Jr was offered it, or borrowed it, and helped symbolize the alliance between Bush and Blair to invade Iraq. When all that invasion nonsense was taking place the Bush Adm always enphasized the alliance with Blair and the UK. As everybody knows Obama was against the invasion since the beginning and returning Churchill to the Embassy was probably symbolic too in making a point that the alliance over Iraq was over. And of course placing Martin Luther King makes all the sense.

[pogo]

Like if David Cameron went to the South and started using "y'all". Sure, technically correct, as it's just the explicitly plural "you". So, indeed, how are y'all doing? But there are cultural layers to everything and you'd have to be careful in its usage. You don't want to make it look like you're a white foreign guy trying to speak in Ebonics - which could come across if, say, most of your audience is black when you say it. You don't want to come across as a patronising arsehole. Certain words, in the wrong time and place, can quickly become a minefield.

You have completely missed the point. Obama did not come over here and start using local dialectal terms, or putting on a local accent. That would go down very badly, understandably so. That sort of cultural borrowing needs to be done very carefully if at all, as if inauthentic or if seen as so it can be disastrous, especially for a politician. On the other hand if someone can get away with it then it’s very effective and powerful. Obama notably talks like the Chicago lawyer that he is most of the time. But he can also speak in a way more suited to a Black audience. But Obama is exceptional in this (as in many things).

What I was referring to though is the words in English that are different, in British and US English. Sidewalk/pavement, faucet/tap, line/queue. Few and easy to remember; as with other modern coinings they often make some sort of sense, are easy to say. If you are exposed to them it’s easy to find yourself using them, even as you keep your own accent and dialect. Maybe someone says them to you and you simply re-use them in the same or your next conversation.

[gumboot]

Is it just me, or is that truncated to "Shooting Fun..." for everyone?

[gumboot]

You should also note that some of what might normally be regarded as Britishisms are actually still formalisms in the US. Britishisms come up in US law a lot, and in other idioms where they wouldn't otherwise be standard American.

The most obvious example is "Fourth of July".

And, of course, British is no different. There are plenty of idioms that use archaic words.

That said, I can't think of any usage of queue in "American" (heck, in Microsoft APIs they can't even spell the word!), but I probably wouldn't notice.

Also, it's hard to not pick up "queue" when in the UK. It's such an essential part of UK life.

[pogo]

Seems the use of Queue instead of Line may even be an Obama quirk as he has done it before, and not just in the UK. Scroll down to the end of this:

Barack Obama's views betray a 'woeful ignorance' on the impact of the EU on Britain's security, says Armed Forces minister

Of course that means you have to at least read the headline which is more laughable Brexit nonsense. Brexit will change many things, mostly for the worse, but it won’t make any difference to our border security, unless we want it to, as we maintain borders with the rest of Europe and are not in the Schengen Area. The only terrorists we have are home grown, i.e. ones radicalised in this country.

[KlaxonCow]

Well, if it's just a personal quirk of his and there's no sense reading too much into it, then I won't read too much into it.

But it was still an interesting thing to note his unusual word choice there, either way.

[phattslagg]

It's also entirely plausible that he told some of our people in advance what he was intending to say. In which case, even if he had been planning to say "back of the line", he would have probably been advised that we'd respond better to "queue".

But, in all honesty, he almost certainly knew about this, and adapted accordingly. Americans that I have met love these British idiosyncrasies, and know full well about the differences between US and British English, just as we do.

[(o)(o)]

Brexit will change many things.. but it won’t make any difference to our border security, unless we want it to, as we maintain borders with the rest of Europe and are not in the Schengen Area.

Of course it will make differences to our security. France has already threatened to pull their border controls that would have a direct impact.

The only terrorists we have are home grown, i.e. ones radicalised in this country.

You've got the complete list have you?

I'm pretty sure it's possible for an immigrant to be a terrorist too! Abu Hamza lived in the UK he was born in Egypt.

[pogo]

Brexit will change many things.. but it won’t make any difference to our border security, unless we want it to, as we maintain borders with the rest of Europe and are not in the Schengen Area.

Of course it will make differences to our security. France has already threatened to pull their border controls that would have a direct impact.

The only terrorists we have are home grown, i.e. ones radicalised in this country.

You've got the complete list have you?

I'm pretty sure it's possible for an immigrant to be a terrorist too! Abu Hamza lived in the UK he was born in Egypt.

There is that, which would make leaving the EU worse for our security. There may be other things: France does not have to stop cooperating on border security, but they could easily do so especially if we are foolish enough to try and stop free movement of people. And if they do that then they, or any other EU country, could easily stop cooperating on other matters, including security matters.

As for terrorists in the UK my point was the border does work. The bunch of Belgians that loaded up their cars with guns and explosives and drove to Paris might have come here instead, if our border was as porous as those within Schengen. Instead we have British born terrorists like those that killed Lee Rigby, with kitchen implements.

[merman]

The current US-EU trade talks started in 2013, including the controversial TTIP laws*.

They were supposed to finish in 2014, and are now scheduled to conclude in 2019-20.

So yes, the UK re-negotiating a new trade deal with the US from outside the EU could take 5-10 years. BECAUSE OTHER TRADE DEALS HAVE TAKEN THAT LONG, NOT BECAUSE OBAMA IS TRYING TO HELP CAMERON.


*and if you are not clued up on TTIP, just imagine this scenario. Under TTIP a company could sue the Government for introducing a law that stops or restricts the company's products from selling. And it will also make reversing privatisation harder, which is particularly relevant to the NHS.


Back to our usual "moron under a bad wig" discussion...

[Darkflame]

Oh, nothing to worry about. I am sure the US lawyers will be completely non-bias and open minded when it comes to weighing up the British social(ist) healthcare system against the US pharmaceutical industry.

[Little stoned kiwi]

Gosh, 'queue'. Imagine the reaction if Obama said, 'back of the bus'.

[(o)(o)]

Here's one for the ' FAILED BUSINESSMAN RACIST GLOBAL WARMING DENYING VIOLENCE ENDORSING CLOWN IS SAFER THAN THE ALTERNATIVES ' types ..



.. plus those who consider Abby Martin hot

[merman]

Cruz and Katish pact means that they won't compete against each other in key states (starting next week) to prevent Trump gaining enough candidates for the outright win.

Trump is throwing his toys out of his pram, and tearing his "hair" out at being outflanked.

[pogo]

But that is unlikely to make much difference. It’s not as if they can get enough delegates to beat Trump, then go on to unify the Republican party. They are ideologically too far apart. Cruz and Kasich still need the other to admit defeat. But they still each have reason to stay in the race. Cruz is the clear runner up, so the one that should in theory find it easiest to win if Trump cannot secure the vote on the first round. Kasich is the only remaining mainstream candidate and the one with the strongest case that he could win in November.

And Trump can hardly complain. He has had ten months to wrap up this nomination. He has gone from facing a dozen opponents to facing two. Yet his support has been stuck at around 30-40%, not the 50% or more that would guarantee him being their candidate. Normally by now the contest is over.

The last time there was a contested convention, where things were still undecided when the convention arrived, was 1976. The whole point of the protracted primary process is to choose the candidate before the convention, so the convention gets fully behind them and they have the maximum time to run their campaign for November. A contested convention would be great for political pundits but terrible for the Republican Party and their already slim chances of winning in November.