Originally Posted by Livia (Post 9216431)

This issue isn't a competition surrounding how many people signed a petition. It's like a silly points-scoring exercise, trying to have a debate in here. If you uphold the right the law allows for state visits, then you're a Trump supporter. I posted the petition supporting his visit as a way of showing that not everyone supports the hysterical opposition to a man who is not, in any way, the worst despot in the world but seems to have attracted the most attention.

If only there was as much passion about other world leaders, sadly there only seems to be a limited amount of bandwagons available at any one time.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 9193496)

If this petition supporting Trump's visit had started first, I wonder whether the anti-Trump people would have thought making their views known was a waste of time?

As far as I can see the petition supporting Trump's visit has not been going long but it's climbing up nicely, and the more people see it, the more people will sign it. I think it sends a good message to our biggest export customer, that no everyone in the UK thinks Trump should be singled out from all the other odious, questionable world leaders we entertain.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 9193516)

Well, the petition exists and now people who've had to listen to the endless rhetoric and histrionics since Trump was elected, have somewhere they can express their own view. That can only be good. Otherwise, just one side can harp on about how they have 1.5 million signatures and imagine theirs is the only voice. Let's see how this opposing petition goes, THEN we will have context because in the last half an hour it's risen from 89,000 odd signatures to 93,000 odd. It seems there are strong feelings on both sides.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 9193674)

Good. Although I don't agree with you I do uphold your right to your opinion and to voice it.

Heading for 110,000 signatures now. Creeping up, isn't it.

I think those opposing Trump and those... (I hesitate to say "supporting him" because I don't actually support him, any more than I supported Putin when he had a State visit... or when Mugabe did... or the Chinese...) and those who believe he should come because he is the president of the USA, is probably on a par numerically. However, as with Brexit, those against make the most noise, the squeaky wheel if you like. Those who find themselves in opposition to the noisy ones use the vote to voice their opinion. They did when the Tories unexpectedly gained a majority at the last general election, they did when we voted to leave Europe and they will now.

A discussion on this is difficult because those who oppose Trump intimate in what they write that if you aren't with them on this, then you're a hard-right, card-carrying, cross-burning fascist.

Originally Posted by Cherie (Post 9217944)

Government responded:

HM Government believes the President of the United States should be extended the full courtesy of a State Visit. We look forward to welcoming President Trump once dates and arrangements are finalised.


During her visit to the United States on 27 January 2017, the Prime Minister, on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen, invited President Trump for a State Visit to the UK later this year. The invitation was accepted. This invitation reflects the importance of the relationship between the United States of America and the United Kingdom. At this stage, final dates have not yet been agreed for the State Visit.

Foreign and Commonwealth Office


when was this debated...

Originally Posted by MTVN (Post 9217948)

Apparently the government issue an official response to all petitions which get over 10,000 signatures. It will still be debated on 20 Feb

Originally Posted by Kizzy (Post 9217991)

Yep come trump, when parliament is shut obv...And not to London as the objection to a WESTERN leader with values such as yours ( it would be gauche of me to compare him to other world leaders with questionable human rights records) may not receive an altogether positive reception here.

How about a shopping centre in Milton Keynes? :joker:

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 9217992)

Everyone who didn't object to Trump coming and cited other world leaders as a comparison, are now unsophisticated and socially awkward? Unlike those who opposed him, who are apparently very sophisticated and socially gregarious?

Non-Western leaders are not to be used in the discussion.... why? Are they not equal to Western leaders? How about South American despots, can we use them under your new rules?

Isn't this just another opportunity to slag off some people who disagree with you without saying anything constructive?

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 9218003)

I'd love to wait longer for the reply but I have things to do today.