logo
Voters like the UK-US reaching a trade deal – they just don't think Trump will follow it

Voters like the UK-US reaching a trade deal – they just don't think Trump will follow it

Independent09-05-2025

Across the board, Americans and Britons agree that a free-trade agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom is a good idea, but far fewer are confident that President Donald Trump will abide by whatever deal he strikes.
On Thursday, Trump and Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced that the two countries agreed to increase access for U.S. agricultural exports while lowering some levies against the U.K., in the first deal since Trump launched his global trade war.
But polling from last month indicates that details of an agreement are less of a concern to adults in the U.S. or U.K. – instead, most people are wary of Trump's unpredictability.
While 78 percent of U.S. adults support a free-trade agreement in principle, only 44 percent believe Trump will abide by the terms of an agreement, a Politico and Public First poll conducted last month found.
Similarly, 73 percent of U.K. adults said they support the same kind of agreement, but less than 30 percent trust that Trump will keep his word.
A signature of Trump's public-facing leadership style is unpredictability. He's known to reverse course on policy approaches and throw people off with sudden sharp rhetoric.
Of the 2,000 U.S. adults surveyed between April 23 and 27, 50 percent said they believe the president's unpredictability is his biggest barrier when it comes to negotiations.
Those findings are consistent with other polls.
In a PBS/NPR/Marist survey, 62 percent of respondents said the president rushes into changes. In a New York Times /Siena College poll, 66 percent of respondents, including 47 percent of Republicans, said the word 'chaotic' described Trump's second term well.
Given the majority of U.K. adults opposed Trump's tariffs, they're likely to approve of the deal, which lifted a 25 percent tariff on steel exports and lowered the 27 percent tariff on automobiles to 10 percent for 100,000 vehicles.
But for U.S. adults, who are currently facing 145 percent tariffs on China, the U.S.'s second-largest trading partner, and general 10 percent tariffs for nearly every one of its trading partners, the U.S.–U.K. deal is less likely to land happily.
While nearly half of Americans believe the U.K. is the most important country to have as an ally, only 20 percent believe it is the most important to have a trade deal with.
Trump had only implemented the 10 percent tariff on the U.K., one of the U.S.'s closest allies. That baseline tariff will remain even after the deal.
Economists have largely agreed that while the U.S.–U.K. deal is good for their relationship, it's unlikely to make any major economic changes and it certainly won't serve as a blueprint for other trade deals.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump tells France 'you would be speaking German right now' if not for America as he touts Army parade
Trump tells France 'you would be speaking German right now' if not for America as he touts Army parade

Daily Mail​

time18 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Trump tells France 'you would be speaking German right now' if not for America as he touts Army parade

President Donald Trump needled France Tuesday saying 'you would be speaking German right now' had it not been for the U.S.'s involvement in World War II, as he again touted Saturday's Army parade. 'We're going to celebrate our country for a change,' Trump said, expressing frustration that the U.S. hasn't held military-centric celebrations to mark significant military milestones. Trump then told reporters how he had recently called up France as they were celebrating the World War II victory. 'But we helped them a lot,' Trump said. 'As you know, I don't have to get into that, but I called up other countries, they're all celebrating the victory. We're the only country that didn't celebrate the victory and we're the one that won the war, OK?' 'If it wasn't for us you would be speaking German right now, OK?' the president continued. 'We won the war - you might be speaking Japanese too - you might be speaking a combination of both. We won the war and we're the only country that didn't celebrate it and we're going to be celebrating big on Saturday,' the president added. Saturday's Flag Day parade, which also happens to be Trump's 79th birthday, is to mark the Army's 250th anniversary, as the U.S. military formed before the Declaration of Independence was signed. It was a 2017 visit to France that got Trump mulling military parades. He was invited by French President Emmanuel Macron to attend Bastille Day celebrations, which in 2017 also coincided with the 100th anniversary of the United States entering World War I. During Trump's first term, he tried to host a military parade, but the idea was scrapped due to the high cost of fixing Washington, D.C.'s roads, among other hiccups. Instead, in 2019 the president held a 'Salute to America' on the Fourth of July in front of the Lincoln Memorial, where tanks were on display, and several flyovers occurred. Now on Saturday, Trump is finally getting his military parade. 'We're going to have a fantastic June 14 parade, Flag Day, it's going to be an amazing day. We have tanks, we have planes, we have all sorts of things. And I think it's going to be great,' he boasted. During his back-and-forth with reporters in the Oval Monday - before he headed to Fort Bragg to kick off the Army's 250th anniversary celebrations - he also warned protesters not to try anything. 'By the way, for those people who want to protest, they are going to be met with very big force,' Trump said. 'And I haven't even heard about a protest, but you know this is people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force,' the president added. An organization called 'No Kings' is organizing demonstrations across the country on June 14th, the day of the military parade. The threat to demonstrators comes amid Trump sending Marines to Los Angeles and federalizing National Guard members to quell protests that broke out over Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in the area. 'If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it. We'll see. But I can tell you, last night was terrible. The night before that was terrible,' Trump also said Tuesday. 'If we didn't send in the national guard quickly, right now, Los Angeles would be burning to the ground,' Trump told reporters in an impromptu Oval Office meeting with members of his team.

Mike Johnson suggests Gavin Newsom should be ‘tarred and feathered'
Mike Johnson suggests Gavin Newsom should be ‘tarred and feathered'

The Guardian

time23 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Mike Johnson suggests Gavin Newsom should be ‘tarred and feathered'

Republican US House speaker Mike Johnson advocated for a brutal form of vigilante justice to be performed on the Democratic California governor, Gavin Newsom, on Tuesday, saying he should be 'tarred and feathered' for his opposition to immigration agents' enforcement actions in the state. Newsom replied: 'Good to know we're skipping the arrest and going straight for the 1700's style forms of punishment. A fitting threat given the [Republicans] want to bring our country back to the 18th century,' when what is now the US was ruled by a monarch. The came after the Louisiana congressman declined to say if Newsom and other California officials should be arrested – as a Trump and his 'border czar', Tom Homan, have recently floated – for allegedly impeding federal deportations. Tarring and feathering, in which the recipient is stripped naked and wood tar applied to the skin followed by feathers, is first recorded as being used in 1189 in orders issued by Richard I of England during the Crusades. But it became a more common form of vigilante justice for tax evaders, customs officials and others in British colonies in North America and used by Continental forces against the British during the American revolutionary war. It is now most commonly used as a metaphor for the application of public humiliation. Johnson's comment follows days of verbal sparring between Trump, members of his administration and elected officials in California in response to the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) raids on Los Angeles businesses, the protests that followed and the ordering of national guard troops and marines into the city. On Sunday, Homan refused to rule out arresting Newsom or the Los Angeles mayor, Karen Bass, after issuing previous threats of arrest for anyone who obstructs immigration enforcement. 'I'll say it about anybody,' Homan said. 'You cross that line – it's a felony to knowingly harbor and conceal an illegal alien. It's a felony to impede law enforcement doing their job.' But Homan did not directly accuse Newsom, Bass or any California politician of impeding Ice enforcement. Asked about the LA mayor, he said he did not believe 'she's crossed the line yet'. Newsom later pushed back against Homan, goading him to carry out an arrest, saying: 'Come after me – arrest me. Let's just get it over with, tough guy. I don't give a damn.' A day later, Trump was asked if he supported Homan's suggestion he might arrest the California governor. 'I would do it if I were Tom. I think it's great,' Trump said. 'I like Gavin Newsom. He's a nice guy. But he's grossly incompetent.' He added: 'Gavin likes the publicity, but I think it would be a great thing.' Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Yet later both sides were looking to dial down the rhetoric. Homan told CBS News 'there's no intention to arrest' Newsom and said: 'That whole thing's been taken out of context. 'They haven't crossed a line yet … If you cross that line, I don't care who they are – the governor, the mayor, whatever – and when you commit a crime against Ice officers, we will seek prosecution.' In his comments on Tuesday, Johnson repeated his position that any decision to arrest Newsom was not his to make, but the governor was 'standing in the way of the administration of carrying out federal law'. 'He is applauding the bad guys and standing in the way of the good guys,' Johnson said. 'He is a participant, an accomplice.' He added: 'I'm not going to give you legal analysis on whether Gavin Newsom should be arrested. But he ought to be tarred and feathered, I'll say that.'

Labour holds same contempt and arrogance towards Scotland as Tories
Labour holds same contempt and arrogance towards Scotland as Tories

The National

time23 minutes ago

  • The National

Labour holds same contempt and arrogance towards Scotland as Tories

THE pattern is now clear and established. Keir Starmer's promised "reset" of the relationship between Westminster and Holyrood meant resetting it to the same old contempt and high-handed arrogance which we witnessed under the previous Conservative administration. When Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced that she was going to axe the universal winter fuel payment for pensioners, the Scottish Government was reportedly given a mere 40 minutes' notice despite the fact that control of the equivalent benefit in Scotland is devolved to Holyrood. Holyrood was given little notice of the swingeing benefits cuts which Labour announced in March, even though some of the benefits affected in England and Wales are devolved in Scotland and the benefits cuts will entail a reduction in the annual block grant which forms the backbone of the Scottish budget. This week, the Labour government announced a U-turn on its massively unpopular axing of the winter fuel payment. The UK Government has so far failed to inform the Scottish Government how much extra the Scottish Government will receive as a result of this U-turn. Yet again, there has been no consultation with the Scottish Government on a critical issue affecting thousands in Scotland. READ MORE: Labour MSP Davy Russell sworn in to Scottish Parliament after by-election win Speaking on BBC Scotland's Good Morning Scotland this morning, Governor General Ian Murray first tried to insist that Scottish pensioners will now receive less than their counterparts in England and Wales as a result of Labour's U-turn, a Unionist talking point which had been calmly debunked by Scottish Secretary for Social Justice Shirley-Anne Somerville on the same programme just minutes before. Murray then fell apart when asked how much extra funding the Scottish Government will get after Labour's winter fuel U-turn. He didn't know and ended up rambling on about NHS waiting lists as a distraction. If the Scottish Secretary, the man supposedly Scotland's voice in the UK Government cabinet, doesn't know what the financial implications of this U-turn are for the Scottish budget, then how exactly is the Scottish Government supposed to know? (Image: PA) In yet another instance of Scotland being marginalised and ignored by a Westminster government which continually assures us that it has Scotland's interests at heart, the SNP has pointed out that since taking office, this Labour government has committed £36 billion to energy projects in England since taking power last year but Scotland has scarcely registered at all, with the telling exception of the £3.4 billion electrical interconnection projects which will see two new high capacity electrical cables run from Scotland to England, one on the west coast and one on the east. This project is not about energy production, it is rather a means to facilitate the export of cheap Scottish energy to consumers in England. It's a project which some view as a form of colonialist resource extraction. As the BBC coyly put it in its report announcing the construction of the cables: "Although the link can carry electricity in both directions, the majority is expected to flow out of Scotland." That's like describing the British Museum as a benefit to Athens and the Parthenon. These are the only kinds of energy projects which the UK Government is willing to fund in Scotland. It's almost as though they expect Scotland to become independent and are determined to grab what they can before we go. (Image: PA) This week, Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a £14.2 billion UK Government investment in the Sizewell C nuclear power station in Sussex. The nuclear plant is expected to take between nine and 12 years to build and cost around £20bn, according to initial estimates from 2020. However, in January, The Financial Times reported that the true cost of the reactor is expected to exceed £40 billion, and will not be ready until 2031 at the most optimistic date. When construction began on the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant in Somerset in 2017, it was expected to go on stream this year, but the project has been plagued by delays and cost overruns. The plant is now expected to be ready between 2029 to 2031 and is forecast to cost £41.6–47.9 billion rather than the original price tag of £18 billion when the project was commissioned. Meanwhile, the UK Government has still not spent any of the £200 million it promised to invest in Grangemouth, while GB Energy's budget has been repeatedly cut. The SNP opposes nuclear power in Scotland, and the party's energy spokesperson at Westminster Dave Doogan, accused the UK Government of pouring money into 'white elephants'. (Image: House of Commons) He said the Labour government was 'treating Scotland as an afterthought because of its prioritisation of English industries with a litany of investments made south of the Border over Scotland'. The SNP added: 'In total, since coming to office last year, the Labour Party has now committed £36bn to nuclear and carbon capture projects in England, whilst the Acorn Project has been forced to live with Labour's warm words, but not a penny of commitment.' Doogan said: 'Yet more billions has been committed to English nuclear projects, yet we have no investment in the Acorn Carbon Capture project, Grangemouth has been shut down and Westminster's fiscal regime has ruined North-East energy jobs – Scotland isn't just an afterthought, it's barely a thought at all. 'The evidence is clear that nuclear is extortionate, takes decades to build and the toxic waste is a risk to local communities – Scotland's future is in renewables, carbon capture and links to Europe, not more money for white elephants. 'It is absurd that energy rich Scotland is home to fuel poor Scots and that while energy bills go up, Scottish energy jobs are going down – that's directly as a consequence of Westminster policy and the further squandering of cash on expensive nuclear won't change that. 'Only the SNP firmly believe money from Scotland's natural resources should benefit Scotland's people – something that's an alien concept to Scottish Labour MPs who cheer on investment in England at the expense of Scottish industry.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store