On Trump: An Englishman Scolds America’s Left
Read Time:3 Minute, 59 Second
Now my fine liberal American chums. It really is getting to the ‘put up or shut up point’. You hate and despise Trump. Fine, I get that. I even understand why. Trump isn’t exactly high up on my Christmas card list either. The thing is, everything has to have a ‘cut off’ and, frankly, you can say ‘Not In My Name’ or ‘Not My President’ until the sun doesn’t shine but, guess what? He is – or is about to be – your President.
Will there be an impeachment of some description? No, of course there won’t. Will The Donald become the President? Yes, of course he will.
Whether he survives a four-year term is another matter of course – come to that, whether the world survives a four-year Trump term is another matter as well but, Trump IS your next President and love him or loathe him – and, clearly, you will select the ‘loathe option’ nothing can be done about it other than assassination and, to be honest, that is not a serious option unless you are a complete and utter utter whacko.
Now. I have a question for you liberal Americans:
I suspect that you accept that UKIP (The United Kingdom Independence Party) led by Nigel Farage leans to the right politically speaking. Some may claim they are ‘far right’ although they would be wrong. They do, however, certainly lean to the right politically speaking.
RELATED: Donald Trump: A Portrait In Tyranny
Now. Donald Trump is to be your next President despite receiving 3 million fewer popular votes than Clinton. Correct?
Along with suggestions regarding impeachment about various things, this fact is one of the main reasons I am hearing from anti-Trump Americans as to why he shouldn’t become President.
Personally I have considerable sympathy with that view. Clinton received 3 million more votes from ‘the people’ than Trump did so certainly it somewhat beggars belief that she didn’t win.
Your political ‘system’ prevented her from winning via your electoral colleges. I’m right so far yes?
Ok.
Now. UKIP received 4 million votes at the last British General Election in 2015 yet, due to the anomaly of the British democratic system only won 1 seat in government whilst the Liberal Democrats who received less than 2 and a half million votes gained 8 seats in government.
If Britain had ‘proportional representation’ we would currently have a coalition government of Conservative and UKIP.
RELATED: Hitting the Wall With Trump
So, my question is this.
If you, liberal America, insist that Trump is not ‘your President’ given that your main argument concerns Clinton gaining 3 million more of the popular vote than Trump did, would you accept that Britain’s right wing UKIP party deserved to be in a coalition government given that they received 4 million votes in Britain’s election in 2015?
What I’m trying to get at is this.
You can’t have it both ways.
Your politics are liberal and [or] more to the left of centre. Fine and dandy.
However, if you will not accept Trump won under your current democratic rules and insist on denying him the right to become President then you have to also agree that Britain’s somewhat right wing UKIP party should be in coalition here.
Of course, you can ‘opt out’ of the debate by saying “Oh this is America so it isn’t relevant to Britain” but, in so doing, you are clearly and shamelessly trying to acknowledge that politics in the west are currently seeing the ‘right’ in the ascendancy and behaving like an ostrich is not going to help stop or solve that.
Acknowledging that Trump won is one thing you find difficult and fair enough but, your primary reason of Clinton’s 3 million more popular votes merely confirms that Britain’s right wing UKIP should have far more power.
You feeling like Solomon then?
I would much appreciate you answering this question:
Will you accept Trump as your next President? Yes and the debate ends. No and then you are arguing that UKIP should be sharing power with the Conservative government in Britain.
So, liberal America, fancy agreeing that UKIP should be in government in Britain? No? Fine, then you are accepting Trump won.
You can’t have it both ways people even if both ways is the way you would like it.
By the way. There is, would you believe, one positive regarding Trump’s victory. Political correctness is going to end. Now what ever else is or isn’t good or bad regarding the election of Trump, the death of political correctness has got to be a great thing! With luck the death of multiculturalism will follow.
See? Every cloud and all that.
Happy
0 %
Sad
0 %
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
0 %
Surprise
0 %
0
0
I’m a realist. I accept that he is going to be inaugurated as our 45th President of the United States. I have to accept that reality.
But I don’t have to like it.
Indeed you don’t!
That’s the thing with us realists though eh?
I don’t like Oldham Athletic FC losing but they keep doing it….mind you…52 years of supporting them has made me immune to depression 😉
At least you won’t have 52 years of Trump!
I’ll be surprised if we have 2 years of Trump.
Me too. Then again, unlike democrats, republicans love circling the wagons.
“They” want pence in the White House to bring their theocracy to bear.
1 year of Trump would surprise me….but I think a good decade of right wing politics is coming.
On the plus side right wing politics usually only lasts a decade tops…Usually.
I will never accept this clown as my president. I love my country but I don’t have to love its president.
Absolutely! But we are where we are so let’s try and have some fun with it! – After all, if you don’t laugh you’d cry!
As soon as I figure out British politics, I’ll move on to the easier task of understanding Loop Quantum Gravity.
But my beef about this disastrous election is less about winning with fewer votes than about a man guilty of a multitude of crimes that border on treason. The horror is in the fact that so many Americans really don’t care if he’s a rapist who wants to work his office for private gain, collude with our enemies even if it risks world war and an endless list of disqualifications. He’s made the ever present refuse of American humanity into a winning political force and even if he had won in a landslide, the danger is real — and horrifying. In a week we might live in a country where it’s OK to piss on the president (if you’re female and good looking) but illegal to criticize him.
When an atheist says “god help us” we’re in trouble.
I’m afraid I can offer nothing other than my crossed fingers for you chaps Glenn.
I’ll cross my toes too in case that helps……….
By the way – if you do figure out British politics let me know will you? 😉
Your UKIP skirts are showing old bean 🙂
Oh God! You haven’t got some of those compromising pictures of me in a skirt have you??? I’ll pay!! name your price!!! 🙂 🙂
Not really old bean. The situation is what it is and UKIP did get 4 million votes – nearly 2 million more than the Liberal Democrats – yet the Lib Dems have more seats.
This isn’t intended as a ‘ra-ra UKIP contribution’ but merely a pointing out that if Clinton’s 3 million more votes should have won her the Presidency – and I can quite see that – then surely UKIP should have the seats the Lib Dems have.
I accept Britain is Britain and America America but the reasoning behind Clinton should have won is the same regarding UKIP.
I’m just curious whether liberal Americans would agree, reluctantly perhaps, that the ‘Clinton popular vote equation’ (of which I sympathise) has to transfer to UKIP having enough seats to be sharing power with the Conservatives in Blighty.