Donald Trump becoming US President is a rather attractive prospect - because he'd annoy the worst people in Britain:
I want to see President Trump – if only because of who he’d annoy
It would be Trumpageddon for all the worst people in Britain, and the prospect is rather attractive
Rod Liddle
6 February 2016
The Spectator
I suppose spite and schadenfreude are thinnish reasons, intellectually, for wishing Donald Trump to become the next American president (and preferably with Sarah Palin, or someone similarly doolally, as veep). But they are also atavistically compelling reasons nonetheless. Think of the awful, awful people who would be outraged and offended.
If you recall, 8 May last year was awash with the bitter tears of lefties who couldn’t believe the British people had been so stupid as to elect a Conservative government (the first outright win for the Tories in a general election since 1992). There were the usual hilarious temper tantrums and hissy fits. Typical of these was an idiotic college lecturer called Rebecca Roache who loftily announced that she had gone through all of her Facebook contacts and ‘unfriended’ any who might be Conservatives for their ‘abhorrent views’. But there were thousands of others, besides Becca, stamping their little feet and daubing ‘Tory scum’ on war memorials. One columnist said she kept breaking down and weeping, unable to believe how thick or vile the electorate must be. Oh, how we laughed. If Trump wins, it will be like that, times ten. It will be Trumpageddon for all the worst people in the country.
The BBC, for example, will not be happy. There will be a markedly different mood within the corporation this election night to the one we witnessed in 2008, when the studios were awash with ejaculate and we viewers were all forced to endure a relentlessly celebratory Obamathon, utterly devoid of anything even approaching impartiality: how wonderful of the Americans to elect him and what a marvellous, marvellous little black man he is! They will be instead grim-faced with incomprehension and antipathy.
The BBC would not be happy with Trump becoming President
I doubt too that President Trump will be bunged a Nobel peace prize within a few months of taking office — because his electoral success will offend all the metro–liberals in the world and they will all start talking about the patent legitimacy of taking ‘direct action’, which is the only recourse when a population proves itself to be so dumb in the polling booth. Think how grossly offended will be those half a million quasi-Stalinist Brits who signed a petition demanding that Donald Trump be banned for ever from visiting this country. And the fatuous MPs who took the suggestion so seriously that they debated the issue themselves. We cannot possibly allow into our country people who disagree with our views, even if it is a view (regarding Muslim immigration) with which the majority of the population would concur.
Think, too, of what the Guardian will have to say the morning after he’s elected. Think of the furious and deranged columnists now in full agreement with Jezza that we should leave Nato and maybe cut off diplomatic relations and at the very least stamp and shout and scream with rage. Think of Newsnight, whose editor, Ian Katz, when he was at the Guardian — the print version of the programme — urged readers and leftie celebs in 2004 to bombard the voters of the swing state Ohio with letters pleading with them not to vote for George W. Bush — a strategy which provoked derision and outright hilarity from Cincinnati to Cleveland and helped to ensure Ohio went for Dubya by a mile.
Think of the Newsnight post-election edition once Trump has won: Kirsty Wark and four sobbing women panellists deciding that this is the end of the world as we know it, and no, we don’t feel fine.
Kirsty Wark, host of the BBC's Newsnight, and four sobbing women panellists would decide that this is the end of the world as we know it if Trump was elected
And that phrase reminds me — think of the bien-pensant slebs, the actors and the luvvies and the pop stars. Think how royally pissed off they will be. Benedict Cumberbatch will deliver an emotional denunciation in the middle of Hamlet’s third soliloquy, perhaps joined on stage by Emma Thompson, Stephen Fry, the ‘comedian’ Stewart Lee, Lenny Henry and many others, to hold hands and keen for the millions who will be murdered, maimed or simply excluded by the Trump presidency.
And the pop stars. It is not just the effete Georgia indie heroes REM who have it in for Trump. Our own homegrown purveyor of blue-eyed cod-soul middle-of the-road overproduced slush, Adele, has demanded that Trump stop using her terrible song ‘Rolling in the Deep’ before his conventions. He has no right to use my song without my permission, she said. Yes he has. But in future, when he uses it, he should dub out your voice, Adele, and replace it with someone imitating Pinky or Perky. It’ll sound better that way.
The same goes for Steve Tyler, frontman of drug-addled Rolling Stones wannabes Aerosmith, who has demanded that Trump stop using his horrible power ballad ‘Dream On’. I admit it would be better by far if Trump used ‘Dude Looks like a Lady’ — but, Stevie, US heavy-metal bands tend to be right of centre. Get with the programme.
And then — it grieves me to say this — there’s Neil Young. He objected to Trump using his clever and ironic anthem ‘Rockin’ in the Free World’. The genuinely talented Canadian has announced that he will be supporting leftie Democrat Bernie Sanders for president. Perhaps this is just a fan speaking, but I suspect that’s all because Neil wants to impress the splashtastic leftie eco-loon actress Daryl Hannah, with whom he is currently shacked up. They spend their time fighting for the rights of red Indians, or whatever we’re meant to call them, and opposing drilling in places where beavers live. Someone please tell Daryl that Neil was for Reagan in 1980 and Ross Perot in 1992 and that, in general, his politics are as idiosyncratic as his music. Almost his entire mid-1980s output would enrage liberals — and that’s before we consider the, uh, counterintuitive feminist statement ‘A Man Needs a Maid’.
So, all those people to enrage. The people who do not believe that it is even remotely legitimate to have a view which differs from their own. The more I think of it, the more attractive a Trump win becomes. I may write some letters to the voters of New Hampshire.
I want to see President Trump – if only because of who he’d annoy
I want to see President Trump – if only because of who he’d annoy
It would be Trumpageddon for all the worst people in Britain, and the prospect is rather attractive
Rod Liddle
6 February 2016
The Spectator
I suppose spite and schadenfreude are thinnish reasons, intellectually, for wishing Donald Trump to become the next American president (and preferably with Sarah Palin, or someone similarly doolally, as veep). But they are also atavistically compelling reasons nonetheless. Think of the awful, awful people who would be outraged and offended.
If you recall, 8 May last year was awash with the bitter tears of lefties who couldn’t believe the British people had been so stupid as to elect a Conservative government (the first outright win for the Tories in a general election since 1992). There were the usual hilarious temper tantrums and hissy fits. Typical of these was an idiotic college lecturer called Rebecca Roache who loftily announced that she had gone through all of her Facebook contacts and ‘unfriended’ any who might be Conservatives for their ‘abhorrent views’. But there were thousands of others, besides Becca, stamping their little feet and daubing ‘Tory scum’ on war memorials. One columnist said she kept breaking down and weeping, unable to believe how thick or vile the electorate must be. Oh, how we laughed. If Trump wins, it will be like that, times ten. It will be Trumpageddon for all the worst people in the country.
The BBC, for example, will not be happy. There will be a markedly different mood within the corporation this election night to the one we witnessed in 2008, when the studios were awash with ejaculate and we viewers were all forced to endure a relentlessly celebratory Obamathon, utterly devoid of anything even approaching impartiality: how wonderful of the Americans to elect him and what a marvellous, marvellous little black man he is! They will be instead grim-faced with incomprehension and antipathy.
The BBC would not be happy with Trump becoming President
I doubt too that President Trump will be bunged a Nobel peace prize within a few months of taking office — because his electoral success will offend all the metro–liberals in the world and they will all start talking about the patent legitimacy of taking ‘direct action’, which is the only recourse when a population proves itself to be so dumb in the polling booth. Think how grossly offended will be those half a million quasi-Stalinist Brits who signed a petition demanding that Donald Trump be banned for ever from visiting this country. And the fatuous MPs who took the suggestion so seriously that they debated the issue themselves. We cannot possibly allow into our country people who disagree with our views, even if it is a view (regarding Muslim immigration) with which the majority of the population would concur.
Think, too, of what the Guardian will have to say the morning after he’s elected. Think of the furious and deranged columnists now in full agreement with Jezza that we should leave Nato and maybe cut off diplomatic relations and at the very least stamp and shout and scream with rage. Think of Newsnight, whose editor, Ian Katz, when he was at the Guardian — the print version of the programme — urged readers and leftie celebs in 2004 to bombard the voters of the swing state Ohio with letters pleading with them not to vote for George W. Bush — a strategy which provoked derision and outright hilarity from Cincinnati to Cleveland and helped to ensure Ohio went for Dubya by a mile.
Think of the Newsnight post-election edition once Trump has won: Kirsty Wark and four sobbing women panellists deciding that this is the end of the world as we know it, and no, we don’t feel fine.
Kirsty Wark, host of the BBC's Newsnight, and four sobbing women panellists would decide that this is the end of the world as we know it if Trump was elected
And that phrase reminds me — think of the bien-pensant slebs, the actors and the luvvies and the pop stars. Think how royally pissed off they will be. Benedict Cumberbatch will deliver an emotional denunciation in the middle of Hamlet’s third soliloquy, perhaps joined on stage by Emma Thompson, Stephen Fry, the ‘comedian’ Stewart Lee, Lenny Henry and many others, to hold hands and keen for the millions who will be murdered, maimed or simply excluded by the Trump presidency.
And the pop stars. It is not just the effete Georgia indie heroes REM who have it in for Trump. Our own homegrown purveyor of blue-eyed cod-soul middle-of the-road overproduced slush, Adele, has demanded that Trump stop using her terrible song ‘Rolling in the Deep’ before his conventions. He has no right to use my song without my permission, she said. Yes he has. But in future, when he uses it, he should dub out your voice, Adele, and replace it with someone imitating Pinky or Perky. It’ll sound better that way.
The same goes for Steve Tyler, frontman of drug-addled Rolling Stones wannabes Aerosmith, who has demanded that Trump stop using his horrible power ballad ‘Dream On’. I admit it would be better by far if Trump used ‘Dude Looks like a Lady’ — but, Stevie, US heavy-metal bands tend to be right of centre. Get with the programme.
And then — it grieves me to say this — there’s Neil Young. He objected to Trump using his clever and ironic anthem ‘Rockin’ in the Free World’. The genuinely talented Canadian has announced that he will be supporting leftie Democrat Bernie Sanders for president. Perhaps this is just a fan speaking, but I suspect that’s all because Neil wants to impress the splashtastic leftie eco-loon actress Daryl Hannah, with whom he is currently shacked up. They spend their time fighting for the rights of red Indians, or whatever we’re meant to call them, and opposing drilling in places where beavers live. Someone please tell Daryl that Neil was for Reagan in 1980 and Ross Perot in 1992 and that, in general, his politics are as idiosyncratic as his music. Almost his entire mid-1980s output would enrage liberals — and that’s before we consider the, uh, counterintuitive feminist statement ‘A Man Needs a Maid’.
So, all those people to enrage. The people who do not believe that it is even remotely legitimate to have a view which differs from their own. The more I think of it, the more attractive a Trump win becomes. I may write some letters to the voters of New Hampshire.
I want to see President Trump – if only because of who he’d annoy
Last edited:
