That time Donald Trump was elected Mayor of London


In 2008, Boris won the Conservative ticket with 75% of the open vote. He then won both first & second rounds of the mayoral vote with an increased turnout over the previous election.

Four years later, the turnout dropped but he did the same thing.

In the general election, he then won a London constituency with twice the votes of the nearest challenger.

Maybe the 2008 was a"comedy" vote, but 2012 and 2015 were unlikely to be. Either the original premise is incorrect, or his first term convinced people he was better than the alternative.

I’ll leave someone else to tackle how unpleasant using “rapey” as an insult is…


“the parallels are terrible and frightening.” A politician who actually speaks his mind, and does not suffer from a reflexive liberal mindset–yes, terrible and frightening indeed–at least to Mr. Doctorow, who never seems to realize the absurdity of his hyperbole.


That’s exactly why Trump is terrifying. You do know that he’s stated that he’d get the US embroiled in numerous economic world wars right? Totally unnecessary wars for even stupider reasons than Bush had.

Yes Trump speaks his mind. And that’s why we’re afraid. He’s transparently shown himself to be so thin-skinned he doesn’t belong within 500 miles of the nuclear football. Because he’s said he’ll punt it.

He doesn’t just look like a psychotic muppet. He pretty much is one.


Hmmm how about a honeypot?


Quite the opposite the way I see it.


He gave up his US nationality. I think it was earlier this year. If he’d kept it, he’d have had to start paying US taxes, due to some change in American law.

Edit: -
"Johnson sold a house in London for a cool £730,000 profit, and as U.S. citizens are required to pay capital-gains tax on overseas transactions, Uncle Sam sent Mayor Boris a bill. "


Sorry Cory, you write a lot of good stuff but I think your comparison here is well wide of the mark and invoking that “rapey clown” quote is pretty inappropriate.

Johnson is a centre-right, educated, cosmopolitan politician who yes, uses a larger-than-life media persona to his political advantage, but also if you ever watch London assembly questions has a sensitive approach and is involved with real details. It’s a bit of an insult to the combined electorate of London to suggest we repeatedly voted him in as a joke, or to entirely dismiss the positive things that have happened to London on his watch as the work entirely of others.

Supporting a London living-wage, better access to our jobs market for foreign nationals and big infrastructure spending such as cros-srail 1, 2 and an estuary airport are hardly the marks of a hard-line, reflexive right winger in the Republican image

Trump on the other hand has always come across to me as an anti-intellectual philistine. His TV persona seems to be entirely about him being right because he is rich, not the other way around (which is more often admired). His election campaign appears to be a naked piece of ego mania, peppered with insults and deliberate antagonism. Th two men are not the same.

Each is easily skewered (although I would argue one is more deserving) on their own merits should you wish to write that way (although I would argue Trump is more deserving of attack), but the comparison is not illuminating.


There is of course another possible reason: the two things the English (not the Sottish or the Welsh) are most infatuated with are self-made ambition and the Establishment. Thanks to the strange quirks of history B Johnson embodies both these spaces. He is fuelled by fiery ambition of an upstart immigrant thus is a bit of an outsider while also being hyper Establishment (Eaton & all).

You could basically read him as a rejuvenating force to the Establishment. People can nurse the illusion that they have elected something new and different while at the same time voting for the good old, tested reliable establishment. i.e. It looks different but nothing really changes…

As to Trump. He is merely a symptom of US American’s love affair with capitalism which by now clearly trumps your nobel and historic love affair with freedom and liberty.


Basically what you are saying is that it’s a bit harder to fool the general London voter than the US GOP electorate? Which is not saying much.

As a Londoner, interested and involved in politics I find it difficult to pin point anything B. Johnson did that was not to the advancement of his cause i.e. B Johnson, and benefited the population at large.

Two questions. How can a politician in charge of the biggest melting pot in Europe (which greatly benefits from EU immigrants) be so xenophobically anti Europe

And how can he possibly in his hands on way be booth Mayor of London and a constituency MP. Sorry, I am just not buying it that London is having a good deal with a Mayor with a second job.


I can’t speak to Johnson, but in Trump’s case it’s not an insult:


but he is a capitalist’s dream. with no conscience and a good hand at picking yeah sayers as advisors. what more do you want…capitalism has won, fair and square…and the communal is dead.


I think rapey is a bit much without evidence or suspicion of rape, but that appears to be a quote from the source article and not Doctorow.

Now, it can be pointed out that Boris Johnson withdrew funding for the only rape crisis centre in all of London. That’s a bit pro-rapey IMO, -pro-rapey- still isn’t rapey I guess. He has since doing that rectified the situation, so less pro-rapey than he once was, if only politically.


Yeah, but it wasn’t being used to describe the apparently alleged rapist Trump (alleged because I’ve not heard the accusations, just that weird rebuttal) - it was used to describe Johnson, who isn’t (as far as I can see on a quick Google).

I’d also argue that “rapey” is a problematic term regardless of accusation because it turns it into a comedy descriptor of someone creepy or weird, rather than being about the illegal act itself.


Yah, I don’t think someone can be rapey. They are a rapist or merely creepy or socially inept or any number of other problematic things people can be.


I guess how acceptable you find BB using the phrase “rapey clown” comes down to if you think BB is calling out the phrase or reusing it. And it doesn’t read as a call-out to me.

But maybe BB would be fine with a link to an article describing one of them as rapey as long as we put it in quotes to show it wasn’t our opinion, just that of that other bloke. :confused:


You don’t see a conflict between the party members who want an actual left-wing politician like Corbyn, versus the leadership who want a Blair clone? Do you think Burnham is likely to be an election winner?

(FWIW, I really like Corbyn, and hope he wins)

Did he, though? I know he threatened to (again).


I see it as sorting the wheat from the chaff.
I think Andy Burnham is very much a ‘yes man’. He’ll tell you whatever you want to hear, he even resembles a ventriloquist’s dummy. Yvette Cooper has more chance than Liz Kendall, but JC is what’s sorely needed after Milliband.
If the leadership won’t support him there’ll be plenty who can step up, despite the claims otherwise.


But Boris never gave the reporter’s address to Guppy.

So really this is just a phone conversation making Guppy look bad, not Johnson.


A double dose of “president” George W. Bush didn’t smarten you up?!?

As the disembodied head of Richard Nixon said while running for reelection in the year 3000, “…the average voter is as drunk and stupid as ever.”

closed #29

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.