Inherited wealth and Muslim-baiting aside, I don’t think Zac Goldsmith is much like Trump. He’s been an MP for 6 years, not a celebrity. He’s largely voted along with the party leadership. He’s also not a billionaire (though it’s quite possible Trump isn’t either).
His dad definitely was.
Looks like Zac is only half a billionaire (right now).
http://www.richestlifestyle.com/networth/zac-goldsmith-net-worth/
I was really surprised by his campaign. I thought he was from the touchy-feely-nice-green wing of the Tories.
I’ve had this confirmed thru two friends on both sides of the big water: in jolly olde England ‘trump’ is a slang word for fart
(perhaps as in to ‘trumpet’ or emit a musical tone, ahem)
My House Representative Keith Ellison, the only Muslim in congress, is also threatened by ISIS.
How fitting.
HA HA HA HA HA HA! That’s really funny!
" Trump is Ignorant."
Fify.
"He grew up in London’s housing projects, and his dad was a bus driver. "
Why no mention of his mother?
I would have expected BB to have moved beyond father/son/patriarchy.
From a strictly common sense persepective I reckon he has a point; I agree that Trump really does help ISIS.
But as an atheist I feel queasy when that statement is made by an elected official, as in; “my particular shade of this religion is the right one, the other versions are the wrong ones.”
The what?
Well that’ll happen when you renounce non-dom status as part of your PR strategy to get into politics…
Not sure I see the problem. Trump is clearly demonising anyone who identifies as Islamic by lumping them in with a bunch of radical terrorists.
Khan is pointing out that characterising all of Islam by the actions of a tiny minority of terrorists is divisive, dangerous, plays into the hands of the terrorists, and in this case is unpopular with the broader community.
What is your issue as an atheist with this position?
Seems to me that still, in this day and age, all elected officials everywhere are required to identify with one religious tradition or another. No atheists or agnostics allowed in that club. Personally, I think that is stupid. I hope but don’t expect that to change in my lifetime. Alas.
We had an atheist Prime Minister in Australia and no one gave a toss. The fact that she was a woman though… another matter entirely.
I love our new mayor!
#progress
I confirm this is true 
Did Sadiq Kahn say that? I don’t think he did.
This identification with religion seems to be a media thing. From my point of view, as someone who working in London, I would much rather have someone who lived in a London Housing project, and a working class family, and can identify with people of similar needs. If he has an Islam family background, but is not ruled by religion, then he can do his job and also represent another community that needs a good front. A much better choice than Zac ‘Because Money’ Goldsmith, so London voted him in.
I can see why we have these 'first ’ headlines: the ‘first black man’, the ‘first worman’, the ‘first Islamic’, and so on. Technically, they are right. Practically, they always seem to carry a whiff of xenophobia. ‘Look, the rot’s started’. ‘Bang goes the neighbourhood’.
Oh well, cheer up, everyone. They can only use the headline once. The change should be permanent.
Yeah. And FIFA has an ethics committee. I think there is something homeopathic here.
