Donald Trump is the best thing to happen in the lives of the American poor since before Ronald Reagan came to power. Since Ronnie's election, neo-liberalism has dominated the thinking of all presidents and both main parties. Barack Obama showed himself to be a true friend of the excessively rich when he bailed out the bankers and recommended that tens of millions of ordinary Americans should have their property stolen off them by the very banks he had gifted with billions of dollars. Within the first three months of Obama's presidency, ninety-five per cent of the growth in the economy he ushered in went to the top earners who consisted of a mere one per cent of the population. However, the worst president of the last forty years, from the perspective of all but the superrich, was, without a doubt, Bill Clinton. This is not just because of his complete lack of any moral integrity in how he lived his personal life but because of the way he deliberately dismantled all the non-Constitutional checks and balances of the democratic system in the States, gave previously illegal monopolies to his favoured corporations and let jobs disappear out of the nation like water down the drain because of his enthrallment to unrestrained neo-liberalism.
So, am I saying that the policies of the Republican Party are better for the poor than the policies of the Democrats?
No, I am not. The truth is that the policies of the two different parties are so similar and both so geared towards the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer that all that there is to separate the two parties are a few cosmetic policies that make very little difference to the lives of the vast majority of Americans but which they hope will keep their core supporters happy whilst they screw them through less publicised legislation. However, when the Republicans are in power, grassroots Democrats get up off their Big Mac extended backsides, take to the streets and fight tooth and nail to protect the poor of their country from the callous actions of the Republican president. Quite often they are successful in, at least, getting the severity of new laws toned down and occasionally their campaigning results in laws going to the Supreme Court for scrutiny and then being overturned. A Democrat who is president escapes such constant scrutiny and is left to get on with unjust decision making without being brought to account. This is why I believe the American poor are far better off with Trump in charge than they would have been if the worst president ever's biggest supporter had won the last presidential election. At least, with Trump in the White House, the poor have millions of Democratic voters looking out for them, something they did not enjoy under Obama and previous Democratic presidents.
My few British friends should substitute "Labour" for "Democratic," "Thatcher" for "Reagan," "Blair" for ""Bill Clinton" and "Ed Miliband" for "Hilary Clinton." Nobody can be compared to Donald Trump.