The World Needs A Trump Presidency 

America and The West has been sick for years. The fever had to break sooner or later.

Before I start this, let me make myself abundantly clear: I have not, am not, and never will or could be a supporter or fan of Donald John Trump Snr. This living breathing clown shoe represents everything that is wrong with America, and the world. His words and actions showing support for racism, bigotry, sexism, homophobia (to name but a few faults) are beyond my comprehension and barriers of taste and decency. That said, these do not appear to be beyond the boundaries of others. 

We’ve been hearing more and more over the last few months, and especially after the election, of the surprise in Trump’s following. His pledges pandering to the basic fears of the ill informed American (banning Muslims, reversing Obamacare, punishing abortion, building “The Wall”) has drawn back a curtain on a country so utterly divided it no longer deserves the title of United States. I mean it must be bad if an entire state like California wants to remove itself from the union. Right now America is no more united than England can realistically be part of a United Kingdom after Brexit. 

Given the frankly awful options America was forced to choose their next Commander-In-Chief from , I always saw Hillary Clinton as the least worst option out of her and Trump. But now, given this deep nationwide divide I do wonder if another President Clinton would have been a bigger mistake than Trump in the White House. Yes, you may say that’s crazy, nay impossible. But consider Clinton for a minute. Firstly, a female president, while very welcome by many and indeed needed, is clearly too big a step for a country, of which half its population  simply couldn’t cope with something just as progressive and hopeful as a black US president. Hillary Clinton’s presidency would have been blocked at every turn by the Republicans, and achieved less than Mr. Obama’s time in office, because she would be another Democrat in a Republican house. And God forbid, a female Democrat in that house! At the end of the day, being the first serious female contender for President is not enough to qualify you for the highest office in the land.

Hillary Clinton is also part of the very system that Trump supporters and those oh so important swing voters feel has let them down. All those jobs going to “foreign lands”, being “taken by those immigrants” (just one of the staples of many a Republican campaign that horrendously simplifies a complex situation to dangerous racial bias, yet which Trump claims he can magically fix). 

Ultimately, Clinton couldn’t be trusted because of her history, both in her career and personal life. Whether or not you believe the laundry list of corruption allegations going as far back as the Watergate scandal, to the perfectly timed FBI investigations in to (disproven) security breaching emails, whether proven false or not, mud like that sticks. And in a career spanning 40+ years, that amount of mud becomes a straightjacket, impossible to escape or convincingly hide from observers. For these (admittedly oversimplified) reasons, Clinton was the wrong choice for President, and for the Democratic nomination. The DNC failed to recognise that the people simply wanted someone they could trust and that a female candidate, while a great achievement, is pointless if she’s wearing one of those straightjackets. By pushing Clinton to the forefront, the Democrats failed the country they claimed they wanted to govern.

Source: CNN

And if, in some alternate reality, Mrs Clinton did become president, of course there would be elation from her supporters, but I do believe the backlash (or “white-lash” may be more appropriate) from disgruntled Trump supporters would have been just as disappointed/heart-broken/frustrated/angry (and possibly more violent) as what we’ve been seeing from the millions of Clinton/anti-Trump supporters. But this is the nature of democracy, heck any contest; to have a winner there must be a loser. You may argue that (see above CNN graphic) Clinton should have won based on the popular vote and that the Electoral Votes don’t truly reflect the views of the people. There’s only one problem with that; a victory of 0.1% isn’t a mandate to go against the rule of the land, or change the wishes of 52.6% of the country that didn’t want Clinton. As a Brit who voted remain in our ridiculous EU referendum, I can say this from experience; all your protests, your petitions, while valid and even required to voice your concerns and fears, ultimately accomplishes nothing except to further highlight the chasm within America. You have already spoken with your vote. You live in a democracy, you champion it. This is it. Deal with it. Fight your corner, please fight, but recognise that this is not just a battle against the next president, but against the very system that gave him not just the opportunity to be considered a candidate, but also the keys to the White House. 

The 45th President of this so called United States of America is a test. Half of Americans got what they wanted, which I believe will be a step back to the worst ideals of the 20th Century. The other half are now in absolute dread at the prospect of being dragged by there by their ankles. Like Brexit before him, Candidate Trump gave political validation to the worst aspects of modern society. But now he’s President Trump he claims he wants to unite the country, and in order to do that, the vile rhetoric of the last 18 months has to be dialled down. This inevitably means that some of his (often half baked, if not, raw) pledges that he has made to his baying rally crowds will have to be flipped. When 2017 starts let’s see what happens to that stupid wall of his that “Mexico will pay” an estimated  $25bn for. Let’s see what really happens when he tries to deport an estimated 11 million illegal immigrants from US soil. All of America will be watching to see if he can deliver on these and other ridiculous, populist pledges; half hoping he can, the other half praying he can’t.

Even up to the beginning of November the idea of President Trump was always a joke. The reality of it just isn’t funny. What this clown shoe represents isn’t just a failure of America, but a failure of the so-called “Civilised Society”. Across the Westernised world, its people are rising up and rebelling against authority like a hot headed teenager screaming “you don’t tell me what to do”! With President Trump, Brexit, and the growing popularity of right wing politics across Europe, we face the mother of a globalised hormone charged tantrum. So maybe it’s time to let loose the reigns. Let these societies, these metaphorical spoilt brats go out and make their mistakes. Indulge in their ill advised and poorly thought out vices. Then hopefully, in time, they’ll wake up with their heads in the metaphorical gutter, vividly remembering and forever regretting the stupid mistakes they made. Because they clearly have not learnt from their elders, or paid attention in history class when being told about the catastrophic rise of the right wing across Europe just 80 years ago. Or worse, maybe they just don’t care.

There are two further outcomes from this election that I’d like to quickly share. The first is that we now have concrete proof that time travel does not and will never exist, because no one in the future would look back at the last year of this destructive freak show of an Democratic election campaign and say “no, I wouldn’t change a thing” and not do something about it! And secondly, amusingly, possibly childishly, here in England Trump means “fart”. Next year we will be witness to the Fart Presidency. “Ladies and gentlemen, President Fart”!! Purile I know, but if simple pathetic jokes like that can still make you laugh this week, then we’re in with a shot of cleaning up this mess. You could say let’s wait for Trump’s follow-through.

US Election: Choice? What choice?

​America is caught between a rock and a hard place with Trump and Clinton. Can the celebs make it easier to choose?


To read the full article just click!

The UK: Not a democracy, more a dictatorship by distraction

Governments refusal to debate NHS Bill proves they no longer represent the UK people

11th March 2015; it was to be a day of reckoning for the Conservative government and their increasingly obvious plans to dismantle and privatise the NHS. Parliament was to listen to the 2nd reading of the Green Party’s NHS Reinstatement Bill…….


How YOU can help save the NHS

NHS Reinstatement Bill to be debated in Parliament 11/03/2016


So we’re in to the 2nd day of the 4th round of industrial action by junior doctors‬. It’s a disgrace that our highly trained and valuable medics have been put in this position by a government intent on breaking their promise that the NHS would be “safe” in their hands. As with Jeremy Hunt’s handling of this entire situation, it was a lie.

When the junior doctors return to work tomorrow, the battle for the future of the NHS will continue, inside the Houses of Parliament. The NHS Reinstatement Bill, which has cross party support, aims to remove our health service away from the prying hands of private contractors and keep it in public hands, ensuring that the most important thing remains patient care, not shareholders bank balances.

MP’s must vote in favour of the bill to ensure this happens, that’s why today I have written to our local MP asking her for support. I ask you please to do the same. You can write to your local MP by entering your postcode at

You can read more information on the NHS Reinstatement Bill at

Please help to do what the Conservative government clearly can’t – keep the NHS safe.


Government guidelines leave male abuse victims out in the cold


petitionEquality. It’s not just a word, it’s a battle. One that has raged since before we even knew how to say it. Whether it is based on our gender, race, beliefs, sexuality, hair colour…..we still fight to be recognised as equals even though many I listed here are affectations we are born with. We had no choice in. While open debate rages around the topics of the gender pay gap, equal employment opportunities and same sex marriage, there is another more disturbing discussion required that our own government seems intent on ignoring.


Transcript of interview with Kate Russell and Paul aka MahdDogg

This transcript is a companion piece to “Government guidelines leave male abuse victims out in the cold”.

Normal: SPB

Bold: Mahddogg

Italic: Kate Russell


Right, for both of you then: In your own words what is the aim of your campaign?

For me it’s about justice, pure and simple. Once we started looking into the overwhelmingly gender biased portrayal of domestic abuse victim support material and awareness campaigning by UK police authorities we followed the breadcrumb back to the source: the Home Office statutory guidance on coercive control, issued in December 2015 to support the new law… That guidance, as written, expressly advises gender bias against men… it’s unlawful, it’s wrong, and it’s morally corrupt

For me, it’s to get to the heart of why there is gender bias in the treatment of Domestic Abuse victims, which I think we have identified, and address it head on. Domestic Violence is a massively underreported crime yet the Home Office is issuing guidance to the police that is based upon CPS prosecution statistics, and is not representative of the entire breadth and diversity of victims, male, female, gay or bi or trans. It’s ignoring and therefore not targeting these groups. The guidance must be changed so that policing and investigation of Domestic Abuse and coercive/controlling behaviour is gender and sexuality blind.

100% of the authorities who have responded to my question about whether they use that document to inform policy making in policing domestic abuse, stated in writing they do use it as guidance

I know from my experience that there is a stigma amongst male victims in particular. Guidance of this kind is what keeps us from reporting our abuse. Because it seems like the authorities don’t care.

yes.. and men don’t report it because this stigma tells them they won’t be believed, and might lose access to their kids, or face arrest themselves. No wonder they don’t report it

That last one is at the forefront of every man’s mind when we’re under attack too. It’s why we don’t defend ourselves

So this becomes not only about getting the government to change guidance appropriately, and authorities to adjust accordingly, but also to affect a massive change in culture as well.

Absolutely. If the home office admit they were wrong then we can use that as a springboard to start asking police authorites and the care services to review their policies and offer real support to ALL victims

That’s the hope, just this one step isn’t going to be enough to effect a full on shift in culture, but this one step will be massive in it’s impact on victims of domestic abuse and violence. All it takes is for Theresa May and the Home Office to change 3 paragraphs to reflect the reality.

It’s also about changing the perception of male victims about what is happening to them.. if they see posters expressing male victims then maybe they will feel more confident to take action and save themselves and their kids. And if female abusers see these poster maybe it will make them wake up to the reality of what they are doing

While no one wants to admit they are a victim, understanding that you are can help you make the moves you need to get help and get safe.

Every journey begins with a single step. In this case that step is rewriting 3 paragraphs

That’s all. Right there, and will change so much.

Theresa may can do that, on her own, in her office, in about 10 minutes. And the document as written is UNLAWFUL, by the government’s own definition

We’ve done the research to back up the change; it’s in breach of The Equality Act. I’ve been reading a lot of acts.

If we were discussing a minority here, people would be up in arms about the under reporting of the crime, and would launch a media campaign to make them more aware. But it’s men… half the population. So that aspect just doesn’t get spoken about. Instead we launch campaigns to encourage more women to come forward.

That’s the bias that results in documents like the Guidance. Where we can see from the Violence Against Women Report from the CPS shows that 84% of their reports come from women. Women ARE reporting, more should too, of course. Women are already responding to the last 30 years of work done by domestic violence campaigning and services.

There is a blatant hypocrisy here. Have you received any backing from any help groups or charities that deal with domestic abuse?

There have been a number of small groups who have been in contact with Kate and I throughout the campaign and back before we even started.

Lots of small charities and support groups are helping push the petition, and if you read the comments you will see dozens and dozens of personal accounts from abused men who have not reported their abuse. But the mainstream organisations supporting domestic abuse victims all suffer the same bias, and all refer to the statutory guidance when questioned. Having the guidance changed would take away that place the hide and make the well-funded organisations have to stand up and be counted.

Having seen the posters, would you also say that as well as discriminating against men, it is also on the side of being racist and homophobic?

Not racist or homophobic no. Those are proactive discriminations. What we’re dealing with here is lack of support and omission of the true statistics. It’s not a wilful discrimination, but equally corrosive to the victims who are not represented.

I wouldn’t go so far as to call it homophobic, that’s heading into hate crime territory, however it definitely does exclude Gay and Bi relationships as all seem to depict heterosexual relationships. As to race, I wouldn’t say so. A lot of campaigns do have a good balance of ethnicities represented.

Agreed on the ethnicities fact, but that goes back to my point about minority representation. It’s very ‘fashionable’ to support minorities. “Fashionable” is perhaps trivialising that point too much.. but you get my drift I hope.

I can’t say it better than that. It’s certainly something that is proactively addressed. However there is one “-ist” that hasn’t been mentioned: sexist. [Are these campaigns] sexist?”

And instead of responding to newspaper polls where the public overwhelmingly agree the campaigns are sexist, some public servants instead vote brigade their cronies to swing the poll results back the other way. While being paid a salary by public money, half of which comes from the pockets of men.

Then claim to be victims of an “Orchestrated Campaign” against the police.

It occurs to me that even if we get the guidance changed, these biased approaches will still exist, but with the guidance document changed to express the gender/sexuality neutral status of the crime it will take away their place to hide when challenged. That has to be a positive thing for everyone.

Just out of interest what kind of media exposure have you had so far?

We had an interview on BBC 3 Counties radio which kind of kicked it all off and gave us the idea to target the guidance document

That was an hour of radio time on this subject. A good start too. We’ve been pushing everything so far through social networks; even through there, we’re getting a good feel as to public response. It has been overwhelmingly positive. I’m sitting here with the petition page open watching the numbers go up. That’s a heartening thing to see.

Less heartening are the dozens and dozens of stories from abuse victims who feel they don’t have a voice.

Is the petition just for May, or is it requesting a debate in Parliament?

Just May. She has the power to change it It is fully within the home secretary’s power to change the guidance as laid out in Section 77 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. The simple facts are, the document as it stands is unlawful by the government’s own definition, and Theresa May can put that right in less than an hours work probably. She has yet to reply to repeated emails and tweets to the Home Office account though. So much for ‘public servant’.

Refusing to do so, well, that would send a very clear message to victims of domestic abuse everywhere.

This is not a topic for debate.. there is no debate.. it’s the right and moral thing to do

It just occurred to me that this may well fall under a Human Right issue. Has this been explored aat all?

Hmm… not expressly. This petition is the first step. If we get no joy, we won’t stop. Any person who is sane can see the document is wrong

But if she refuses then it may very well become a human rights issue.

I mean, it uses statistics taken from the Violence against Women and Girls Crime Report 2013-2014 to assert that most victims are women…

And everyone in those statistics reported and it lead to a prosecution.

That’s like going into a brazillain meat BBQ restaurant to assert that most people are meat eaters, or going into a vegan restaurant to assert we’re all vegetarians.

The Office of National Statistics covers unreported crime and includes male victims. Putting them at 33% of all victims of abuse. 33.33% to be precise.

It’s another prime example of the government only using facts that they want to use.

When the government office in charge of national statistics says that the numbers the guidance relies on can’t be used as national statistical data then they have no argument to make.

One of the problems historically in bringing light to this issue is that it is usually argued back and forth between people with extreme ideologies – feminists vs. mens rights activists. It’s the reason we wanted to be clear in the petition that this is not about Men vs. Women. I campaign for gender neutrality and against gender bias in the tech sector. I couldn’t be more moderate politically. And Mahddogg is a victim – WAS a victim.. though it’s a dreadful label to put on someone who has shown such strength of character in raising this issue.

A survivor, and I’d like to see more of us.

We don’t care who you are – if you’re suffering domestic abuse, you deserve to get treated equally.

This is not an issue to use as a political or ideological football. It can affect anyone, from any walk of life. That’s the importance of all of this. The law is good, its application is wrong.

Theresa may needs to understand that this isn’t going away

Guys this is brilliant thank you.

Imposition from the eyes of a future junior doctor.


Earlier today I spoke with a medical student, Michael, asking him his thoughts on the imposition of the junior doctors contract.

“Stephen, I’m well thanks (though been better!) It’s a bad day, not just because the contract is set to apply to all junior doctors from August, but because it sets a precedent for the government to ignore the views of an entire workforce and force through a flawed contract condemned by all. That is bound to affect the dynamic, both within the NHS and between the public sector and the government, in a very serious and negative way. Medical students are demoralised. My colleagues and I have our final exams in a month’s time; what better way to motivate bright young minds than to impose unsafe, unfair working conditions just as they reach their biggest hurdle to entering what was once a respected profession?”

It’s a polite response, but it cannot hide the disappointment shared by all those who are fighting to save the NHS. Mr. Hunt’s insistence at forcing this contract is seen as nothing more than a diktat on an already overstretched, demoralised workforce. We’re asking how many existing junior doctors will leave the profession because of this imposition. We should also be concerned about how many medical students will turn their back on their once chosen profession, because of the actions of a failed marmalade exporter.