This American is proud of a country that is willing to face up to its racist past and openly remove the racial-slur markers of that terrible history. I look askance at any assertion that sweeping those slurs under the rug of public attention — or, heaven forbid, embracing them — is worthy of any sort of pride.
Gulf of Oil Riches?
Look, this is what happens when you make an actual crazy person the most powerful person in the world. Embrace the chaos, I guess.
You think removing a racist and sexist slur from official place names “chips away at national pride”? I guess we have different ideas about what to be proud of.
I’ll also note that ruby-red Montana already had a law against the official use of “squaw” in place names, so clearly it isn’t only Democrats who have a sense of basic human decency.
Note that maps will put the old name on it, and other countries will call it whatever they please.
Well, you can certainly ask, but I suspect Denmark’s price will be too high. And the US Treasury would pay, I assume. And by extension, we all will.
I think what bugs me the most is the nearly complete disregard for history that the idea shows. It’s been the Gulf of Mexico for going on 300+ years, or something similar (there’s a map on the Wikipedia entry that calls it “The Great Bay of Mexico”). Because you know, for a long time there, most of the coastline was part of Spanish Mexico, and for a while, all of it was. It’s only since 1836 that it hasn’t been the case.
It’s a typically stupid Trump flex to rile up the ignorant and stupid by waving the flag and doing something insulting to Mexico, because they’re “against us”.
Picking fights with those weaker than you. That’s what bullies do, and what other bullies respect.
See, that’s kind of my take on it. Things like this have happened before, like with the Louisiana Purchase, and Alaska, so it’s not unheard of to just offer to buy a chunk of land and transfer its sovereignty to another country.
What’s crazy is, “Why Greenland?” He’s got it stuck in his head that this is somehow critical for US national security, and is obsessed with it, to an extent that he’s willing to continue causing international incidents over his obsession. Buying Canada, I could understand. Renting Mexico, sure. Putting Panama on lay-away, alright. But why Greenland?
One theory: he thinks it’s much, much bigger than it actually is, because he’s only seen it on Mercator projection maps.
Good luck on convincing me I need to stay updated. My globe still has the Soviet Union on it.
In the Flat Earth Model where Trumplandia lives, when push comes to shove, there’s a clear strategic advantage to controlling the real estate that’s farthest away from the edge:
Also, you could then definitely see Russia from your house.
In coming days, expect a raft of landmarks to be renamed for Trump.
There is already “The President Joseph R. Biden, Jr. Expressway” near Scranton, so Donald will have to outdo that in some spectacular way, possibly by ordering his head to be carved (oversized) into Mount Rushmore.
Maybe one or two, and, like the Biden Expressway, it would come from his supporters, not Trump himself.
Missing from this thread is the reality that Trump’s Gulf of America naming plan is a smart, even brilliant, move that he can get the Secretary of the Interior to push through without legislation. If Trump loses interest, that will be a sign he is in decline.
What will the major U.S. TV networks call that body of water in 2026? Unless Trump drops the ball, they will call it the Gulf of America, and every time they say it, the Trump brand will be polished.
In 2028, what will the Democratic nominee say if asked whether the Gulf of America renaming should be reverted? I think they are going to have to go along with the change, because, otherwise, they will look anti-American. Sucks.
It’s a stupid idea. Even if it helps him politically, it’s still stupid. And he’s already showing many signs he’s in decline.
GFKAGofM.
Kinda like X will always be Twitter.
Prince will be Prince, not the artist formally known as.
I just checked abcnews.com and nbcnews.com. They are both calling it X.
But that’s different, because Musk has power to rename Twitter worldwide, while Trump (or, technically, the Secretary of the Interior) can only rename it in the U.S. If Trump goes through with this, media outlets, headquartered in the U.S. will have a difficult choice to make.
New York Times? I think they would stay with Gulf of Mexico, at least through the Trump 47 term. Same with the non-profit Associated Press, whose international customers would insist on Gulf of Mexico. Washington Post? This is a choice that they may be hoping to avoid.
Maybe the mainstream media oligarchs will get Trump to drop an idea they will hate. Or maybe he’ll throw them under the bus.
Republicans don’t find the term “squaw” derogatory? Basket of deplorables…the whole lot of 'em.
And who cares if they don’t find it derogatory? It absolutely is and should be removed. As others have pointed out, states have already banned it and it was already being eradicated long before Biden’s administration. If it isn’t offensive, why did they rename the “squawfish” to Pikeminnow way back in 1998?
Not everything should be about a political standpoint. Sometimes you just do what is right because you are a decent human being and not a pandering politician.
Mexican President suggests renaming “North America” as “America Mexicano”
That’s some quality trolling right there. A tip of the sombrero.
It won’t be a problem. Trump will just have the US Mint produce a coin to cover the cost. Sorta like how Trump proposed paying off the national debt. A few trillion-dollar coins or something like that?
Trump is definitely approaching this like a crooked real estate developer - he assumes Denmark will be “forced” to sell if he offers the right price, and that he can bring that price down by negging them.
It’s not going to work.
When I worked at a small market research company, our operations manager had an Excel spreadsheet which would calculate the cost we’d quote to a client for a project, based on various factors (mostly the size and complexity of the study).
He showed me that his spreadsheet had a box that he could check to apply a “PITA surcharge” to a cost estimate: it’d increase the overall cost by a certain percentage if we considered the client to be a Pain In The Ass to work with. Even if Denmark were interested in dumping Greenland (they’re not), they’d absolutely be applying a PITA surcharge, that’d get bigger the longer that Trump persisted in this dumb-ass idea.