A few months ago, Kemi Badenoch, 45, praised JD Vance for "abandoning some truth bombs." What is the aspiring British Prime Minister speaking like a teenage YouTube provocateur in the Texas basement? Badenoch is older than Tony Blair and David Cameron.
Vance approved all rights in Germany on German land on the eve of the federal election there. He called the roadside of free speech a real threat to Europe, while the Ukrainians died under (literally) bombs. If this is Badenoch's description of the truth, she deserves election condemnation beyond Thursday's local elections.
Canadian activities indicate that it will appear in time. It was just strange that American worship outside the United States was in the past. Now it seems to be a political responsibility. The fate of Canadian conservatives has just lost the near-no doubt election, partly because of their relationship with Donald Trump, who should scare their siblings in the UK.
Yugoff said 16% of British people have a good view of Trump. 13% agree with Elon Musk. Even a subset of the Conservative Party voted for the Landslide Failure last summer was almost exactly what the public did to the two men. As for Vance, his positive score is not as high as double digits. This is before the UK experiences a surge in inflation or the possible increase (or both) caused by U.S. tariffs.
Apart from raising Bashar al-Assad's training, the Conservatives cannot have a bigger vote than their allies with Maga. As labor prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer has some moral licenses: People know that he is opposing all his instincts to win bilateral trade with Britain or involve the United States in Ukraine. But what about the gathering of rights? Whether it is fair to see Trump's enthusiasm is not necessarily true? Pierre Poilievre can advise on risks.
The Conservative Party faces choice. This is between Trump (in the foreseeable future, the United States) and election viability. Contacting him during his first term or during his powers wasn't that toxic. But now we must stay gay, because the second act of his shock made people everywhere feel dissatisfied, that is, more or less confiscated votes. Many British Conservatives understand this intellectually, but cannot break the habits of nearly a decade, or they have been more bound to the United States.
Therefore, most people deny the dilemma. They say that Britain is not Canada, and its economy belongs to the tariffs of the United States. British conservatives can still get rid of Trump's flattery and imitation, which will make Canadians unpatriotic. Well, I can name about 400 Labour MPs who encourage the Conservatives to test this claim. If anything, British voters on the same continent as Russia have reasons why they dislike Trump and his foreign policy more than Canadians. (Unless you think he will be threatened with the "51st State" of the Northbound Tank.) A parliamentary system with a trade-to-GDP ratio of 65%: there are enough similarities between the Canadian and British scenarios to guarantee some of the Conservative fears.
In any English-speaking democracy, the Conservative Party that abandons Trump is more frustrated than any center-right party. This is because Britain, which has nothing to do with the United States, will need to have more to do with Europe: as an economic buffer and military pursuit. Now Starmer frequently builds accommodation with the EU - a person about youth immigrants - with little controversy. Only 30% of voters believe Brexit is going well. More than four years have passed since multiple majority. None of these means re-entering the offense, but the benefit of doubt is the person seeking melting. Whenever the Conservatives are opposite, workers can ask them to name alternatives. "Embraise America closer"? Really?
Populist voters in Britain are different from those in the United States. Trump has famous billionaire supporters. This is likely to gain support from politicians in Europe. Trump wants to cut the federal government. Populism in the old world is often so statistician that it overlaps with the left hand. (The most resonant case against the EU during the 2016 referendum was that it would cost to spend on the NHS.) The religious edge of the Trump movement was a slight election drag, even in the United States, so he created a brief traction in the traction of the abortion hardwood. In Britain, a place so godless, the church found itself bouncing a dead cat in attendance, and the Christian platform could not get in touch with the public for the first time.
I will go further than "different". Unless their countries have no relationship with each other, no two nationalist movements can coexist for a lasting enduring time. One person's militancy will eventually be targeted at the other and then must fight back or look weak. Poilievre achieved amazing results while keeping distance from Trump: jingoism representing another country. His failure should warn of rights around the world, and liberals can now attack their certificates of patriotism. Badenoch's boundaries about Vance are the masterpiece of modern conservatism: a compliment to American politicians on American platforms: a compliment to American politicians. Only the election will probably be British.
janan.ganesh@ft.com