Can Other UK Liberals Admit the US Has Two Right-Wing Parties?

And no... sexism and racism weren't the reason Trump got elected

As a liberal, I have to ask: can other UK liberals acknowledge that the United States effectively has two right-wing parties—and that Democrats might protect criminals as readily as Trump? I’m exhausted by the constant moral high ground that some liberals assume, both here and across the pond, as if we’re unshakable in our convictions and victories.

Walking around London today, overhearing conversations, I kept thinking about the tone-deaf confidence of liberals, assuming they’ve won the “culture war” and operate with unquestionable morality. But if this is true, why does the opposition remain so powerful, so emboldened, and so capable of winning? Sure, Trump has been convicted of crimes—but have we conveniently forgotten the likes of Dick Cheney, celebrated by some despite his record, or ignored the uncomfortable reality that Democrats aren’t immune to harboring deeply questionable figures within their ranks?

As a person of colour with traditional family members, I see firsthand how some people’s resistance to liberal culture isn’t about wanting to “ban” LGBTQIA+ rights or freedoms. It’s more complex than that; many want the freedom to express a different perspective—even one at odds with liberal views—without fearing social repercussions. The idea isn’t about erasing or restricting rights but about finding a space where disagreement can be aired.

Even those who might hold reservations about progressive values understand they can’t, and likely won’t, change the culture. Yet, liberals sometimes assume these traditionalists are scheming to overthrow societal progress. The truth, I think, is that we fail to understand what the other side actually wants: not necessarily to dominate, but to feel heard in the cultural discourse. By painting them as one-dimensional threats to progress, we strengthen their support base instead of weakening it. I saw Trump’s recent win coming from a mile away, and I suspect it’s partly because liberals misinterpret the motivations and sentiments of his supporters.

I have many LGBTQIA+ friends and love them dearly, but I also recognize how politicians like Trump play a tactical game. His rhetoric energises his base, while his actual policies shift to wherever support is strongest. Trump isn’t consistent—he’s an opportunist. The tragedy here is that liberals are caught in a game played from both sides, believing they’re fighting the ultimate battle against regression, while both parties work around them. The real left-wing alternative—Bernie Sanders—is far behind us. Democrats have grown so entrenched in corporate and establishment influence that they hardly represent the left anymore. Meanwhile, the rhetoric of both parties has left a void for genuine progressive action.

And then, after every election, we’re treated to an endless cycle of “doom perspectives.” It’s exhausting. Each time, it’s the supposed end of democracy as we know it, a call for constant vigilance against a looming apocalypse. But is it really the end? We’ve seen liberal administrations come and go in the US. There will be others, even if the fears of authoritarianism and collapse are real. The crucial thing, I think, isn’t obsessing over who’s in power but ensuring that the right kind of liberal government eventually takes the reins—one that listens, adapts, and genuinely strives for progress rather than relying on rhetoric and complacency.

Let’s talk honestly about what’s happening without the blind spots, the double standards, and the intense moral posturing. I think we owe the good of humanity that, at the very least.