Correct.
Also this is a very politicised name change. Ergo, in the USA it will be embraced by supporters of the orange one, whilst everybody else in the USA will continue to call it "Gulf of Mexico".
As this was clearly done to stir up controversy, I can't think of anything more ridiculous. The job of a head of state is to unite a people, not divide them.
Most Americans support ‘the orange one’. There was a poll conducted on this quite recently.
This isn't some minority view committing a coup. This is a pretty-damn-near majority using the electoral process to give itself a thumb on the scale to win.
It may not be "what America really is", but it's also not not who America really is. It's fair to say that this is who the world should continue to expect us to be, and that we'll continue to think that this is a democratic country. (Not just that 49.8%, but a large majority, even most of those who oppose the present government.)
I completely agree with your later points -- my point was that that is not only who we are, and Trump winning doesn't mean everyone else now has to hold their tongues.
My point re: most Americans voted for the President is Trump winning the popular vote. Which is shown on Wikipedia, but I’m not going to cite it. :)
In your grandparent post, you simply stated that more than half the country support Trump; viciousvoxel was refuting that by pointing out that less than half the country voted for him.
How many actively opposed him is immaterial to your initial statement.
Maybe my language was imprecise, I could agree with you there, but I don’t think the other people matter.
"Head of state" is very much a job where you get to define your own mission and duties, including "sell cryptocurrency to suckers" and "sow division to exploit". Defining internal and external enemies is a very effective technique for retaining power.
King Charles III, all his modern predecessors and all other European Royal heads of state would rather disagree with that statement! As would the constitutionally elected presidents of most other countries of the world. The citizenry would get rid of them if they thought otherwise. Royals included.
No means of getting rid of a sitting president, other than impeachment (which isn't going to happen either) or, you know, the other one.
You mean Surrenderland? I anxiously await whatever new moniker our leader comes up with for your country, but that's my bet.