唐纳德·特朗普总统在他的朋友鲍里斯·约翰逊(Boris Johnson)赢得五年首相任期后，在英国的选举结果中有很多值得欣赏的地方，保守党在议会中获得了绝大多数席位。特朗普一如既往地在推特上迅速发布了这条消息。
"祝贺鲍里斯·约翰逊的伟大胜利！"总统在周五早上发布了公告在承诺“完成英国退出欧盟”的竞选活动后，保守党将赢得下议院650个席位中的360多个席位，这一点变得越来越明显
“继英国退出欧盟之后，英国和美国现在可以自由达成一项大规模的新贸易协定。这项交易有可能比与欧盟庆祝鲍里斯达成的任何交易都大得多，利润也更丰厚！”
这对美国和英国来说是一个在经济上走得更近的机会，特朗普曾多次提出加快贸易协议，现在英国终于在1月份即将离开欧盟。特朗普不支持欧盟，长期以来一直支持英国退出欧盟。
此外，英国的选举结果也可能在2020年大选前提升特朗普的精神约翰逊无耻的民粹主义、民族主义运动亲英国退出欧盟的右翼彻底击败了左翼工党及其公开宣称的社会主义领袖杰里米·科尔宾。
但自相矛盾的是，保守党的强大多数增加了英国退出欧盟变得更加温和的可能性——这可能意味着尽管特朗普向约翰逊示好，威斯敏斯特还是选择了布鲁塞尔而不是华盛顿。
这是因为约翰逊现在不再那么依赖议会中强硬的英国脱欧保守派。他们是一个相对较小的立法者群体。但是在上届保守党政府执政期间，他们掌握了影响力，因为它缺乏一致的多数。
伦敦大学伯克贝克分校的美国政治专家罗伯特·辛格教授说新闻周刊约翰逊在经历了多年的议会悬而未决和虚弱之后获得了强大的多数席位，“最终让一个稳定的政府能够规划五年”
“理论上，这让美国达成贸易协定的可能性更大——但我认为这仍取决于鲍里斯是否追求一个‘软’英国退出欧盟，这还不清楚，”他说。
约翰逊目前的协议是在选举前仓促谈判达成的，它将英国从欧盟关税同盟中剔除。欧盟关税同盟允许威斯敏斯特与世界各地的其他国家签署自由贸易协定，无论它们是否与布鲁塞尔有协议。
英国将于1月份离开欧盟，届时将进入过渡期，在此期间，威斯敏斯特和布鲁塞尔将就自由贸易协定进行谈判。约翰逊将有机会在这里软化英国退出欧盟。
英国不能同时与美国和欧盟进行无摩擦贸易，因为在几年前跨大西洋贸易和投资伙伴关系谈判失败后，华盛顿和布鲁塞尔没有自己的协议。
反对党工党在竞选期间制作的一份泄露的英国政府文件详细描述了英美贸易谈判者就达成后英国退出欧盟协议进行的谈判。
根据这份文件，美国贸易代表明确表示，如果英国致力于欧盟关税同盟和单一市场，那么美国和英国的自由贸易协定将是“不可能的”
目前，英国正在退出关税同盟。但它可能会在未来几个月决定，继续留在关税同盟并与欧盟庞大的内部市场保持流动性贸易符合其更大的利益。欧盟的内部市场约占英国贸易的一半。
要么英国和欧盟之间必须进行严格的海关检查——这是一个意味着英国退出欧盟更加艰难的贸易壁垒——要么威斯敏斯特必须牺牲与美国和其他国家进行更自由贸易的机会，以便更容易地进入欧洲单一市场。
特朗普认为约翰逊是朋友可能是他最亲密的欧洲盟友。
保守党愿意渲染友谊来奉承特朗普——在约翰逊看来，这种关系是由现实政治驱动的——并且比其他人更愿意迎合美国，如果这意味着得到他想要的。
但是约翰逊面临着复杂的政治挑战，这体现在关于国民健康服务(NHS)的选举辩论中，国民健康服务是英国由纳税人资助的免费服务用户的健康服务，以及特朗普承诺的后英国退出欧盟贸易协定。
国民健康保险制度是英国选民的主要担忧，保守党经常被指责试图将其服务私有化。工党指责约翰逊在与华盛顿的贸易谈判中试图向美国公司出售国民医疗保险制度。
约翰逊否认了这一点，并表示国民保健制度不会参与任何交易。特朗普还表示，他不想与国民医疗保险制度有任何关系，他回顾了此前的评论，即在贸易谈判中，一切都将摆到桌面上，包括医疗服务。
尽管选民对国民健康保险制度感到担忧，保守党还是在英格兰北部和中部的传统中心地带赢得了工党的席位——民调显示，工党被选民信任来管理医疗服务，其中许多人强烈支持英国退出欧盟。
如果特朗普在美国医疗保健利益的压力下改变对国民医疗保健制度的看法，这可能会对他与约翰逊的关系以及首相声称的在他的领导下医疗保健服务不会受到私有化威胁的诚意进行一次重大考验。
将国民健康保险制度加入贸易谈判也将使约翰逊的多数席位受到质疑，这一多数席位由如此多的前工党席位组成。这次脸色发青的前工党选民将密切关注这些谈判，特朗普也将密切关注——他们的新保守党议员也将如此。
辛格教授说:“现在与保守党议员在一起的北方选区也将阻碍一项提供国民保健服务的协议。”新闻周刊。
无法在议会通过一项全面的美英贸易协议可能会迫使威斯敏斯特在贸易问题上回到布鲁塞尔，因此意味着一个更加温和的英国退出欧盟。许多英国脱欧者承诺的向华盛顿的重大转变将会取消。
目前还不清楚特朗普会对英国拒绝接受他的公开提议做出怎样的反应，英国拒绝接受特朗普的公开提议是为了加快一项大而有利可图的贸易协议。总统狂热的推特表明他不会接受。
除了贸易和英国退出欧盟问题，英国选举结果也是美国进步人士的警钟。那些认为只有温和派才能击败特朗普的人和那些认为激进的替代平台是2020年获胜之路的人之间存在争论。
特朗普不受欢迎，面临弹劾，他可能会从支持英国退出欧盟的民粹主义运动背后为约翰逊的胜利赢得一些信心，这场运动对“相信英国”的民族主义情绪很重，这种情绪把他的个性放在了最重要的位置。
前副总统乔·拜登利用科尔宾令人震惊的失败——工党自1935年以来最糟糕的表现——在竞选巨额公共开支和国有化宣言后，勉强赢得了200多个席位——来发出警告。
周四晚上，在旧金山的一次筹款活动中，拜登提到工党的举动“到目前为止都是偏左的”，并表示，根据一份关于该事件的集体报道，人们会对约翰逊“有点像总统的身体和情感克隆体”能够获胜感到震惊。
约翰逊还受到了对手的猛烈抨击，因为据称他在英国退出欧盟交易的细节和其他秘密策略上撒谎，比如科尔宾已经完成了自己的事情，并受到损害后，他放弃了与英国广播公司主持人安德鲁·内尔的高调而艰难的采访。
此外，约翰逊有争议的评论史——比如用“西瓜微笑”形容非洲黑人是“挥舞旗帜的黑人”，穿罩袍的穆斯林妇女是“信箱”，男同性恋是“坦克顶的流浪汉”——在这场运动中表现突出。
然而，他们，以及他威胁使用政府权力对抗竞选期间与他有分歧的电视网络，并没有损害他赢得多数席位的机会。工党承诺向公共服务和福利投入资金的宣言也没有。
约翰逊的竞选被他的批评者嘲笑为特朗普式的。但是他赢了，而且赢得很大，尽管激进的反对派承诺进行真正的变革。
伯克贝克的辛格告诉记者:“在某种程度上，这表明民粹主义是多么有韧性，尽管鲍里斯的竞选似乎乏善可陈。”新闻周刊。
“他的大部分竞选与其说是经济，不如说是身份——美国可能再次证明是相似的。”
WHAT BORIS JOHNSON'S STUNNING U.K. ELECTION WIN MEANS FOR DONALD TRUMP
There is much for President Donald Trump to enjoy in the U.K. election result after his friend Boris Johnson won five more years as prime minister, with the Conservative Party securing a large majority in parliament. True to form, Trump was quick to tweet about the news.
"Congratulations to Boris Johnson on his great WIN!" the president posted in the early hours of Friday morning, as it became clear that the Conservatives would win more than 360 of the 650 seats in the House of Commons after a campaign that promised to "get Brexit done."
"Britain and the United States will now be free to strike a massive new Trade Deal after BREXIT. This deal has the potential to be far bigger and more lucrative than any deal that could be made with the E.U. Celebrate Boris!"
This is an opportunity for the U.S. and U.K. to move closer economically and Trump has repeatedly offered to expedite a trade deal now Britain is finally on the cusp of leaving the European Union (EU) in January. Trump is no fan of the EU and has long backed Brexit.
Moreover, the result in Britain may also lift Trump's spirit ahead of the 2020 election after Johnson's unashamedly populistic, nationalistic campaign from the pro-Brexit right resoundingly defeated the left-wing Labour Party and its avowedly socialist leader Jeremy Corbyn.
But a strong Conservative majority paradoxically increases the chances of a softer Brexit—which could mean Westminster choosing Brussels over Washington despite Trump's overtures to Johnson.
This is because Johnson is now less beholden to the hard Brexiteer Conservatives in Parliament. They are a relatively small group of lawmakers. But they wielded the power of influence under the last Conservative government because it lacked a consistent majority.
Professor Robert Singh, an expert on U.S. politics at Birkbeck, University of London, told Newsweek that Johnson's robust majority after years of hung parliaments and weakness "finally allows a stable government to plan for five years."
"In theory it makes a U.S. trade deal more likely—but I think that still depends on whether Boris pursues a 'soft' Brexit or not, which isn't clear," he said.
Johnson's current deal, hastily negotiated before the election, removes the U.K. from the EU's customs union, which would allow Westminster to make free trade agreements with others all over the world, regardless of if they have deals with Brussels.
Britain is set to leave the EU in January, when it will enter a transition period, during which time there will be negotiations between Westminster and Brussels on a free trade agreement. It is here that Johnson will have the opportunity to soften Brexit.
The U.K. cannot have frictionless trade with both the U.S. and the E.U. because Washington and Brussels do not have their own agreement after the failure of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership talks a few years ago.
A leaked U.K. government document, produced by the opposition Labour Party during the election campaign, detailed the talks between British and American trade negotiators on reaching a post-Brexit deal.
According to that document, the U.S. trade representative made clear that if the U.K. committed to the EU customs union and single market then a U.S.-U.K. free trade agreement would be "a non-starter."
Currently, Britain is on course to exit the customs union. But it may decide over the coming months that it is in its greater interests to remain in the customs union and maintain fluid trade with the E.U.'s vast internal market, which accounts for around half of the U.K.'s trade.
Either there have to be strict customs checks between the U.K. and E.U.—a trade barrier meaning a harder Brexit—or Westminster must sacrifice the opportunity for freer trade with the U.S. and others for easier access to the European single market.
Johnson is considered a friend by Trump and is probably his closest European ally.
The Conservative is willing to play up the friendship to flatter Trump—a relationship motivated, from Johnson's point of view, by realpolitik—and is more willing than others to pander to the U.S. if it means getting what he wants.
But Johnson has a complex political challenge, which is embodied in the election debate over the National Health Service (NHS), Britain's state-run taxpayer-funded health service that is free to service users, and the post-Brexit trade deal promised by Trump.
The NHS is a major concern for British voters and the Conservatives are often accused of attempting to privatize its services. Labour accused Johnson of trying to sell off the NHS to U.S. corporations in its trade negotiations with Washington.
Johnson denied this and said the NHS would not be part of any deal. Trump has also said he wanted nothing to do with the NHS, walking back on a previous comment that everything would be on the table during trade negotiations, including the health service.
Despite voters' concerns about the NHS, Conservatives won seats off Labour—which is, polling shows, trusted by voters to run the health service—in their traditional heartlands across the north and midlands of England, many of which are strongly pro-Brexit.
Should Trump change his mind on the NHS under pressure from American healthcare interests, it could prove a big test for his relationship with Johnson, and of the prime minister's purported sincerity that the health service is not threatened with privatization under his leadership.
Adding the NHS to trade talks would also bring Johnson's majority, formed of so many ex-Labour seats, into question. The former Labour voters who turned blue this time around will be watching those negotiations, and Trump, closely—as will their new Conservative MPs.
"The northern constituencies now with Tory lawmakers will also hamper a deal that offers access to the NHS," Professor Singh told Newsweek.
Inability to pass a comprehensive U.S.-U.K. trade deal in Parliament could force Westminster back towards Brussels on trade, and therefore mean a softer Brexit. The great pivot to Washington promised by many Brexiteers would be off.
It is not clear how Trump would react to the U.K. snubbing his public offers to expedite a big and lucrative trade deal. The president's febrile Twitter feed suggests he would not take it well.
Beyond the issue of trade and Brexit, the U.K. election result is also an alarm bell for American progressives. There is a debate between those who argue that only a moderate can beat Trump and others who say a radical alternative platform is the path to winning in 2020.
Trump, who is unpopular and facing impeachment, may take some heart in Johnson's victory off the back of a populistic pro-Brexit campaign, heavy on nationalistic sentiment about "believing in Britain," that put his personality front and center.
Former Vice President Joe Biden used Corbyn's staggering loss—the Labour Party's worst performance since 1935, scraping just over 200 seats after campaigning on a manifesto of huge public spending and nationalizations—to deliver a warning.
At a San Francisco fundraiser on Thursday night, Biden noted Labour's move "so, so far to the left" and said people would be shocked that Johnson "who is kind of a physical and emotional clone of the president is able to win," per a pool report of the event.
Johnson also came under heavy fire from his opponents for allegedly lying about the details of his Brexit deal and other underhand tactics, such as bailing on a high-profile and difficult interview slot with BBC presenter Andrew Neil after Corbyn had already done—and been damaged by—his own.
Moreover, Johnson's history of controversial comments—such as describing black Africans as "flag-waving piccaninnies" with "watermelon smiles," Muslim women in burqas as "letterboxes," and gay men as "tank-topped bumboys"—were prominent in the campaign.
Yet they, and his threats to use his government's powers against the television networks with which he had disagreements during the campaign, did not damage his chances of winning a majority. Neither did Labour's manifesto pledging to rain money on public services and welfare.
Johnson's campaign was derided as Trumpian by his critics. But he won, and won big, despite a radically progressive opposition promising genuine change.
"At some level, it shows how populism can prove resilient, even though Boris seemed to have had a lackluster campaign," Birkbeck's Singh told Newsweek.
"A lot of his election was more about identity than economics—the U.S. might prove similar again."
