Red, White and Blueland? Trump’s Greenland talk sparks some colorful proposals

President Trump’s repeated talk of buying Greenland has inspired a number of related proposals — both serious and satirical — from those who either endorse or oppose the idea.

Trump first spoke of purchasing the massive Arctic island from Denmark in 2019 and has strongly reiterated his interest in the early weeks of his second term, part of a “manifest destiny” push that has also included talk of “taking back” the Panama Canal, making Canada the 51st state and taking over Gaza.

Trump has said buying Greenland is essential for American economic security, and “National Security and Freedom throughout the World.” Experts say the island holds value geopolitically and geographically: It’s home to rare earth minerals that the U.S. largely relies on China to get.

Trump’s idea has been welcomed by congressional Republicans, who have introduced supportive bills with names like “Make Greenland Great Again” and the “Red, White and Blueland Act.”

But the leaders of Denmark and Greenland rejected it, saying the island is “not for sale.” (Trump has declined to rule out military or economic coercion to take control of it.)

A January poll found that 85% of Greenlanders do not want to be part of the U.S. And, as NPR has reported, most Danes “have gone from shock, confusion to just plain bemused” by Trump’s proposal.

Some Danes are now flipping the script, suggesting their leaders buy California and turn it into “New Denmark.” More than 220,000 people had signed the satirical petition as of Wednesday morning.

The push to “Danify California” 

The petition aims to gather 500,000 signatures and raise “$1 trillion (give or take a few billion)” in support of what it calls “Denmark’s Next Big Adventure.”

“Have you ever looked at a map and thought, ‘You know what Denmark needs? More sunshine, palm trees, and roller skates.’ Well, we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make that dream a reality,” its website says. “Let’s buy California from Donald Trump!”

Why California? The petition lists a few reasons, including its year-round sunshine, tech dominance, avocado supply (“avocado toast forever”) and Disneyland (“we’ll rename it Hans Christian Andersenland”).

And it jokes that Trump might be willing to part with it for the right price.

Trump has had no shortage of critical words for California, which voted against him three times. He has accused Democrats of destroying the state, even calling it “Paradise Lost” on the campaign trail.

He has long feuded with its Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, most recently blaming him for the scale of the wildfires that devastated Los Angeles in January and threatening to tie federal aid to voter ID. Newsom, in turn, signed two laws last week setting aside $50 million for legal battles against the second Trump administration.

The petition borrows some language from Trump, like calling its plan “tremendous,” including “bigly” in its email address and brandishing the slogan “Måke Califørnia Great Ægain.” It says it is in Denmark’s national interest to promote its heritage by turning California into New Denmark and L.A. into Løs Ångeles.

“We’ll bring hygge to Hollywood, bike lanes to Beverly Hills, and organic smørrebrød to every street corner,” it says. “Rule of law, universal health care and fact based politics might apply.”

The website includes fake testimonials of support from celebrities — like Danish-born Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich and Danish-American actor Viggo Mortensen — and imaginary people, including Sven the Viking and Karen from Accounting.

It’s not clear who the organizers of the petition are. Their website, Denmarkification.com, cheekily says they are located “somewhere on Earth, for strategic and economic reasons.” And they are upfront about it being satire, with a disclaimer reading “This campaign is 100% real… in our dreams.”

A bill to rename Greenland 

Meanwhile, in Congress, some Republican lawmakers are throwing their legislative support behind Trump’s efforts.

On Tuesday, Rep. Buddy Carter of Georgia introduced a bill that would authorize Trump to enter into negotiations with Denmark to acquire Greenland and, if successful, rename it “Red, White, and Blueland.”

“Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other record of the United States to Greenland shall be deemed to be a reference to ‘Red, White, and Blueland,” it reads.

The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to oversee its implementation on federal documents through the Board of Geographic Names — which is effectively how Trump renamed the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America.

“America is back and will soon be bigger than ever with the addition of Red, White, and Blueland,” Carter said in a statement. “President Trump has correctly identified the purchase of what is now Greenland as a national security priority, and we will proudly welcome its people to join the freest nation to ever exist when our Negotiator-in-Chief inks this monumental deal.”

Carter’s bill has been referred to the committees on Foreign Affairs and Natural Resources for further consideration, though it’s unclear how much support it will have. It’s the second of its kind — a dozen House Republicans introduced the “Make Greenland Great Again Act” in mid-January, before Trump was even sworn in.

The bill authorizes the president to seek to enter into negotiations with Denmark over Greenland. It requires any agreement they may reach to be submitted to the House and Senate Foreign Relations committees within five days and gives Congress 60 days to review it.

Does Trump need Congress’ support? 

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives a president the power to make treaties “with the Advice and Consent of the Senate” and “provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

But in the decades after World War II, according to the Senate, presidents have entered the U.S. into a growing number of international agreements without the Senate’s approval.

“Since 1990, only about 6 percent of international agreements have been made through formal treaties submitted to the Senate for advice and consent,” it says.

Those executive agreements, as they are called, are still considered binding under international law.

While Trump’s push for Greenland gains steam among Republicans, support among Democrats appears to be lacking. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in January that “House Democrats believe that we are not sent to Washington to invade Greenland.”