I suspect this might be short-lived thanks to Trump, but it's still good news.
In a post-truth world, it's much more accurate to say "it's still news I prefer" - after all, what is "good"?
Seriously though - that is not intended to bash that particular viewpoint - the whole notion of "good" is at the core of this whole political discussion in the first place. There is some group of people who think their ideas are "right" and "good" and some other group who thinks different (and often opposite) views are good.
The only laws of the universe are physics - and those don't have "good" ratings. So as much as some folks like to bash religions or the supernatural, at least those belief systems provide some system for defining "good" that is external to popular opinion or base physical laws. Hard as I might, I can't figure out how humanists or atheists or anyone else can rationally claim any justification for any moral stance - because the law of the universe is basically "strongest local force wins, and entropy, yo." There is no justification for saying "we should protect sapient beings" or "we should protect the environment" or "we should try and preserver the human race". Why? What's the point? Why is hurting other beings bad? Why is depleting the earth's resources bad? The universe doesn't care. Does the universe think there is a difference between a sapient race blowing itself up with nukes and that same civilization dying off because a comet hit their planet?
The way I see it - there are only a few logical paths: - you become something like a Nietzchian "the will to power" kind of person, which is "Whatever I can get away with is by definition right", or you end up in some kind of nihilism or "there is no point to anything" or you end up with "there is some kind of supernatural principle that defines good". I can't see any other stance as fundamentally logical. That isn't to say the supernatural approach is easy, because then you have the mess of figuring out
which supernatural belief is the correct one - especially because by definition, the "supernatural" is not able to be pinned down by the scientific method.