We won't actually get Pauline, though. In terms of far right party popularity electorally, I'd imagine we're a long way behind much of the Western world at this stage. More serious versions of Hanson have come close to being elected in Europe, and Marine Le Pen seems to have a real chance in France. One Nation is really just Pauline and James Ashby, both of whom are just in it for the easy money anyway. Trump getting elected was bizarre, but it still happened in a US system in which no party generally holds the presidency for more than two terms under any circumstances. A political party that can barely be called that winning enough seats in both houses of parliament is an entirely different proposition.
Your understanding of why this is all happening is pretty simplistic and a fair way off, by the way.
This is... bad.
Salon and the Huffington Post (both of which are generally meh) are hardly the equivalent of Breitbart. That would be some sort of Stalinist or anarchist publication at this point. Ooh, 'pro-globalist'. Do you even know what that means? Mark my words, soon they'll be replacing globalist with what they really mean, which will inevitably be 'rootless cosmopolitan'.
Anyway, having recently read a fair bit of academic literature in this area, I can safely say that you're barking up the wrong tree. Not sure what a letter supporting Trump's Muslim ban has to do with anything, you'd be nuts to suggest that the US immigration system is geared to let muslims in. If you had any idea what you were talking about, you'd be well aware that punitive measures against muslims in the US/seeking to enter the US have had bi-partisan support since 9/11.