Healey walks fine line on working with Trump
BOSTON (SHNS) – As President Donald Trump passes 100 days in his second term in office, Gov. Maura Healey says she's still willing to work with him, but called his administration 'a disaster' so far.
'I said at the outset that I would work with this administration where it benefits Massachusetts, our residents, our economy, our state, but it's become clear to me that this administration is not interested in helping people, and day after day, they seem to be doing the opposite — slashing funds, hurting people, scapegoating, targeting the vulnerable, trying to divide us as Americans,' Healey said at an event Wednesday to celebrate the culture and arts in Massachusetts.
Springfield Regional Chamber takes to Beacon Hill
Asked after the event if those comments meant she had changed her position and was no longer willing to work with the president, Healey said 'No, my tune hasn't changed at all.'
'Any governor in any state wants to have a good working relationship with the federal administration, and that continues to be the case,' she said. 'What is also clear after 100 days is that this federal administration is finding ways to hurt our states left and right.'
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, a Democrat who has ties to Healey and an increasingly national profile, has been in the news recently for cultivating a relationship with Trump.
Healey visited Whitmer along with other female governors at Mackinac Island in Michigan in the summer of 2023, and Whitmer made a visit to the State House in Boston last year. The two have also publicized the group chat they are in with other women Democratic governors, where The 19th reported they've formed friendships, as well as just working relationships.
Whitmer has come under fire from some Democrats for fostering a closer relationship with Trump in recent weeks, taking a meeting at the White House last week and on Tuesday joining the president at Selridge Air National Guard Base in Michigan, where they reportedly hugged.
Whitmer co-chaired former Vice President Kamala Harris's 2024 campaign against Trump, and has criticized the president in the past, but said she's willing to work with the administration on priority goals — including on ensuring the Air National Guard base in Michigan, which supplies tens of thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions of jobs to the state, doesn't close.
National outlets, many of which refer to Whitmer as a 'probable 2028 presidential contender' have speculated about the Democrat's political positioning, as Democratic governors around the country have tried to decide how much, or little, to work with an administration that they see as perpetrating harm.
Asked about Whitmer's developing relationship with Trump, Healey said: 'I think every governor is out there advocating for their state. I'm doing, you know, I'm doing my best to advocate for Massachusetts,' Healey said.
She continued, 'You've got to continue to advocate, and you've got to point out when things aren't going the way they should, and when your state is getting harmed.'
In a 'town hall' streamed Tuesday night on YouTube, Healey joined fellow Democrat Govs. JB Pritzker of Illinois, Tim Walz of Minnesota and Kathy Hochul of New York to discuss the first 100 days of Trump's second term. Healey said his this go around 'is far worse than what we saw with with Trump one.'
'We need to continue to stand up to him and to speak out against what he is doing when he's doing things that hurt people, that hurt our economy — tank our economy — are illegal and unconstitutional,' she said to the national audience.
She was asked how Democrats should think about how to 'package the party' for both the midterm elections in 2026 and in the 2028 presidential election.
'I see people standing up every day around this country as more and more people are realizing the pain and the consequence of Donald Trump and what he is doing. And I just encourage people to continue to stay at it,' Healey said. 'This is going to be a marathon. It's going to take some time, and we just got to stay at it every single day.'
Healey encouraged listeners to share posts they see on social media about the Trump administration that they find important, and talk to each other about politics, because 'politicians matter, but everyday Americans matter more.'
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on WWLP.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Democrats Have an Authenticity Gap
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Since President Donald Trump's victory last fall, Democrats have been trying to reengage with male voters, find a 'Joe Rogan of the left,' and even fund a whole left-leaning 'manosphere.' Young men—Rogan's core audience—were among the voting blocs that definitively moved toward the GOP in 2024, as a comprehensive postmortem by the data firm Catalist recently illustrated. In response, many powerful liberal figures have obsessively returned to the same idea: If we can't compete with their influential manosphere, why not construct our own? One high-profile progressive group, the Speaking With American Men project, is embarking on a two-year, $20 million mission to build 'year-round engagement in online and offline spaces Democrats have long ignored—investing in creators, trusted messengers, and upstream cultural content,' though its leaders say they're not looking for a liberal Rogan. Another effort, AND Media (AND being an acronym for 'Achieve Narrative Dominance'), has raised $7 million and, according to The New York Times, is looking to amass many times that amount over the next four years to back voices that will break with 'the current didactic, hall monitor style of Democratic politics that turns off younger audiences.' But in recent conversations with people in all corners of Democratic politics—far-left Bernie bros, seasoned centrists of the D.C. establishment, and rising new voices in progressive media—I came away with the sense that Democrats don't have simply a podcast-dude issue, one that could be solved with fresh money, new YouTube channels, and a bunch of studio mics. The party has struggled to capitalize on Trump's second-term missteps. It has yet to settle on a unifying message or vision of the future. Given this absence, such a tactical, top-down fix as deputizing a liberal Rogan looks tempting. The big problem is: That fix is both improbable and illogical. [Read: Democrats have a man problem] The party's 'podcast problem' is a microcosm of a much larger likability issue. 'We are a little bit, you know, too front-of-the-classroom,' Jon Lovett, a former Obama speechwriter and a co-host of Pod Save America, told me. In a sense, the show's production company, Crooked Media, already tested the 'make your own media ecosystem' proposition: Five years after its independent founding in 2017, Crooked announced that it had received funding from an investment firm run by the Democratic megadonor George Soros. Lovett seemed less skeptical of the new initiatives than other Democrats I interviewed, but also acknowledged some limitations. 'We believe how important it is to invest in progressive media,' Lovett told me. 'But in the same way you can't strategize ways to be authentic, you can't buy organic support.' The limits of this approach have already become clear. 'If you're trying to identify and cultivate and create this idea of a 'liberal Joe Rogan,' by definition, you're manufacturing something that's not authentic,' Brendan McPhillips, who served as campaign manager during John Fetterman's successful Pennsylvania Senate bid in 2022, told me. 'This fucking insane goose chase that these elite donors want to pursue to create some liberal oasis of new media is just really harebrained and misguided.' Joe Rogan, Theo Von, and other prominent voices in the existing manosphere are not inherently political and, even when they do touch politics, don't adhere to GOP or conservative orthodoxy. Although Rogan and Von did attend Trump's second inauguration, both have also been enamored with Senator Bernie Sanders, of Vermont; and recently, Von delivered an emotional monologue about the destruction in Gaza, drawing ire from many of his listeners on the right. In short, these guys are guided not by ideology, but by their own curiosity and gut instinct. Fluidity in belief is central to their appeal, and helps explain their cross-party success. Their audiences also blossomed over time, not after the stroke of a donor's pen. Throughout my interviews, I heard constant lamentations over the inescapable 'D.C. speak' in both Democratic politics and the left-leaning press. 'Normal people aren't out here talking about and paying attention to the kind of things that tie senior Democratic strategists up in knots,' McPhillips, who lives in Philadelphia, told me. You can't read white papers and study what goes on in the states from afar, he argued; you have to be there at eye level, living among real people, talking like a real person. What politicians have been advised to do for decades—stick to short cable-news hits, repeat the same few points over and over—are habits that today's voters find, in the words of a senior official who worked both in the Joe Biden White House and on the Kamala Harris campaign, 'repulsive.' Although this person, who asked for anonymity in order to speak freely about party strategy, discounted the premise of finding a 'Rogan of the left' as a fool's errand, they did say that, from now through 2028, Democrats should try to infiltrate sports-focused podcasts, paying particular attention to YouTube. This operative has come to view the current moment less as center-left versus center-right, and more as a larger battle of institutionalists versus anti-institutionalists: 'The psyche of a liberal in this moment is institution defense.' Also: fear. Too many Democrats, they believe, approach every public conversation and media interview with a level of trepidation about what they're saying—not in fear of Trump, but in fear of the wrath of their own potential voters. During her 2024 campaign, Harris reportedly feared the potential blowback within her own team from sitting down with Rogan. 'There was a backlash with some of our progressive staff that didn't want her to be on' his show, Jennifer Palmieri, who advised the second gentleman Doug Emhoff, said a week after the election. (Palmieri later revised her comments.) This year, some progressives have found a way to break through. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who's proved capable of acing a hostile Fox News interview, has now grown facial scruff and has been popping up on the podcast circuit. Several Democrats I spoke with praised both Buttigieg's recent media tour—his appearance on the brash bro show Flagrant was singled out—and Sanders's ability to win over certain manosphere hosts. 'They're able to do that because they have the confidence and the skill to go on a program like that and just be themselves, and people believe what they say because they're being honest,' McPhillips told me. On the Fighting Oligarchy Tour, and in his frequent podcast appearances, Sanders has positioned himself as an accessible and righteously angry force. Faiz Shakir, Sanders's 2020 campaign manager and now an adviser to the senator, told me that Democrats 'are too far removed from organic and interesting conversations that people want to hear about, and have become too reliant on a one-way push at people about the things we want to tell them,' rather than actually listening to voters. Although he himself is a Harvard alumnus who lives and works in D.C., Shakir criticized the Democratic Party's perpetually buttoned-up ethos, the opposite of an unstructured podcast hang. He spoke about the power of anger—the defining emotion of the past political decade—as something that many Democrats don't know how to wield effectively. 'If you're angry, you're uncouth,' Shakir said. 'Calm down! That's not professional!' Unless Democrats stop worrying about politely conforming to pre-Trump communication mores, he believes the chasm with voters will continue to exist, hypothetical new-media ecosystem be damned. [John Hendrickson: Jake and Logan Paul hit the limits of the manosphere] Two things can be true at the same time: Many centrist Democrats may be too timid or genteel, and lack the moxie to speak with the anger that resonates with voters. But the cause of men's alienation from liberal politics cannot be distilled simply into perceptions of gentility. Nor is voicing rage a plausible way to hack the manosphere. When it comes to podcasts—the medium of the moment—a different emotion reigns: curiosity. Hosts such as Rogan and Von succeed across party lines not because they're indignant, but because they're inquisitive and, crucially, persuadable. Their talent is to seem real and relatable without trying. Throughout my conversations, I asked why liberals have not organically produced a figure of Rogan's magnitude and influence. No one really had an answer. But one thing became abundantly clear: No amount of strategic parsing will let Democrats fake their way through this moment. You can't buy authentic communication. Article originally published at The Atlantic
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Letters to the Editor: When it comes to Trump immigration policy, 'the chaos and cruelty are the point'
To the editor: I couldn't agree more with guest contributor David J. Bier that immigration, like many other things in the country, should be subject to the rule of law ('Voters wanted immigration enforcement, but not like this,' June 5). Prior to the Trump era, the problem was that those responsible for determining immigration policy couldn't reach consensus on what the policy and the law should be. Well, maybe they could have if Donald Trump hadn't intervened to block proposed bipartisan immigration legislation, just to keep the issue alive for the 2024 presidential campaign. Against that backdrop, I'm baffled that Bier doesn't point out that, for President Trump, the chaos and the cruelty are the point. June Ailin Sewell, Marina del Rey .. To the editor: The article raises an important point: Support for border enforcement doesn't justify extreme or harmful policies. Many voters expected a more thoughtful, humane approach, not one that detains families or rushes deportations without considering individual circumstances. These methods don't reflect the values of fairness and dignity most Americans still believe in. People say that tough enforcement is about following the law, but without compassion, the law does more harm than intended. Enforcing immigration policies should involve smart case-by-case judgment and not punishment for everyone. A better approach would balance safety with empathy and recognize that real solutions come from true understanding, not fear. Patricia Geronimo, Redondo Beach This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
San Francisco Chronicle
18 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Americans still have faith in local news − but few are willing to pay for it
(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.) Jennifer Hoewe, Purdue University (THE CONVERSATION) Many Americans say they have lost trust in national news – but most still believe they can rely on the accuracy of local news. In 2023, trust in national newspapers, TV and radio reached historic lows. Just 32% of Americans said they have a 'great deal' or 'fair amount' of trust in these news sources. In 1976, by comparison, 72% of Americans said they had a 'great deal' or 'fair amount' of trust in mass media, including newspapers, TV and radio. And in 2021, the United States ranked last among 46 countries in the trust citizens placed in news outlets. Yet even as the local news industry is declining in the U.S. – more than 3,200 local and regional newspapers have closed since 2005 – Americans still place much more trust in local news than they do in national news. In 2024, 74% of Americans said they had 'a lot of' or 'some' trust in their local news organizations, and 85% believed their local news outlets are at least somewhat important to their community. I am a former local journalist who studies the effects that media content can have on people. Local news can help people understand what their local government is doing, stay aware of day-to-day events, such as local weather, traffic, sports, schools and crime, and even feel a greater sense of community. The decline of local news News organizations in the U.S. have long relied on commercial business practices – such as advertising from companies and subscriptions from readers – that have not been financially sustainable since the mid-2000s. Newspapers' advertising revenue peaked around 2005 and has since rapidly declined from more than $49 billion a year in 2005 to less than $10 billion in 2020, according to the Pew Research Center. This drop was driven by the rise of the internet. As a result, the U.S. has lost more than a third of its local and regional newspapers since 2004. Of the local newspapers that remain, 80% are weeklies, as opposed to the daily local newspapers that were more common in the past. With fewer reporters and editors who closely follow the ins and outs of local and state issues, local newspapers are now less able to hold state and local government officials accountable for their actions. Americans also read local newspapers less than they once did. Since 2015, print and digital circulation numbers have dropped 40% for weekday news editions and 45% for Sunday editions among locally focused daily newspapers and their websites. Instead, a larger percentage of Americans now turn to their family members, friends and neighbors than their local news outlets for local news. Despite local news' problems with declining revenue and readership, Americans still trust local news – and this trust crosses partisan lines. A 2024 Pew Research Center survey found that both Republicans and Democrats think local journalists are in touch with their local communities. The majority of Democrats and Republicans in this survey agreed that local news media 'report news accurately,' 'are transparent about their reporting,' 'cover the most important stories/issues' and 'keep an eye on local political leaders.' This might be because local newspapers can focus on issues people encounter in their day-to-day lives rather than on national politics. In many cases, readers are also able to more easily connect with local journalists in their communities and share story ideas or feedback. People learn about their elected officials and become more informed about local issues from their local news, making it an important component of developing a well-informed public. The current local news environment When people no longer have access to local news sources, or they stop following local news coverage, their faith in the integrity of local elections decreases, their ability to assess elected officials is worse, and voter turnout is lower in local elections, compared with those who do follow, read, watch or listen to local news. Some Americans started relying more heavily on national news when local newspapers shut down, which research shows led to increases in political polarization. My research found that when people trust a partisan-leaning national news source, for example, they're very likely to agree with the partisan-slanted news stories published by that source. As nonpartisan local newspapers have vanished or downsized, partisan-leaning online local news content has cropped up over the past several years. These sites publish news stories that are focused on local issues but approach it with a partisan bent. As a result, people looking for local news information may take in unreliable information that is presented as local news and interpret it as trustworthy. Verifying the origins and intentions of information continues to be paramount for news consumers to make sure they are receiving accurate information – including when it comes to local news.
