JD Vance shrugs off criticism over Disneyland trip with one-line reply
NEWSOM SLAMS VANCE
His post came after Governor Newsom shared a comment on X, reacting to viral videos showing Vance and his family enjoying the popular theme park over the weekend. Newsom's message read: "Hope you enjoy your family time, @JDVance. The families you're tearing apart certainly won't."This comment pointed at the Trump administration's immigration crackdown, which Newsom has strongly opposed. His remarks came just as protests broke out in Anaheim, close to Disneyland, where nearly 150 people gathered to show support for immigrant families affected by ongoing federal raids in California.Newsom's office continued to criticise Vance, pointing out that many Disneyland workers are immigrants and that California's economy depends heavily on immigrant labour.While JD Vance's family outing to Disneyland made headlines, his California trip also included an official stop at Camp Pendleton, a key military base. There, his wife Usha Vance participated in a literacy event, reading to children of active-duty service members.Although his reply to the backlash was just one line, it drew widespread attention for its measured and composed tone. Vance chose not to directly address either the protests in Anaheim or Governor Gavin Newsom's pointed remarks.Newsom, widely seen as a potential Democratic contender for the 2028 presidential race, has consistently criticized policies from the Trump administration, especially those concerning immigration and civil rights.- EndsWith inputs from ANIMust Watch
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Are elite universities like Columbia and Brown 'selling their souls' to Trump? Newsom feels so; here is why
(Andri Tambunan/The New York Times) California Governor Gavin Newsom has never been known to temper his words, but his latest salvo against America's most prestigious universities, Harvard, Columbia, Brown, and the University of Pennsylvania, has triggered a fierce debate over whether the Ivy League and its peers are quietly sacrificing principle for survival. In an era when federal funding is both lifeblood and leverage, Newsom's charge of universities 'selling their souls' to the Trump administration slices directly into the uneasy nexus of money, politics, and academic independence. The spark: Settlements and sanctions The controversy began when reports surfaced that several elite institutions had agreed to multimillion-dollar settlements with the Trump administration to restore frozen federal research grants. The freeze came after the administration accused universities of either failing to adequately address antisemitism on campus or promoting 'woke' initiatives in violation of federal standards. Newsom, speaking on Pod Save America, did not mince words. 'UCLA is not going to sell their soul like Harvard or Brown or Penn or Columbia. Shame on all of them. We're not. And we're going to fight like hell to protect our democracy, our liberties, our freedoms. I love Republicans. I love Democrats. I don't care what your party affiliation is. I honestly don't. I care about this country and our democracy. I care about the rule of law. ' While elite universities insist that settlements are pragmatic measures to end costly investigations and secure continued access to billions in federal research dollars, critics see something more corrosive: an erosion of moral authority. A $500 million price tag Harvard's case epitomizes the crisis. Reports indicate that the university is weighing a $500 million settlement to regain access to more than $2.6 billion in federal funding. For Newsom, the compromise cuts to the institution's very identity. 'And let me make this crystal clear to everyone watching and make it crystal clear to the folks at Harvard,' he said. 'We will never ever sell our soul to Donald Trump. Harvard, I pray you are listening. How could you? Of all institutions, on tens of billions of dollars, what's the point of your damn endowment if you cannot stand on principle?' The rhetorical sting lies in his point: Harvard's endowment exceeds $50 billion, larger than the GDP of some nations. Why, Newsom asks, would a university of such financial heft bow to federal pressure instead of enduring the funding drought? UCLA: The lone holdout Newsom has positioned the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) as the counterexample. The Trump administration is reportedly demanding a $1 billion settlement from UCLA, alongside the creation of a $172 million claims fund for alleged Title VII violations under the Civil Rights Act. The governor has vowed that under his leadership, UCLA will not capitulate. Speaking in San Francisco earlier this month, he thundered: 'We're not Brown, we're not Columbia, and I'm not going to be governor if we act like that. Period. Full stop, I will fight like hell to make sure that doesn't happen.' The standoff sets up UCLA as a potential battleground, where principle and politics collide with the raw financial calculus of survival. Why did they 'lose their souls'? The phrase 'selling their souls' is not a rhetorical flourish alone; it points to a broader structural fragility. American universities, even those with massive endowments, rely heavily on federal research grants to sustain laboratories, pay faculty, and remain globally competitive. According to the National Science Foundation, federal agencies supplied more than 50 percent of academic R&D funding nationwide last year. When that spigot is shut off, even elite schools feel the sting. Faculty departures, stalled projects, and reputational damage loom large. Settlements, then, become not just about compliance but about institutional survival. Yet critics argue that in agreeing to Trump's terms, whether over antisemitism protocols or restrictions on diversity initiatives, universities are legitimizing a political litmus test for research funding, undermining their own claim to independence. The broader implications The question that lingers is not just whether Columbia or Brown compromised, but whether higher education itself is at risk of becoming hostage to political power. If federal funds become contingent on aligning with the ideological preferences of the ruling administration, can universities still claim to be bastions of free inquiry? For Newsom, the answer is clear. His defiance positions California as the holdout state, one prepared to endure financial strain rather than concede ground. But for institutions already under investigation and staring down billions in frozen grants, the path of resistance appears less straightforward. Principles vs. pragmatism Newsom's rhetoric frames the moment as a moral test: Stand firm for democracy or bend under financial duress. Universities counter that without research dollars, their ability to innovate, cure diseases, and lead globally would collapse. But the charge of 'selling their souls' is likely to linger, not just as political theatre but as an indictment of how American higher education navigates an era of intensifying political intervention. Whether elite institutions can reconcile financial pragmatism with academic principle may ultimately decide whether they are remembered as defenders of independence or as cautionary tales of capitulation. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Which Quran is he reading? NYC mayor attacks Mamdani on prostitution issue
New York City Mayor Eric Adams has slammed Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, criticising his support for the decriminalisation of prostitution and questioning how such a stance aligns with his religious beliefs. Adams linked sex work to trafficking and rising crime, calling Mamdani's stance "dangerous".Mamdani's campaign hit back, accusing Adams of endangering thousands of trafficking survivors by slashing funding for critical support services. Mamdani has backed sex work reforms since 2020, though critics cite trafficking concerns in places where it's been can't be more clear. I'm a man of god, just as Mamdani says he's a Muslim. I don't know where in his Quran it states that it's okay for a woman to be on the streets selling their body," the mayor told reporters, New York Post reported. "I don't know what Quran he is reading. It's not in my Bible," he added. "As a man who said he is of faith, I don't quite understand what religion supports prostitution," Adams criticised Mamdani after a news report highlighted Mamdani's past efforts to change the law that makes selling sex illegal in New an issue Mamdani has taken up multiple times since he ran for state assembly in 2020 and has continually supported since—but the 33-year-old socialist has been largely mum on the issue since he started his run for mayor, The New York Post SUPPORT FOR LEGALISING SEX WORK MAY LEAD TO TRAFFICKING RISKS: ADAMSSlamming Mamdani's prostitution stance, Adams linked sex work to trafficking concerns."I think he's lost on the fact that sex trafficking is very much part of prostitution. We are trying to bring down crime and he is talking about legalising sex work," New York Post quoted the mayor as saying."You're not doing any service to a woman who is on the street who is forced to sell her body for whatever reason," the mayor further said. "No one should be on our streets selling their bodies. No one.""If that is his belief, it is a danger for our city," Adams was quoted as saying."Our city needs to be a safe city. It should not be a city where women are standing on corners, or boys are standing on corners, or young men standing on corners selling their bodies," he his 2020 campaign for the state assembly, Mamdani has consistently supported allowing sex workers to operate without fear of criminal prosecution."Not only must we decriminalise sex work, we need a comprehensive platform of justice for all," Mamdani said on the campaign trail in May 2020, according to The New York has co-sponsored several bills that would legalise prostitution across New York State while serving as a Queens assemblyman, The New York Post state lawmakers must approve the change, as mayor he could push for it and direct the NYPD to deprioritise prostitution enforcement, according to the CAMPAIGN HITS BACK AT ADAMSMamdani's camp hit back, saying Adams' budget cuts put sex trafficking survivors at risk by taking away millions in support funding."Mayor Adams' reckless budget cut over $3 million in funding from Safe Horizon (a nonprofit victim assistance organisation), putting thousands of victims of crimes related to sex trafficking and prostitution in harm's way (sic)," a spokesperson from Mamdani's campaign said in a statement, according to The New York Post."As mayor, Zohran will prioritise genuine public safety for all, including investing $40 million through his Department of Community Safety towards victims' services," the spokesperson to the report, people who support legal sex work say it would help protect sex workers from abuse by clients, pimps, and some studies of places where it has been legalised, like Nevada and some European countries, have found human trafficking spikes to fulfil the demand for sex workers, as other forms of organised crime fester around the industry, The New York Post reported.- EndsTune InMust Watch
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
How Gavin Newsom is taking the fight to MAGA - Trump-style
It began with a meme. Two photographs went viral on X: Gavin Newsom as a teenager, scarf draped across his shoulders, the very image of San Francisco privilege; and J.D. Vance, straight-backed in Marine fatigues, fresh out of high school and heading for Iraq. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The contrast was deliberate. Newsom: born into money and connections, nurtured by the Getty family, polished into politics before he hit forty. Vance: raised in a chaotic household in Ohio, stabilized only by the Marines, hardened in Iraq, propelled upward by Yale Law and a bestselling memoir. It was the quintessential split screen — privilege versus grit, elites versus scrappers. But the meme was only the opening act. The Trumpian Turn For years, Newsom's official press accounts were standard Democratic fare: policy announcements, carefully worded releases, ribbon-cutting photos. Then, this August, something changed. His press office on X suddenly began sounding like at 3 a.m.: ALL CAPS proclamations. Mocking nicknames. Boasts so overblown they bordered on parody. Trump was rechristened 'Taco Trump' — shorthand for 'Trump Always Chickens Out.' J.D. Vance became 'JD 'Just Dance' Vance.' And Newsom crowned himself 'our nation's favorite governor,' vowing to 'SAVE AMERICA' from the 'disastrous maps war' Trump had unleashed. The parody was deliberate. Newsom wasn't talking policy; he was trolling. MAGA : From Mockers to the Mocked MAGA has always thrived on ridicule. Trump's nicknames — 'Crooked Hillary,' 'Sleepy Joe,' 'Low-Energy Jeb' — weren't just insults. They were branding. They turned opponents into caricatures and made Democrats look joyless, out of touch, and defensive. Newsom's innovation was to flip the script. Instead of rolling his eyes or fact-checking, he mocked them back. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now He parodied their style, borrowed their cadence, threw their tactics in their face. And MAGA, for once, didn't laugh. The Guilfoyle Subplot Adding spice to the feud is a subplot straight out of a political soap opera. Gavin Newsom's ex-wife is Kimberly Guilfoyle — now a sequined staple of MAGA, US Ambassador to Greece and Donald Trump Jr.'s former partner. From 2001 to 2006, she was married to Newsom and even served as First Lady of San Francisco during his mayoralty. Their split was civil, blamed on geography, but history clearly enjoys irony. Today, she's a leading voice of MAGA while her ex-husband needles MAGA's king with memes. Why It Works On the surface, Newsom's trolling looks juvenile. Why would a governor's press account waste time calling the Vice President 'Just Dance Vance'? But Democrats spent the last decade underestimating ridicule as a weapon. Trump proved that attention is currency, and nicknames can define opponents more effectively than policy papers. By mimicking Trump's style, Newsom isn't trying to out-debate him. He's trying to deny him the monopoly on mockery. The strategy is simple: Mock back. Dominate the oxygen. It's crude. It's performative. But it works. The MAGA Battlefield in 2025 This fight isn't happening in a vacuum. MAGA today isn't just Trump's campaign machinery; it's a permanent movement. It controls school boards, censors textbooks, drives immigration crackdowns, and fuels conspiracies across social media. The Republican Party has been fully absorbed into this ecosystem. J.D. Vance may be Vice President, but figures like Ron DeSantis and Marjorie Taylor Greene still command cultural loyalty. The battlefield isn't legislation; it's narrative. That's why Newsom's trolling matters. He's meeting MAGA not with white papers, but with memes — the lingua franca of the culture war. Carrot and Stick Trolling is the stick. But Newsom also wields a carrot: direct engagement. His podcast, This Is Gavin Newsom, has featured right-wing guests like Charlie Kirk and Steve Bannon. Democrats were horrified. Why legitimise extremists? But Newsom's message was clear: I'm not afraid of you, and I'll argue with you in your own spaces. It's a risky gamble. But it positions Newsom as one of the few Democrats willing to meet MAGA on the cultural battlefield rather than avoiding it. Harris vs. Newsom: Memo vs. Meme The contrast with Kamala Harris's 2024 campaign could not be sharper. Harris ran as the anti-Trump: sober, cautious, scripted. She leaned on biography — first woman Vice President, daughter of immigrants — and policy proposals on childcare and reproductive rights. But her campaign avoided spectacle. When Trump mocked her as 'Laffin' Kamala,' Harris didn't punch back; she relied on fact-checkers and surrogates. Her message discipline made her look serious, but it left her flat-footed in a culture war defined by ridicule. Newsom, by contrast, leans into the chaos. Where Harris tried to be dignified and above the fray, Newsom revels in it. Where she treated memes as unserious, he treats them as currency. Harris thought voters would crave normalcy. Newsom bets they want someone who can fight Trump at his own game. Harris's 2024 was a memo. Newsom's 2025 is a meme. Democratic Doubts Not everyone in the Democratic Party is impressed. Moderates see the trolling as reckless, undermining the gravitas of their brand. Progressives worry it trivialises policy battles like climate change and healthcare. But among the Democratic base, there's also relief. For years, they've watched Trump humiliate their leaders with nicknames, while Democrats responded with sighs. Newsom is the first to punch back in kind. The Risk The danger is obvious. If Democrats troll like Trump, do they risk becoming indistinguishable from him? Does parody politics normalise Trumpism rather than defeat it? This is the tightrope Newsom walks. But the louder they scoffed, the more they proved Newsom's point. MAGA loves to brand others but hates being branded itself. The Lyndon Johnson Question Yet trolling alone isn't governing. The deeper question is whether Newsom, if he ever reaches the White House, could turn parody into power. Here's where Lyndon B. Johnson looms. When John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, Johnson was dismissed as a backroom Texan wheeler-dealer. But he stunned the nation by pushing through the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, and the Great Society. Johnson showed that politics requires both theatre and muscle — spectacle to capture attention, and force to deliver results. Can Newsom do the same? Can the man who tweets 'TACO TRUMP' also twist arms in Congress to pass universal childcare or climate reform? Eyes on 2028 Newsom insists he isn't running in 2028. No one believes him. With Biden retired and Harris damaged, Democrats need a contender who won't flinch in the meme arena. The question is whether Democrats will stomach a candidate who fights like Trump. For some, it's unbecoming. For others, it's overdue. For MAGA, Newsom is an irritation they can't easily dismiss: rich, coastal, polished — but unafraid to mock them back. Back to the Meme That viral split screen of scarf vs fatigues was meant to define who had grit and who had privilege. But in modern politics, biography matters less than performance. Vance leveraged his Marine past to ride Trump's coattails into the vice presidency. Newsom is leveraging parody to carve out space as the Democrat unafraid of MAGA. Act one was the split screen. Act two is the troll war. Act three, if it comes, will be 2028 — where Gavin Newsom will either be remembered as the liberal who cosplayed Trump for a season or the Democrat who figured out how to use memes to win power. Could he be the Lyndon Johnson of the meme era — underestimated, even mocked, until history forced him into greatness? That remains unanswered. But for now, MAGA finally knows what it feels like to be on the receiving end of ridicule. And Gavin Newsom is laughing loudest.
