
The other JD Vance: Meet Josh Hawley, the man who wants be Trump's MAGA heir
As JD Vance settles into his role as Vice-President of the United States—and presumptive heir to Donald Trump's populist throne—another Republican senator is quietly but audaciously laying claim to the same inheritance.
Enter Josh Hawley: the fist-raising, union-hugging, populist-posturing Senator from Missouri who has managed to rebrand himself from January 6 pariah to blue-collar crusader.
While Vance enjoys the institutional weight of the vice-presidency and Trump's personal endorsement, Hawley is playing the long game. With a series of legislative proposals and bipartisan alliances, he's betting on a new kind of Republican appeal: pro-labor, anti-corporate, and unmistakably MAGA.
From Fists to Families
Once best known for saluting protesters on January 6 before running from them on camera, Hawley has undergone a political transformation few would have predicted. This year, he shocked conservatives and delighted labour organisers by releasing a union-friendly proposal: A Pro-Worker Framework for the 119th US Congress. Among other things, it seeks to ban captive-audience meetings and impose civil penalties for labour violations—ideas more at home in Bernie Sanders' toolkit than Paul Ryan's.
On Tax Day, Hawley published an op-ed in The Washington Post calling for expanded tax relief for low-income families. He followed up with another in The New York Times, blasting 'corporatist Republicans' for demanding Medicaid cuts in Trump's 'big, beautiful' spending bill. He even teamed up with Democrat Peter Welch to cap prescription drug prices and with Cory Booker to speed up union contract negotiations.
For a senator once known for fighting Obamacare and opposing minimum wage hikes, the pivot is seismic.
Labor Love or Opportunism?
Is Hawley for real? Skeptics abound. Labour leaders who once begged for his support and were turned away now watch him appear on picket lines with cameras in tow. Jim Kabell, a retired Teamsters organiser, called it 'the most shameful political theatre I've ever seen.' But others see a shift in the GOP base—and in Hawley himself. A former Democratic staffer suggests Hawley's disdain for Big Tech monopolies may have genuinely pushed him left on labour issues.
This isn't ideological evolution in isolation—it's strategic adaptation. A YouGov-American Compass poll in March showed Republican favourability toward unions at a net positive 8 points, jumping to 38 among Republicans born after 1980. In that generational chasm, Hawley sees his future.
The Post-Trump Primary Begins
Vice President JD Vance waves after speaking with American Compass founder Oren Cass at the American Compass's The New World Gala in Washington, Tuesday, June 3, 2025. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
With the GOP base changing and the Trump dynasty facing questions of succession, the 2028 Republican primary is shaping up as a clash between two brands of right-wing populism.
On one side, JD Vance, the vice-president and former venture capitalist who fuses nationalism with traditional conservatism. On the other, Josh Hawley, the banker's son turned culture warrior turned union ally, who's betting on policy populism as his path to the White House.
They're not alone. But they're the front-runners in what is shaping up to be the GOP's most ideological internal battle in a generation.
Vance, with Trump's direct blessing, recently fist-bumped a Democratic Congresswoman on a UAW picket line.
Hawley, not to be outdone, co-sponsored legislation with Bernie-adjacent Democrats and wrote a scathing anti-corporate screed worthy of Elizabeth Warren—if Warren had ever raised a fist for the Capitol mob.
But where Vance remains cautiously loyal to Trump's more oligarchic instincts, Hawley is positioning himself as the Republican who can take on Amazon, Meta, and Musk—all while draping himself in a union jacket.
The Elephant in the White House
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., speaks during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, April 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
Of course, all this populist cosplay comes with contradictions. While Hawley talks about defending workers, the Trump Administration has actively attacked them. In March, Trump signed an executive order stripping nearly a million federal workers of their union rights. His new Department of Government Efficiency—run by Elon Musk—has gutted protections for unionised employees. And the so-called 'One Big Beautiful Bill' has, according to the Congressional Budget Office, favoured the rich while cutting real income for the poorest Americans.
And here's the kicker: Hawley hasn't said a word in protest. Labor historians call it 'the biggest union-busting action in US history.' Hawley calls it Tuesday.
Why Democrats Should Be Worried
Despite the performative silence on Trump's union purge, the right's labour flirtation is making inroads. Teamsters president Sean O'Brien may have upset Democratic colleagues by addressing the Republican National Convention, but he says Trump's administration has 'consulted him more than any Democrat ever did.'
After decades of assuming unions belonged to the left, the Democratic Party is facing a slow erosion from the right. And it's not just rhetoric. When 34 senators wrote to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy last year demanding action on driver mistreatment, three Republicans signed it. JD Vance. Roger Marshall. And Josh Hawley. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was nowhere to be found.
The Showdown Ahead
In a post-Trump America, the battle for the soul of the Republican Party may come down to who can love labour louder—Hawley or Vance. Both are betting that working-class voters will forget old allegiances if offered a new kind of conservative who talks unions, wages, and dignity—but still scapegoats immigrants and rails against the 'woke.'
And if that sounds cynical, that's because it is.
But it might also work.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
34 minutes ago
- Time of India
House will vote on Trump's request to cut funding for NPR, PBS and foreign aid
FILE -- President Donald Trump speaks near House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) after meeting with Republican lawmakers on Capitol Hill in Washington, May 20, 2025. The White House formally asked Congress on Tuesday, June 3, 2025, to claw back more than $9 billion in federal funds that lawmakers had already approved for foreign aid and public broadcasting, seeking to codify spending cuts put forward by Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency. (Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times) House Republicans are moving to cut about $9.4 billion in spending already approved by Congress as President Donald Trump's administration looks to follow through on work by the Department of Government Efficiency when it was overseen by Elon Musk. The package to be voted on Thursday targets foreign aid programs and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides money for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, as well as thousands of public radio and television stations around the country. Republicans are characterizing the spending as wasteful and unnecessary, but Democrats say the rescissions are hurting the United States' standing in the world. "Cruelty is the point," Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said of the proposed spending cuts. The Trump administration is employing a tool rarely used in recent years that allows the president to transmit a request to Congress to cancel previously appropriated funds. That triggers a 45-day clock in which the funds are frozen pending congressional action. If Congress fails to act within that period, then the spending stands. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 2025 Top Trending local enterprise accounting software [Click Here] Esseps Learn More Undo The benefit for the administration of a formal rescissions request is that passage requires only a simple majority in the 100-member Senate instead of the 60 votes usually required to get spending bills through that chamber. So, if they stay united, Republicans will be able to pass the measure without any Democratic votes. The administration is likening the first rescissions package to a test case and says more could be on the way if Congress goes along. Republicans, sensitive to concerns that Trump's sweeping tax and immigration bill would increase future federal deficits, are anxious to demonstrate spending discipline, though the cuts in the package amount to just a sliver of the spending approved by Congress each year. They are betting the cuts prove popular with constituents who align with Trump's "America first" ideology as well as those who view NPR and PBS as having a liberal bias. In all, the package contains 21 proposed rescissions. Approval would claw back about $900 million from $10 billion that Congress has approved for global health programs. That includes canceling $500 million for activities related to infectious diseases and child and maternal health and another $400 million to address the global HIV epidemic. The Trump administration is also looking to cancel $800 million, or a quarter of the amount Congress approved, for a program that provides emergency shelter, water and sanitation, and family reunification for those forced to flee their own country. About 45% of the savings sought by the White House would come from two programs designed to boost the economies, democratic institutions and civil societies in developing countries. The Republican president has also asked lawmakers to rescind nearly $1.1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which represents the full amount it's slated to receive during the next two budget years. About two-thirds of the money gets distributed to more than 1,500 locally owned public radio and television stations. Nearly half of those stations serve rural areas of the country. The association representing local public television stations warns that many of them would be forced to close if the Republican measure passes. Those stations provide emergency alerts, free educational programming and high school sports coverage and highlight hometown heroes. Advocacy groups that serve the world's poorest people are also sounding the alarm and urging lawmakers to vote no. "We are already seeing women, children and families left without food, clean water and critical services after earlier aid cuts, and aid organizations can barely keep up with rising needs," said Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America, a poverty-fighting organization. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said the foreign aid is a tool that prevents conflict and promotes stability but the measure before the House takes that tool away. "These cuts will lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, devastating the most vulnerable in the world," McGovern said. "And at a time when China and Russia and Iran are working overtime to challenge American influence." Republicans disparaged the foreign aid spending and sought to link it to programs they said DOGE had uncovered. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said taxpayer dollars had gone to such things as targeting climate change, promoting pottery classes and strengthening diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Other Republicans cited similar examples they said DOGE had revealed. "Yet, my friends on the other side of the aisle would like you to believe, seriously, that if you don't use your taxpayer dollars to fund this absurd list of projects and thousands of others I didn't even list, that somehow people will die and our global standing in the world will crumble," Roy said. "Well, let's just reject this now."

Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
Iran's Nuclear Bomb Is Ready? Hegseth Drops Bombshell At US Senate Hearing As Israel Plans Attack
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made several key statements during a Senate hearing, confirming that Iran is actively working toward developing a nuclear weapon as diplomatic efforts on a new nuclear deal remain stalled. On China, Hegseth said Beijing has not yet made a decision to invade Taiwan but warned that recent military exercises closely resemble preparations for such an operation. Responding to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, Hegseth emphasized the seriousness of China's maneuvers in the region. He also defended his controversial decision to deploy troops during federal immigration raids in Los Angeles, clarifying that the move was intended to support law enforcement and prevent violence—not to escalate force. Hegseth stated that maintaining law and order is vital when officers are under threat from hostile crowds. Read More


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Sam Altman reveals water cost of each ChatGPT query; it will surprise you
In a surprising revelation, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman shared that a single ChatGPT query uses a few drops of water. This comes at a time when the environmental cost of artificial intelligence is under growing scrutiny. In a blog post, Altman said each query consumes about 0.000085 gallons of water. That's roughly one-fifteenth of a teaspoon. AI models like ChatGPT run on massive server farms that must be cooled constantly. This makes water usage an important part of the conversation. Altman's claim aims to ease public concern, but some experts want more clarity and proof. How water usage is connected to ChatGPT AI runs on powerful computers stored in data centers that produce a lot of heat. To keep them from overheating, companies use cooling systems that often depend on water. As tech becomes more central to daily life, water use has joined energy and carbon emissions in the sustainability debate. Sam Altman's water estimate and what it means by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No Distractions. Just Solitaire Play Solitaire Download Undo Altman said each ChatGPT query takes about 0.34 watt-hours of electricity and a few drops of water. That may sound small, but when you think about the millions of queries made each day, the total adds up. Critics point out that OpenAI has not explained how this number was calculated. That lack of detail has made some experts cautious. Past concerns about AI's water use A report from The Washington Post last year estimated that creating a 100-word email with GPT-4 could use more than a full bottle of water. These numbers were tied to the cooling needs of data centers, especially those in hot and dry places. Altman's latest statement appears to push back on that report as pressure grows on tech firms to be more accountable. Experts call for transparency Many in the tech and environmental space say companies like OpenAI need to publish independent and verified data about their resource use. Altman's number sounds reassuring but without knowing how the math was done or where the servers are located, it is hard to trust fully. Can AI be sustainable? As AI becomes a part of more industries and daily life, its long-term environmental cost matters more than ever. Altman believes the cost of intelligence will one day drop to the price of electricity alone. That could make AI both affordable and sustainable. But for now, even few drops of water per query raise big questions. AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now