Latest news with #Trump-esque
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Poli Sci Experts Predict How Gavin Newsom's Brutal Mockery Of Trump And MAGA Will Resonate
Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.) and his team have recently ramped up their social media attacks on President Donald Trump, his administration and the president's most dedicated MAGA supporters. And their approach is simple: Mock Trump by using his own style of writing and combativeness against him. Last week, the official social media account for Newsom's press office mimicked the president in a notably all-caps, Trump-esque tweet on X amid a controversial GOP redistricting ploy in Texas to send five more Republicans to the U.S. House. (Newsom has since launched a ballot initiative in California to ask voters in the state to approve early congressional redistricting to neutralize the Republican gains in Washington.) Related: 'CALIFORNIA WILL NOW DRAW NEW, MORE 'BEAUTIFUL MAPS,' THEY WILL BE HISTORIC AS THEY WILL END THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY (DEMS TAKE BACK THE HOUSE!)' Newsom's press office wrote. And in a tweet published Friday, the governor's office ridiculed a photo of Trump jabbing a finger at Russian President Vladimir Putin by sharing a photo of Newsom doing the same thing to Trump on the tarmac of Los Angeles International Airport in January. 'TINY HANDS IS OUT HERE COPYING ME — BUT WITHOUT THE STAMINA (SAD), AND CERTAINLY WITHOUT THE 'LOOKS.' TOTAL BETA! — GCN' the tweet read. Other posts from Newsom and his office have either imitated Trump's long-winded rants on his Truth Social platform or mocked some of the heavily edited and artificial intelligence-generated images that Trump and his MAGA supporters have been known to promote. But Newsom and his office have not stopped at Trump. The X account for the governor's press team has been quick to hit back at other critics online, and Newsom and his team have had some brutal jokes for Vice President JD Vance. Over the weekend, the California Democrat referenced Vance's past contentious exchange with Volodymyr Zelenskyy prior to the Ukrainian president's return to the Oval Office on Monday by sharing a viral video of Vance running awkwardly at the Disneyland theme park in California this summer. 'Go get 'em JD!' Newsom tweeted. While some socialmedia users who oppose Trumphave celebrated Newsom and his team for viciously trolling the Trump administration, several prominent conservatives and MAGAsupportersonX have, unsurprisingly, taken issue with the brutal tit-for-tat approach. Fox News anchor Trace Gallagher called Newsom's attacks 'childish,' Fox News host Dana Perino questioned whether the governor's wife would step in to stop him from tweeting, and right-wing commentator Tomi Lahren derided Newsom and his team as 'beta males' in a post on X. Newsom told reporters last week that he hoped his trolling was a 'wake-up call' and that 'the deeper question is, how have we allowed the normalization of his tweets, Truth Social posts' without 'similar scrutiny and notice.' But is this an effective approach to fight against the Trump administration? Will Newsom's trolling help energize the left? Read on to hear what experts in political science think. Why Newsom is using mockery to fight against Trump. 'In the age of Trump, my sense is that both Democrats and Republicans are casting about for approaches that are effective in countering Trump's unique style,' said Steven J. Balla, associate professor of political science, public policy and public administration, and international affairs at The George Washington University. Balla said that these responses tend to range from more 'high road' approaches to strategies that seek in some way to 'mirror' Trump. 'For now (at least) and on this issue (at least) Newsom has opted for the 'mirroring' approach,' he said. 'Why is that? I would think that such an approach is seen as a pathway to the Democratic nomination. That is, it is popular among Democratic primary voters, who tend to track to the left of the median Democrat. The target audience, in other words, is progressive Democrats.' Related: Tabitha Bonilla, an associate professor of political science and human development and social policy at Northwestern University, told HuffPost that she believes, 'Democrats are starting to realize that 'politics as usual' is not working as an approach.' 'They lost the election, Democrat favorability is low and there have been a lot of calls to reinvent themselves (and not a lot of agreement on what that means),' she said. 'I think it's clear that Governor Newsom is trying to establish a leadership role within the party and along with that, a style that pokes fun at the president.' 'I think all of this is a way to draw attention to the difference in how President Trump has used social media, but also as a point to demonstrate that Governor Newsom can play on the president's level,' she added. Jacob Neiheisel, associate professor of political science at the University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences, told HuffPost that he thinks Newsom is responding to 'elements of the Democratic rank-and-file who want party leaders to 'take the gloves off' and fight harder against Trump.' Why people on the left are celebrating Newsom trolling Trump. While people on the left have differing views about how to fight against the Trump administration — and different opinions about Newsom himself — there are many Democrats online who are celebrating the governor's approach to opposing Trump. Neiheisel thinks this is because there is a desire among some on the left to 'take the fight to Trump and to adopt Trump-like methods.' 'This move is hardly surprising to me given that the parties tend to emulate each other in many ways, particularly after a loss,' he said. Balla thinks the celebration is likely the loudest among progressive Democrats, 'much in the same way that Trump's communications play well with MAGA voters.' 'In both parties, I think, there are plenty of voters who are disenchanted with mocking attacks,' he said. 'But these voters are increasingly seen as relics, and they are most likely more moderate and therefore less crucial during primary contests.' Bonilla said that while she has not yet seen evidence in polls to suggest whether this style of attacking the president 'pushes opinion very far,' she thinks that for some Democrats, it is exciting to see their leaders fight against Trump. 'In this moment, where the Trump administration has disrupted a lot of how the government functions, has increased the powers of ICE and taken over municipal governments, people are incredibly eager for a way to express worry, frustration, and dissatisfaction with the way things are going,' she said. Is Newsom's approach an effective strategy? Newsom is widely speculated to be running for president in 2028. Should his potential political ambitions matter as people evaluate the effectiveness of his current attacks on Trump? Bonilla said that she supposes it 'does not hurt to engage with why a politician is acting in a particular way,' but thinks that 'most voters are pretty savvy in trying to discern if what an elected official is doing is trustworthy or represents them first and foremost.' But she suspects that any questions surrounding Newsom's political ambitions won't interfere with how people are currently responding to his attacks on Trump. 'However, I do think it would be a mistake to think that what Newsom is doing is a viable strategy for the Democratic Party as a whole,' she said. 'First, this type of response will probably lose meaning the more people do it. Second, other than poking fun at the president, I'd be surprised if this fully helped people (re)gain trust in the Democratic Party.' Balla said that he thinks Newsom's attacks on Trump are 'indistinguishable' from his political ambitions. 'In the end, is this an effective approach? To win a Democratic primary, perhaps,' he said. Overall, Balla finds it interesting that the Democratic Party is 'still so Trump-focused,' since he (presumably) won't be on the 2028 ticket. 'So will a Trump-like approach be effective in the next presidential election cycle? That in part depends on who the Republican nominee is and what that candidate's strengths and weaknesses are,' he said. 'Newsom (and others running against Trump) run the risk of winning the Democratic nomination but being ill-equipped to pivot to the general election.' But regardless of how Newsom's style of attack may play out in the future, are his recent posts likely getting under the president's skin? Neiheisel 'absolutely' believes so. 'Trump was triggered by a painting that was mildly unflattering,' he said. 'I think it is just in his nature to take exception to these types of attacks. And it is in the nature of his supporters to react on his behalf.' Related... Republicans Keep Falling For Gavin Newsom's Trump Trap Newsom's Press Office Slams 'DISGUSTING' Use Of U.S. Soldiers To Roll Out Red Carpet For Putin Gavin Newsom Says California Will Redraw Its 'BEAUTIFUL MAPS' In Hilarious All-Caps Post Mocking Trump
Newsroom
09-08-2025
- Politics
- Newsroom
Why planned voting changes could be a civic rights breach
Opinion: You might recall that in the 2023 election, National and Act 'lost' two seats once the special votes were counted post-election day. In other words, the special votes weighed against them. This meant that they could not form a government without NZ First. Fast-forward to July 2025. National, Act and NZ First have just passed the first reading on the Electoral Amendment Bill, a bill that will almost certainly reduce the number of special votes. Is this bill an apolitical, justified limitation on the holy grail of democratic rights – the right to vote? Or is it a power-abusing, rights-breaching, Trump-esque attempt to rig voting in their favour? Let's look at this a bit more closely. One proposed amendment is that people must enrol to vote 13 days prior to election day. If they don't, they cannot cast a valid vote. Under current law, people can enrol up to and on election day. Votes from people enrolled after 'writ day' – approximately two months before the election in 2023 – and election day are so-called special votes (together with, for example, votes cast overseas). In other words, votes from people who enrol in the 12-day period leading up to the election are special votes. In 2023, 110,000 voters registered on election day and, of the 600,000 special votes cast, 97,000 people enrolled for the first time during the voting period. These votes would be discarded under the proposed law change. Unsurprisingly, then, the Attorney-General – the Government's highest legal officer, and senior National Party member, Judith Collins – found in her report that there was a real possibility a large number of people would be caught by this new rule and, as a result, their votes wouldn't be tallied. She also noted that the highest courts of the land – here and overseas, especially Australia – have stressed 'the fundamentality of the right to vote as lying at the heart of the democratic system'. The coalition argues we need to restrict who gets to vote to avoid delays in post-election count and the formation of a new government. There just isn't the evidence to prove that this amendment is necessary to expedite a verified election result. And as Collins writes, 'While acknowledging the public importance of promoting timeliness in the counting of votes … there may be alternative measures for addressing delays in the processing of votes, which are less restrictive of the right to vote, and could therefore possibly be justified.' It is not even clear that restriction would remedy delays in counting. Those not enrolled before the cut-off can still apply for and cast a special vote. These special votes must still be processed after the election but won't be included in the ultimate vote count. Anyway, any detriment associated with any delay is – to me at least – relatively small because we have a longstanding plan b in place, in the form of caretaker governments to ensure the country keeps running while votes are tallied, checked and verified. Collins also recognises that the restriction on voting registration will effectively discriminate against Māori, Pasifika, Asian and youth voters, who are currently more likely to enrol in the 12 days ahead of the election. 'The Electoral Commission has data that indicates that special votes are more likely to come from areas with larger Māori, Asian and Pasifika communities, and that younger people are more likely to cast special votes. This may indicate that these communities will be more affected by the proposed registration deadline.' The Government had Collins' report before it passed the bill in Parliament but chose to ignore the Attorney-General's recommendations. Let's now consider the bill in the light of the current political context. At least one political poll has the National Party heading towards one term in power and it's likely that the next election will be tight. Just like in 2023, every vote could tip the balance one way or the other. Now balance the long-standing trend that special votes favour the left. As leading election law professor Andrew Geddis notes, 'Restricting same-day enrolment and voting can … be predicted to reduce the number of votes cast by groups that support left-of-centre parties.' This Government has enacted some of the most regressive laws breaching the rights of Indigenous peoples we have seen in decades. In a constitution such as ours, there are few legal barriers to it doing so. This bill is likely to disproportionately affect Māori and their right to vote, thereby making it more difficult to defend their rights. The Act Party has promoted its role as the defender of democracy and the right of one person, one vote. Leader David Seymour said in 2023 that, 'Yes, it's pretty frustrating that it's taken so long to count the votes, but let's not lose sight of the real goal here which is free and fair elections that are above any kind of suspicion. That's absolutely key no matter what the result is.' Given there is no convincing justification for the bill, as assessed by Collins, the reasoning behind it looks suspicious. It has the whiff of a calculated move by National, Act and NZ First to weigh the next election in their favour, in a way that is reminiscent of Donald Trump's advocacy for redistricting of congressional boundaries in Texas to favour the Republican Party. If that is the case, and you be the judge, then this could be a substantial breach of one of the most important of our civic rights and democratic process.
The Australian
05-05-2025
- Politics
- The Australian
Australian values, ineffective Coalition central to election win
On Saturday, Australians comprehensively rejected every single aspect of the Coalition's attempt to win government. The Coalition parties didn't just shoot themselves in one foot, they shot themselves in both feet, arms and torso – it was a total bloodbath. In what will now be known as the worst election campaign in Australian history, the Coalition failed to sell a single policy to Australians and paid the ultimate price. In Victoria, seats heavily targeted by the Liberals, including Aston, Deakin, Menzies and McEwen, all went to Labor – some dramatically, particularly the loss of Liberal MP Keith Wolahan, who was one of the party's best backbenchers. He is someone I have high respect for and who, I believe, the Liberals could have built a more centrist party around. Kudos must be given to Anthony Albanese and to ALP national secretary Paul Erickson for running a tight ship throughout the whole election. Even when Labor was in the polling doldrums at the end of last year, the Prime Minister stuck to his guns. He had a plan to win seats, not just to hold ground. And he was right. And to my former colleagues in the Labor caucus, they maintained their iron discipline they have exhibited since May 2022. Australians also outright rejected the feral scaremongering the Greens piled on. The party's projected wipeout in Queensland, and the fact that Greens leader Adam Bandt, a very tough campaigner, is hanging on by a knife's edge in Melbourne, is testament to that. I'm pleased to see the warrior from Wills, Peter Khalil, is hanging on despite the ugliest campaign by the Greens and their far-left allies that I've ever seen. Watching the election from outside the bubble for the first time in nearly 20 years was like an out-of-body experience for me, but as the two campaigns rolled out there was never a doubt in my mind Labor would not win. The cost of living was the key election issue and the Coalition hoped for a grievance election based on an opinion poll of the government. Once Donald Trump's shadow loomed people wanted to know who had the better plan. In my opinion, the moment Peter Dutton flirted with Trump, he completely misread the Australian identity, which instinctively recoils from extremism from the far left and far right. Like our great mates in Canada, Australians voted to reject any semblance of a Trump-esque (or Trumpet) style of government. People wanted a safe option and Labor offered stability writ large. The Coalition did not have a single alternate policy and this was glaringly exposed when it was forced to drop its Trump-style strategy within weeks of the campaign beginning. The cringe-worthy moment Dutton's 'Department of Government Efficiency' elect, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, donned a MAGA cap should have been the moment every newspaper editor in Australia knew the election result was a fait accompli. It was a campaign that exposed how far removed the Coalition is from modern Australia. In what can only be described as the bizarre revival of Soviet economics, the Coalition was going to create a nuclear industry based on government ownership of the means of energy production. This contradicted core free-market values. It didn't just have a hole in its finances, it dug quarries with its own financial recklessness. Rather than reaching out to help Australians battling the cost of living, the Coalition went on the attack. The scare campaign on people who work from home, which is a major factor for women and families, was embarrassingly wrong-footed and chauvinistic. But it also showed that not having to pay for extra tolls and childcare is a strategy families use to help ease cost-of-living pressures and manage mortgage stress. Everyone – from immigrants, Chinese-born Australians, people born after 1981, women and people who have any connection with the public service in this country – was targeted for existing. There was nothing in it for young people to vote for the Coalition – climate change wasn't addressed and there was no help offered to pay off university debts. In fact, to my amazement, the Coalition was going to scrap the $300 prac payments for people studying nursing at the University of Canberra and other universities. The Liberals also have a problem with people who live in metropolitan Australia, which doesn't leave them with a lot of votes left to win. At the end of the day, the buck stops with the party and the Liberals got everything wrong this time round, not just Dutton. He did make a lot of mistakes, but, on a personal note, it's important for him to remember people were voting for Peter Dutton as opposition leader, not Peter Dutton the human being. When he goes home to see his family, he needs to take that armour of opposition leader off and realise that all the slings and arrows coming at him are about what people see in his job, and he can't afford to take it personally. He needs to rebuild and reconstruct himself, and he cannot afford to let his job as opposition leader define the bloke he sees in the mirror, otherwise he'll go crazy. Ultimately, the result shows us that Australia is a centrist country and Labor has no competition in the middle right now. It's in the best interests of the Liberal Party, and Australia, for it to move to the centre. On a final, positive note, as I stood in the queue to vote as an ordinary citizen, I marvelled at the fact that right around Australia 18 million people turned up to vote peacefully, which shows, despite all our moans about politics and politicians, we are doing something right in this country. Bill Shorten was the leader of the Labor Party from 2013 to 2019. He is vice-chancellor and president of the University of Canberra.
The Age
03-05-2025
- Business
- The Age
Dutton lost his seat. His colleagues were talking about his leadership before a vote was counted
But by 8.30pm, the need for a new leader was clear, and Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce said his colleagues had gotten ahead of themselves. 'There's only been one one-term government in the history of Australia ... And what I never wanted to do, and what I'd say to my colleagues, is don't overbid on what you're saying when you go in,' he said. Liberal National Party senator James McGrath said he would not examine the Coalition's loss so early, but it was clear there must be a 'serious, considered look at the party and how we need to grow'. Loading 'It is not a good night for us. There will be a lot of soul-searching in the party as to how we take the party forward and what we need to do to make sure we are an election-winning force,' he said. Country Liberal Party Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price downplayed her own role in the Coalition's defeat – having generated headlines with a Trump-esque pledge to 'make Australia great again' – but conceded it was a tough ask to unseat a first-term prime minister. 'There's a lot that we're going to have to consider going forward, and regrouping as the Coalition, in terms of the approach we take in three years' time. And considering where we went wrong this time around,' she said. 'Certainly we could have provided our policies sooner to the Australian people ... We could have called out [Albanese's] lies earlier on in the piece.' Finance spokeswoman Jane Hume conceded the Coalition had campaigned in ways 'that we will never do again' but slammed Labor's negative scare campaign that claimed Dutton would cut Medicare to pay for a $600 billion nuclear power policy. 'It was so disappointing to take part in an election where there were so many lies told.' But Hume said her first act on Sunday would be to go through the Coalition's review of its 2022 loss, which she co-authored. 'Because there are some similarities I can see,' she said. 'There is an extraordinary amount of work we need to do, there is no doubt about that. Turning a party around is not an easy thing to do. We will need to start from scratch with great candidates, great policies.' Groups on the left and right of the party had been quietly considering leadership scenarios for weeks, according to factional sources on both sides of the party. Coalition MPs believed Dutton required a five-to-10-seat haul to remain leader. Loading While Dutton lost his seat, Hastie was recording a more than 7 per cent swing towards him in Canning. Taylor, Ley and Tehan all retained their seats without losing significant ground to Labor. Tehan, when asked on Saturday night if he would run to lead the party after successfully fighting off a well-funded challenge by independent candidate Alex Dyson, said: 'I haven't had any time to think about the future'. Hume, seen by other moderates as a future deputy leader, began contacting colleagues in NSW, Victoria and South Australia on Friday, asking for face-to-face meetings or phone calls for Sunday morning. Hume has a close relationship with Taylor, who has been talked about as a potential replacement for Dutton. Hume does not currently hold a leadership position in the Senate, but is a shadow cabinet member. Taylor's path to leadership is complicated by the NSW moderate grouping, which would support Ley, Tehan or Hastie over Taylor, who is one of the leaders of the NSW right. The moderates do not have a clear leadership option in the lower house, where party leaders must sit, making Hume an option as deputy to any future leader, although her comments this week on Chinese spies have lowered her prospects. The NSW moderates have been loyal to Dutton and were only set to change leaders if the Coalition had a disastrous result. Taylor was contacted for comment. Hastie and Taylor are from the right, but it is not clear if Hastie is keen to run. Ley is supported by the small centre-right faction associated with Alex Hawke, while Tehan is a Victorian who does not neatly fit with any group and is battling to keep his seat of Wannon. Out-of-field leadership options include NSW MP Julian Leeser, who was the shadow attorney-general before quitting over the Voice to parliament and energy spokesman Ted O'Brien. Sukkar was also on track to lose his seat to Labor in Melbourne.
Belfast Telegraph
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Belfast Telegraph
Greene writes to Tory voters urging them to back Lib Dems following defection
Jamie Greene crossed the floor last month as he hit out at his previous party's 'Reform-lite' agenda. In a letter sent to voters who have previously backed the Tories, he claimed the party's agenda under new leader Russell Findlay is 'Trump-esque in style and substance'. The drive to convert Tory voters comes after Lib Dem leader Alex Cole-Hamilton was spotted lunching with Conservative Maurice Golden in Edinburgh, with neither denying the attempts made to convince him to defect. Mr Greene said: 'It talks about what it stands against, but has little to say about what it stands for. 'Most importantly, the broad church it was once shifted further and further to the right, alienating many of its members, voters, and in my case its elected representatives. 'I couldn't go on. So I joined the Scottish Liberal Democrats. 'I've found a party that is upbeat and positive. They believe in decency and respect in public life. Getting things done for our local communities is their bread and butter. That's what politics is all about, after all. Getting stuff done. 'So my challenge to you is this: If you feel like I did, politically homeless and scunnered with the Scottish Conservatives, do something about it. 'Come and join me in the Scottish Liberal Democrats and you will be made to feel most welcome, I assure you. 'The language of far-right division doesn't make people's lives better. It won't make Scotland and its communities any better. A positive and inclusive platform does.' But the Scottish Tories claimed the letters could result in a boost for the party. 'The man who enthusiastically campaigned and voted for Nicola Sturgeon's gender reforms can send as many letters as he wants,' a spokesman for the party said. 'We'll post them for him. 'Not a single pro-UK voter will be persuaded by someone who thinks the SNP are right on so many critical issues. 'If anything, this letter will boost support for the Scottish Conservatives.'
