Trump claims he’ll rename the Gulf of Mexico to ‘Gulf of America’
Scott Olson/Getty Images
(PALM BEACH, Fla.) — President-elect Donald Trump declared in a left-field proposal on Tuesday that his administration will rename the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America” in his latest attack on Mexico.
“We’re going to change because we do most of the work there and it’s ours,” Trump said. “It’s appropriate, and Mexico has to stop allowing millions of people to pour into our country,” Trump said in a long, winding news conference.
Trump criticized Mexico for the increase of drugs into the U.S. and said that he would make Mexico and Canada pay through “substantial tariffs.”
“We want to get along with everybody. But you know … it takes two to tango,” he said.
The gulf has been identified by several names throughout its history, with “Golfo de Mexico” first appearing on maps in the mid-16th century when Spain occupied the areas now known as Cuba to the south, Mexico to the west and the the U.S. states that surround it to the North.
It’s the ninth-largest body of water in the world and covers some 600,000 square miles.
Trump’s promise to rename the gulf isn’t the first.
In 2012, then-Mississippi State Rep. Steve Holland proposed a bill that also would have renamed the gulf into the “Gulf of America,” however the Democrat backtracked and said he was joking and using it as a way to criticize his Republican colleagues over their anti-immigrant stances.
“They are trying to really discriminate against immigrants, which offends me severely,” Holland told ABC News in 2012. “I just thought if we’re gonna get into it, we might as well all get into it, it’s purely tongue and cheek.”
Stephen Colbert suggested the same name during the 2010 BP oil spill on his Comedy Central show “The Colbert Report.”
(WASHINGTON) — House Speaker Mike Johnson announced Wednesday evening that House Republicans from across the conference struck a deal to raise the threshold for the motion to vacate — a procedure rank-and-file lawmakers can use to remove the speaker. The new agreement makes it harder to remove a speaker from the position.
The agreement would raise the threshold to force a vote on ousting a speaker from one member to nine members.
While the nine-member threshold makes it harder to oust a speaker, it does not completely remove the threat.
Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris of Maryland and Main Street Caucus Chairman Dusty Johnson of South Dakota — who negotiated the deal on Wednesday — appeared with Johnson at a press conference where they explained the change.
“We had an opportunity to set the motion to vacate at a higher than number one, that motion to vacate will be set at nine in return for getting rid of some amendments that probably would have divided this conference,” Johnson said.
He said the agreement allows Republicans to be “in a better position to move forward with the Republican agenda to make sure that Speaker Johnson, South Dakota Senate Leader John Thune and our President Donald Trump have an opportunity to go forward.”
“For me this is exactly how we’re supposed to come together,” Johnson said.
Harris said the change allows the conference to execute on Trump’s plans.
“We’ve been able to work across the conference to eliminate the controversial issues that could have divided us and move forward together to deliver on the President’s agenda. That’s it,” Harris said.
Earlier this year, Georgia Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene filed a motion to vacate the speaker’s chair, threatening to oust Johnson just months after he ascended to the speakership. When she officially triggered a vote on her motion to oust Johnson, Democrats joined almost all Republicans to overwhelmingly reject her move.
House Republicans will are huddling Thursday morning where they’ll still have to ratify the agreement.
Johnson won the House Republican nomination Wednesday to stay on as the House’s top job. On Wednesday, he said he was “delighted” and “honored” to be the nominee for speaker, saying “we’ll head into Jan. 3 to make all that happen.”
The chamber will vote on their rules package for the 119th Congress on Jan. 3, 2025, following the election of the speaker on the floor.
(LINCOLN, NE) — Dan Osborn, a former union president and Navy veteran who ran an unusually competitive U.S. Senate campaign in deep-red Nebraska as an independent, is launching a new political action committee meant to help working class candidates like himself run for office.
“At least the idea is to help other people like me, who are teachers, nurses, plumbers, carpenters, bus drivers, to be able to run for office in their particular counties, states, areas, and we can help them accomplish that,” Osborn told ABC News in an interview by phone on Monday.
“You know, we’ve created something pretty special here in Nebraska. And I just want to continue that.”
The organization, the Working Class Heroes Fund, is a new hybrid political action committee (PAC) that will support working-class candidates and mobilize working class voters, according to an announcement and a PAC spokesperson. The group will also advocate for labor unions, including supporting strike funds, which help union workers cover expenses if they go on strike.
Osborn hopes the PAC’s work will help bring more workers’ perspectives to government, about how “people don’t want handouts from their government… they just want to know when you go and you put in your time, you put in your eight hours work for eight hours pay, that your paycheck matters, right?” Osborn said. “And going to be able to afford your mortgage and your cars and hopefully set aside money for college and some Christmases.”
The PAC is a new organization and not a conversion of Osborn’s campaign committee, according to a spokesperson. It will vet and consider which working-class candidates to support on a case-by-case basis, and will support candidates across political parties.
Could supporting candidates across party lines lead to pushback? Osborn, who eschewed party labels or support during his Senate bid, feels that doesn’t matter.
“I’ve never really understood why, if you’re a part of a party, that you have to have a specific set of beliefs, and you have to reject the other set of beliefs, and vice versa,” he said.
Osborn had campaigned explicitly on his labor bonafides, including his work as a steamfitter and mechanic, as well as his insistence that he’d be a truly independent voice in the Senate.
On Election Day, Osborn lost to Fischer by 8 percentage points — not as thin of a margin as some polls had predicted, but well ahead of the margin between President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris; Harris lost statewide to Trump by 21 points. (Harris did lead Trump in the state’s 2nd Congressional District, netting her one Electoral College vote.)
Asked if he was surprised by the margin between him and Fischer, Osborn said, “Yes, I was, actually — and it sucked. I suppose if I had to describe it in one word, it sucked.
“You know, I really thought that the people in Nebraska saw the value in electing a working-class person,” he said, but a late influx of money into the race supporting his opponent made a difference. “Does it hurt a little bit? Sure, but again, I think we created something here.”
His family is “not taking [the loss] as good as I am,” Osborn said later with a chuckle. “Everybody goes back to school and we go back — I’m going back to work tomorrow, and my wife, she was working the whole entire time to help pay for the endeavor. But, you know, we were all hoping for different results, and we didn’t see it.”
Osborn said he was not surprised by the larger margin between Trump and Harris, given Nebraska’s deep Republican lean.
One of the trickier dynamics in the race was that as Osborn tried to maintain an independent image, some national Democrats or Democratic groups indicated that if he was elected to the Senate, he would caucus with Democrats. (Throughout his campaign, Osborn emphasized he would not plan to caucus with either party.)
Did that hurt his campaign? Osborn thinks it made a difference.
“I can’t consult with those people. I don’t even know who they are. They’re making money off of my name, which is completely ridiculous,” he said, adding that he wants independent expenditures out of politics more generally.
His own organization, however, is allowed to make independent expenditures, as a hybrid PAC. Asked about that, Osborn acknowledged the irony but said the PAC will support candidates who support campaign finance reform and want an end to how money influences politics.
“The independent expenditure is part of the problem, and I would love nothing more than our elected officials to get rid of my PAC because it shouldn’t exist. You know what I mean? None of this should exist.”
Even as he launches the PAC, however, Osborn said he is also heading back to work as a steamfitter.
“The debt collectors do not care that I ran the closest Senate race in the country, unfortunately,” he told ABC News. (Pre-Election Day polling had found the race among the closest Senate races in the country, although the final results have been closer in other Senate races, such as in Michigan and Pennsylvania.) “So I got to pay my bills. So yes, I’m going back to work.”
Would he run again for public office? Osborn said he wouldn’t rule it out: “I’m open to everything that’s going to be on the table.”
“In my neighborhood, there’s a position open: the dogcatcher’s open,” he added, “So I should probably start there,” he said, although he immediately clarified, “That’s a joke.”
-ABC News’ Brittany Shepherd, Will McDuffie, Isabella Murray, and Kate Walter contributed to this report.
(NEW YORK) — Former President Bill Clinton, during an appearance on ABC’s The View on Wednesday, indicated he hopes President Joe Biden will not preemptively pardon people who could be targeted by the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump, including Clinton’s wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
“If President Biden wanted to talk to me about that, I would talk to him about it. But I don’t think I should be giving public advice on the pardon power. I think it’s too — it’s a very personal thing, but it is — I hope he won’t do that,” Clinton said.
“Most of us get out of this world ahead of where we’d get if all we got was simple justice. And so it’s normally a fool’s errand. You spend a lot of time trying to get even,” he added.
President Biden and his senior aides have been discussing possible preemptive pardons for people who might be targeted by the new Trump administration, according to a source close to the president. Experts have told ABC News he has the power to do so under the Constitution.
Clinton emphasized that he does not believe any potential charges from the incoming Trump administration brought against Hillary Clinton would be valid, arguing that she did not do anything wrong with her handling of emails during her time at the State Department — a controversy which became a flashpoint late in the 2016 election cycle.
Asked separately about his recent comments that a Republican could be more likely to be the first female president, Clinton said, “The impulse to say a woman probably shouldn’t be president comes more from the right than from the left — in the brain — and it’s an impulsive thing.”
He also surmised that voters are not always looking toward how much experience a politician had, because of how they’re focused on day-to-day issues.
“If you’re an alienated voter and you’re genuinely worried about your family’s financial security or your personal security, then the last thing you want is somebody who’s well qualified … if you think the total sum of impact of government action is negative, then you may not want somebody who’s well qualified,” Clinton said.
“And that’s the danger we’re at now, because it actually does matter if you know things.”
Asked about what may happen after Trump’s victory, Clinton emphasized that Trump won fairly.
“So, I think what we have to do is to observe a peaceful transfer of power, stand up for what we believe, and work together when we can,” Clinton said.
“I do not think we should just be jamming them, even though they do that to us a lot. I think it’s a mistake,” he added.
During the 2024 campaign cycle, Bill Clinton campaigned for Vice President Kamala Harris, serving as a key surrogate sent to rural areas and to speak with working-class voters.
Asked how Democrats can win back working-class voters who have been shifting to support Republicans, Clinton said that he feels part of the challenge is “cultural,” as rural voters skewer more conservative and are dealing with things they are not used to.
“The world moves on, and things that once made sense to people don’t anymore,” he said. “The world moves on, and things that once made sense to people don’t anymore. Things that should make sense don’t anymore.”
“We need to quit screaming at each other and listen to each other. We need to have a serious conversation about these things. And I think one of the things that Democrats sometimes do is give up on too many people, because the demographics say they’re not going to be for it,” Clinton said.
“Well, that may be, but you know, if you don’t deal with something that’s controversial, just because you don’t want to hear it, that’s like an insult to voters.”
Clinton has devoted time to charitable and health causes since his presidency, and his memoir “Citizen: My Life After the White House” released in November.
“First, it was fun, and secondly, it was important,” Clinton said of his charitable work. “And thirdly, I could do it. And it didn’t matter if the president was Barack Obama or George Bush, we just did things that human beings needed.”
