Rep. Gregory Meeks recently called the Trump Administration's Greenland push 'colonialism' and warned it threatens NATO alliance safety. Strong words that certainly generated headlines. But I was curious: how do actual New York voters receive this kind of foreign policy messaging?
I ran a study with six New York residents to find out. The feedback was direct and surprisingly practical. The short version: constituents want less academic framing and more kitchen-table relevance.
The Participants
The study included six New York residents from Ditto's US research panel, ranging from 28 to 62 years old. The group spanned the five boroughs and upstate communities, with a mix of income levels and professional backgrounds. What united them: they all follow national news and care about America's international standing.
Finding 1: The 'Colonialism' Frame Needs Work
The most consistent critique? The word 'colonialism' sounds like academic jargon, not constituent communication. Multiple participants said it feels like language designed for think-tank panels, not working New Yorkers.
"Drop the grad-seminar labels and talk like adults who pay the bills." — Participant, New York
This does not mean constituents disagree with the underlying concern. It means the framing creates distance rather than connection. New Yorkers want their representatives to sound like them, not like international relations professors.
Key insight: Academic vocabulary signals that the message is for political elites, not ordinary voters. Simplify the framing without dumbing down the substance.
Finding 2: Connect It to the Kitchen Table
Participants consistently asked: what does this mean for me? What does a Greenland policy have to do with my grocery bills, my safety, my daily life? The foreign policy abstraction does not land without that connection.
One participant suggested a simple reframe: instead of talking about colonial power dynamics, talk about how this kind of international instability affects prices at the store and security in the neighbourhood. Make it tangible.
Key insight: Even foreign policy needs a domestic hook. Constituents tune out abstract international issues unless they can see the impact on their own lives.
Finding 3: Lead With Greenland's People
Several participants specifically suggested emphasising Greenland's right to self-determination. This framing resonates better than geopolitical chess metaphors because it centres human beings rather than abstract power structures.
The suggestion was clear: say 'self-determination' out loud. Talk about Greenlanders as people with their own voice, not as a territory to be acquired. This humanises the issue and makes the objection feel principled rather than partisan.
Key insight: Human-centred framing outperforms power-politics framing. Lead with the people affected, not the strategic implications.
Finding 4: Constituents Want Steady, Not Flashy
Multiple participants expressed that the Greenland situation feels like political theatre. What they want from their representative is the opposite: steady, factual communication that does not chase headlines.
The appetite is for competence signalling, not outrage signalling. Constituents are tired of being mobilised for every news cycle. They want representatives who process complexity calmly and communicate clearly.
Key insight: Outrage fatigue is real. Constituents respond better to calm competence than dramatic positioning.
What This Means for Congressional Communications
The research suggests a clear path for Rep. Meeks's communications team. First, swap academic vocabulary for plain language. 'Colonialism' may be technically accurate but it creates distance from everyday voters. Second, always connect foreign policy to domestic impact: how does this affect New Yorkers' safety, security, and cost of living?
Third, humanise international issues by centring the people affected. Greenland has a population with their own views; elevate their voice. Finally, resist the temptation to match headline drama with dramatic messaging. Constituents are looking for steady hands, not more noise.
Methodology
This study used Ditto's synthetic research platform to gather feedback from six New York-based personas. The research group was filtered to New York residents only, with demographic diversity across age, income, and geographic location within the state. Participants answered open-ended questions about their reactions to Rep. Meeks's Greenland and NATO messaging.