Apr.23

electoral-vote.com

Dem 47

   

GOP 53

A Tale of Two Presidential Candidates

There is absolutely no question that Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) plans to run for president in 2028. He's been laying the groundwork for years, from steering anti-Trumpy legislation through the California legislature, to debating Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL), to supporting Kamala Harris in 2024 with visibly limited enthusiasm.

Recently, Newsom has tacked very hard toward the center. Most readers will know, by this point, that he's not only started a podcast, but that his guests for the first three episodes were Charlie Kirk, Steve Bannon and Michael Savage. In the first of those, Newsom raised more than a few eyebrows when he told Kirk that he largely agrees with MAGA world about trans athletes participating in girls'/women's sports. "I think it's an issue of fairness," said the governor. "I completely agree with you on that. It is an issue of fairness. It's deeply unfair."

We will concede that we were once very impressed with Newsom as a candidate. This was not a judgment of his stance on the issues, mind you, but one of his apparent tactical skill, and his ability to get his name in the headlines. However, we will now concede that we are no longer impressed. A fellow with a slicked-back haircut like that, who dines at the French Laundry ($500-$1,000/person) during a pandemic, whose hobby is collecting wine, already begins with two strikes against him when it comes to people suspecting that he's a phony. At the moment, it simply could not be more apparent that he has information (probably from polls, but common sense would do it as well) that he's perceived as a San Francisco namby-pamby pinko commie liberal, and so he's triangulating so as to re-invent his image. It's not going to work, and all it does is heighten the sense that he's a fake who has little in the way of actual principles.

This subject comes up, in particular, because Newsom sat for an interview with The Hill earlier this week, and spent much time carping about the Democratic Party's lack of identity. "I don't know what the party is," he proclaimed. "I'm still struggling with that." He wants there to be an autopsy so that the blue team can get to the root of what ails it. Newsom also took the opportunity to emphasize his ostensible blue-collar bona fides. He talked about how California isn't just urban elites, and that it has lots of agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting, etc. Then, apparently with a straight face, he decreed:

So, you know, talk about flyover states. My state of mind is deeply entrenched in this rural mindset as I go back over and over and over again in the Central Valley. It's not helped me electorally, but it certainly helped me sort of create a sort of consciousness around that.

Feel free to hum John Denver's "Thank God I'm a Country Boy" as you read that.

We have many responses to this, which we are going to present in list form so we can actually get through them all:

• Nobody in California, and presumably nobody in the whole country, believes that Newsom is predominantly a champion of rural voters, and that he's held firm on that despite all the electoral harm it's done him.
  
  
• If a person wants to connect with voters in Nebraska, or Kansas, or Iowa, it's not wise to use the phrase "flyover states," no matter what your intent.
  
  
• It is not the DNC, or some autopsy written by a bunch of wonks, that decides what the Democratic Party is about. It's the voters, particularly those who vote in the primaries. The notion that some blue-ribbon panel will be able to solve what ails the Democrats (or the Republicans) is a notion that only politicians have. And to hammer on that makes Newsom seem out of touch.
  
  
• If Newsom believes the Party's platform is unfocused, or requires more effective messaging, you know whose job that REALLY is? The politicians. Can you imagine Franklin D. Roosevelt ever whining, "I just don't know what the Democratic Party stands for?" Of course not. He would roll up his sleeves, and put into words his vision of what it stands for, and then get out there and sell it.
  
  
• There is nothing here that serves to dispel our feeling that Newsom is a phony.

In short, in case you can't tell, we are not impressed.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the coin, Nate Silver has made his prediction as to the identity of the Democrats' 2028 nominee, and it's... Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). There isn't that much data at this point, so this prediction is based a little bit on data (AOC has very high favorables, especially compared to other Democrats... like Newsom), and a lot on gut feel.

Our insta-response was that it's kinda crazy to think AOC will get the nomination. After all, the Democrats just suffered a devastating loss with a woman of color who comes from an urban area in a very blue state. The presumption in December of 2024, including from us, was that the blue team would go with someone very safe, very bland, very centrist and very... pale, if you will.

However, on a bit more reflection... AOC '28 is not crazy. We will eventually get to her in our candidates series, but—spoiler alert!—it's not going to be for a while (teaser: she's going to show up between Gov. Wes Moore, D-MD, and Sen. Adam Schiff, D-CA). So, we're going to lay out some of the factors that either would, or could, be in her favor in 2028:

• Having learned from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), AOC is the queen of earned media. Her rallies draw throngs, and nearly everything she says or does makes the news. This was key to the rise of Donald Trump, and may be the only thing she has in common with him.
  
  
• As we have written many times, this appears to be a "throw the bums out" era. If 4 years of Donald Trump leaves voters with the sense that they want someone as different from him as is possible, well, it would be hard to think of a leading Democrat more different than the young, not white, not male, not rich, not corrupt, very liberal AOC.
  
  
• From a game theory perspective, if AOC jumps in, that almost certainly clears out the lefty lane for her to have all by herself. Meanwhile, there is going to be an absolute deluge of moderate candidates. Remember that, unlike the Republicans, the Democrats award delegates proportionally. So, if she collects a steady 30% of the primary vote, that could be enough, if the other 70% is splintered.

We're not ready to join Silver and say AOC is the favorite in 2028. But we are saying she's very viable. More so, in our view, than Gavin Newsom.

On one hand, AOC has a very fine-tuned political ear. She is a very good politician. She surely knows that getting elected as president in 2028 would require all the stars to align and then some. On the other hand, challenging Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) in a primary and winning a Senate seat would be easy-peasy compared to being elected president. It is much easier to be elected president as a senator than as a representative. She will be 38 in 2028 and has plenty of time for a run after a term or two in the Senate. So we think there is a pretty good chance she will go for the Senate in 2028 and leave the presidential run for the future. (Z & V)