Monday, December 4, 2023

Of all the silly scenarios floating around, "why not Newsom?" may be the silliest


 Gavin Newsom did a good job with the debate. I wanted to get the positive out front and center at the beginning because there won't be a lot of it in this post.

Over the next week or two (hopefully not longer), we are likely to hear a lot of journalists and pundits making editorial moon eyes at our governor, there will be an embarrassing number of "why can't we have a candidate like that" comments and more than a few stunningly absurd scenarios where the man of the hour somehow replaces either Joe Biden or Kamala Harris on the ticket (though surprisingly not from Frank Bruni, who deserves credit for seeing through the farce). 

[It's important to note that none of these suggestions has come from Newsom himself. While there have been no end of commentators speculating on the governor's motives and hidden agenda, he has consistently voiced his support for the Biden/Harris ticket. He even sent out a Biden fundraising text on the eve of the debate.]

This is the culmination of a years-long effort to build up Newsom as the ideal candidate, not unlike what we saw with Ron DeSantis, and as with DeSantis, this is an argument that relies on turning a blind eye to some very inconvenient facts. 

The parallels between the two governors is heightened by the symbiotic relationship that both have pursued. Both men have used the other as a standard boogeyman for their respective parties' bases, and it has proven a remarkably sound strategy in the case of DeSantis, one of the few smart moves he has pulled since the campaign started in earnest. Even the debate, which by most standards Newsom clearly won, may end up a positive for Desantis. Being mocked by a smug West Coast liberal (from the Bay Area no less) on Fox News may well help someone running for the Republican nomination. Of course, in this case it is almost certainly not enough to make a real difference. At this point in the Florida Governor's campaign even the best news calls to mind that great exchange from Support Your Local Sheriff that went roughly like this.

[Looking at a dented badge that had obviously deflected a shot.]

"I'll bet that tin star saved your last sheriff's life."

"Well, it probably would have if not for all those other bullets."

If anything, Newsom has been even more focused on this symbiotic relationship. In fact, as far as I can tell that's the only thing he has been focused on for the last couple of years. None of which is surprising when you take into account that this plays upon his real talent as a politician. He is very good on camera with his central casting good looks and confident demeanor. He is quick on his feet, and knows how to work an interview, particularly in the lion's den of Fox News where he is on especially friendly terms with, of all people, Sean Hannity.

Add to this an exceptional gift for knowing what his target audience wants to hear. Gavin Newsom has managed to convince even smart, savvy progressive observers like those at Lawyers Guns and Money that he represented an enormous improvement over Jerry Brown, which would be true if we looked at sound bites rather than actual policy accomplishments, and ignored the state of the state that Brown left his successor.

 Unless you really know California politics, it's difficult to understand how sweet a hand Newsom was dealt and how little he has done with it. When Jerry Brown returned to office, the state was widely seen as ungovernable. Things were so bad that absurd plans for splitting up the state were being treated seriously by the national press. By comparison, Newsom took office with full coffers, a Democratic super-majority, and an opposition party in still smoldering ruins. His accomplishments have been thin in absolute terms. They are even worse in context.

While Newsom has gotten national headlines for big sweeping statements like promising 100% of new car sales to be ZEVs in 2035 (more than a decade after he will have been term limited out of office), little has been done to address California's most serious problems under his tenure. His record on reducing the risk of mega-fires largely consist of a few well-intentioned statements about forest management and lots of high sounding but not especially relevant generalities about climate change (particularly infuriating given the missed opportunities controlled burns during this past historic rainy season)...

His approach to the water crisis has been similarly slow and underwhelming as has his record on climate change.

The two issues where the state made some moves in the right direction were mainly due to the leadership of other people. The legislature was responsible for most of the improvements in housing policy, as less than impressive as those have been, while it was the mayors of Los Angeles and San Francisco who stepped up to the plate during the covid pandemic, with the governor mainly playing catch up.

The one substantive issue which Newsom has been on the forefront on is handing out generous stimulus checks, often based on questionable economic grounds like helping people cope with inflation. Not sure that goes in the plus column, especially when you consider what the money could have done to help alleviate the homeless crisis, put our forests back in equilibrium, fund our colleges and universities, expand public transportation, get our grid smart enough and resilient enough to handle an all EV future...

Given all of this, it's not surprising that the excitement over the national prospects of the governor of California comes mainly from outside of California.

All of this leaves out perhaps the best reason for not pinning your hopes on Newsom. The man comes with a lot of baggage, some of it disqualifying for a presidential run. His tendency to stumble into minor scandals is problematic but survivable... 

Fairly or unfairly, his choice of ex-wives is not.

Given what we know about right-wing media, the Trump family, and Kimberly Guilfoyle, imagine what a campaign with Gavin Newsom on the ticket. The insinuations, the outright lies, the general nastiness, all reported from the standard he said/she said template by Politico, the NYT, and the rest of the usual suspects. 

One of the lessons of 2016 was that, no matter how unfair the baggage is, you still have to take it into account when choosing a candidate, and the battle of the former Newsoms would make the coverage of the Clinton Foundation and but-her-emails look like the golden age of journalism.



 

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)