Gavin Newsom addresses the nation

  • Thread starter Thread starter dukeman92
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 470
  • Views: 5K
  • Politics 
Calheel said:
Right. You like him because he looks and acts like someone that would be the president in a movie. Because he is playing a role.
Click to expand...
There's some truth in that.

Unfortunately, this is often the game politicians have to play. Remember when Obama supposedly changed his view on gay marriage? Did he actually change it? Did newsom actually reconsider his position on trans women in female sports? Maybe he did or maybe he was scared of the backlash for taking such a position sooner.

This is the risk that we often have to take.

What I do know is that he's relatively young, seems intelligent, wellspoken and, yes, presidential.

I'm not saying he's my favorite choice. He's not close to my favorite choice, but after the last decade, I would gladly take him over the other options.
 
Last edited:
So I finally got around to watching the Newsom Statewide address... (it wasn't specifically a "Nationwide" address per se, not initially at least... National media picked it up and ran with it). I liked it. I thought he hit it out of the park. I didn't' detect anything that could be construed as "fake". He was on point 100%.

I also recall his head-to-head with DeSantis Dec. 2023. I thought Gavin hit a home run there too.

I still contend Cal doth protest too much methinks...

I also agree with the poster that said something like Uncle Joe putting on a wig wanting to play in a ladies H.S. softball game is not the hill the Dems should strive to die on. So Newsom alluding to that fact shouldn't be a deal breaker - not in my book at least.
 
I’m with Calheel on this. I know some of y’all love Gavin Newsom, but I really think a lot of voters are going to see through him.

The man looks like a political product designed in a lab: slick, polished, never off message. In this political moment, people are desperate for someone who feels real. Someone who talks like they’ve actually lived some of what regular people are going through. Newsom doesn’t hit that note in my opinion.

Now imagine him up against someone like J.D. Vance. Someone who has a compelling personal story and knows how to tell it in a way that hits the populist notes. Vance would lean into that every day. “I came from nothing. Newsom came from Napa money and political connections.” He’d be hammering that contrast while Newsom is talking about green energy grants and metrics.

I’m not saying I like Vance. Obviously I don’t. But I do think he understands how to perform authenticity in a way that a lot of swing voters respond to. Newsom, by contrast, feels more like a segment on MSNBC. That might excite liberals who follow politics closely, but it won’t move disaffected or working class voters who already feel alienated from the system.

Nominate Newsom, and we risk walking right into a repeat of 2016. Flashy, confident, polished candidate who completely misses the emotional mood of the country.
 
Paine said:
I’m with Calheel on this. I know some of y’all love Gavin Newsom, but I really think a lot of voters are going to see through him.
Click to expand...
But that’s not why this thread got derailed.

I read scant few posts suggesting true Newsom support, as a holistic politician; it was a straw man presented after multiple rounds of multiple posters trying to understand what Calheel thought Newsom should do, in response to Trump pulling nakedly despotic moves upon Californians. Cal focused on Newsom’s image, but not on the substance of the message. There’s invective within this thread that clearly several posters, myself included, found disproportionate to the moment, and in no way represented an endorsement of Newsom.
 
"'The Speech' is what Ronald Reagan called it. Today we call it, "A Time for Choosing," and it was a pivotal turning point in Ronald Reagan's life.Ronald Reagan began a long side-career of public speaking as his acting career closed out. He traveled across the country meeting Lions Clubs, Rotary Clubs, Chambers of Commerce and any other civic-minded local groups. This continued and intensified during his service as the General Electric spokesperson while hosting their sponsored television series. "The Speech" was delivered in various forms and to different audiences as each word was honed, measured and memorized. During the 1964 Presidential campaign, Republican party officials in California, who knew Reagan's powerful message and delivery, asked him to film a speech on behalf of the Republican candidate, Barry Goldwater. The speech was aired on October 27, 1964 and it was electrifying. Donations to the Republican party and candidates increased dramatically.The Republican Party took note and they targeted Reagan as a candidate from that point forward. He agreed in 1966 to run for Governor of California. He won two terms, and eventually won the Presidency."




This was aired on a national program titled Rendezvous with Destiny on October 27, 1964. He was elected governor of California in 1966.
 
Healing said:
But that’s not why this thread got derailed.

I read scant few posts suggesting true Newsom support, as a holistic politician; it was a straw man presented after multiple rounds of multiple posters trying to understand what Calheel thought Newsom should do, in response to Trump pulling nakedly despotic moves upon Californians. Cal focused on Newsom’s image, but not on the substance of the message. There’s invective within this thread that clearly several posters, myself included, found disproportionate to the moment, and in no way represented an endorsement of Newsom.
Click to expand...
I agree that the thread got sidetracked into personal attacks and emotional invective instead of focusing on what Newsom actually does or should do.

This thread probably wasn’t the best place to talk about Newsom’s 2028 weaknesses given the context of the moment, but there did seem to be several posters who like Newsom and would support him in 2028 just because he’s anti-Trump and comes across as polished.

Calheel’s critiques were more grounded than some made them out to be though. In today’s political environment, style is substance for a lot of voters. When someone comes off as phony or opportunistic, people pick up on that. Especially those already skeptical of both parties.

The performative slickness isn’t a minor aesthetic quibble, it’s a warning sign about how a candidate might govern, who they’ll prioritize, and how much they’re willing to bend based on polling or ambition.
 
Paine said:
I’m with Calheel on this. I know some of y’all love Gavin Newsom, but I really think a lot of voters are going to see through him.

The man looks like a political product designed in a lab: slick, polished, never off message. In this political moment, people are desperate for someone who feels real. Someone who talks like they’ve actually lived some of what regular people are going through. Newsom doesn’t hit that note in my opinion.

Now imagine him up against someone like J.D. Vance. Someone who has a compelling personal story and knows how to tell it in a way that hits the populist notes. Vance would lean into that every day. “I came from nothing. Newsom came from Napa money and political connections.” He’d be hammering that contrast while Newsom is talking about green energy grants and metrics.

I’m not saying I like Vance. Obviously I don’t. But I do think he understands how to perform authenticity in a way that a lot of swing voters respond to. Newsom, by contrast, feels more like a segment on MSNBC. That might excite liberals who follow politics closely, but it won’t move disaffected or working class voters who already feel alienated from the system.

Nominate Newsom, and we risk walking right into a repeat of 2016. Flashy, confident, polished candidate who completely misses the emotional mood of the country.
Click to expand...
None of which matters. The fact that he is closely tied to California and, by extension, Los Angeles, is enough to disqualify him in many voters' eyes.
 
sringwal said:
None of which matters. The fact that he is closely tied to California and, by extension, Los Angeles, is enough to disqualify him in many voters' eyes.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don’t entirely disagree with you. The California connection is a major hurdle for a national candidate. But I’d argue it’s not just about geography.

Newsom doesn’t just happen to be from California. He embodies the political aesthetic that people already distrust. Slick, polished, always on message. That’s why his profile is such a liability in a general election. It activates every cultural reflex that makes swing voters tune out or head the other direction.

And that’s what worries me. If we can see it now, the GOP definitely sees it too. They’re going to lean hard into that contrast. So while I get why folks like his polish and positioning, I think it’s playing with fire.
 
So who is the least PHONY democrat with chances then?

The woman with the whiteboard? Too bad she's a she. Maybe she's also from a city. Strike two.
 
77 million voted for a phony, opportunistic, narcissist, authoritarian rapist -
I'll take Gavin any day thank you very much.

Now, having said that, I'd like to see him in a primary against several other bona fide candidates. There's a very good chance I would NOT vote for Gavin in said primary. But if Newsom were to come out as the Dem candidate I'd vote for him in a heart beat... and I would use his speech the other night as example #1 why.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top