Gavin Newsom addresses the nation

[superrific]

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.

Yesterday you said you were criticizing Dems because there was nobody else to talk to.

But boy do you say a lot of great things about Trump and his minions, just like a former leftie poster named Ovshinsky. The idea that JD Vance has a compelling personal story and will tug at heartstrings is ludicrous. Everybody hates that dude. Including Trump. But at least he's not Gavin Newsom.

And though you said you don't want to take shots at Dems, that's exactly what you are doing. What a pathetic caricature, Newsom talking about "green energy credits." Maybe he'll start eating tofu live on air! He's become governor of the biggest and most important state, but he's so politically stupid that he can't connect with people, not as well as noted socialite JD Vance. I mean, go fuck yourself with this stupid crap. I don't love Gavin, but you're again pissing up the wrong fucking tree.

The very first thing you can do if you hate Trump is STOP ATTACKING AND CARICATURING DEMOCRATS. Here's the thing: your political instincts are TERRIBLE. If I was a political consultant, I'd call you, ask your advice and do the opposite. The people who you think will be the standard bearers will actually get crushed. You're the McGovern caucus. So dial it down a bit. Listen to other people. Stop siding with Trump.

 

[Paine]

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.

Beshear is my number one option right now. I'm not confident about his ability to make it through a primary.

 

[breepf]

 

[superrific]

Beshear is my number one option right now. I'm not confident about his ability to make it through a primary.

You like him because he looks like a good ole boy. The idea that Gavin Newsom is somehow a nepo baby while Andy Beshear, son of a [checks notes] former governor, is beyond belief. OK, he has rural NC hair instead of big city hair (note: Newsom's hair probably does not do what Beshear's hair does; Beshear's hair is sort of like mine but my son's hair is nothing of the sort).

 

[Paine]

This comment suggests you see, or believe others see, Trump as genuine, down-to-earth and lacking in personal ambition.

I don’t think Trump is genuine. I think he performs authenticity better than most politicians, and that’s a crucial distinction. A lot of swing voters don’t admire him, but they feel like he’s talking to them in a language they recognize, even if it’s vulgar and self-serving. That doesn’t make it true, but it does make it effective.

And yeah, Trump is a narcissistic authoritarian. That’s exactly why we have to be smarter about how we counter him. If our candidate comes off like the walking embodiment of every coastal elite stereotype then that’s handing the GOP a weapon. Not because those critiques are always fair but because they land.

My point is: we need someone who cuts through the noise, who feels real and rooted, not like they’re trying to win the presidency by focus group. That doesn’t mean purity or perfection: it means consistency, moral clarity, and the ability to connect. I’m not convinced Newsom has that in the eyes of the people we most need to reach.

 

[Paine]

Yesterday you said you were criticizing Dems because there was nobody else to talk to.

But boy do you say a lot of great things about Trump and his minions, just like a former leftie poster named Ovshinsky. The idea that JD Vance has a compelling personal story and will tug at heartstrings is ludicrous. Everybody hates that dude. Including Trump. But at least he's not Gavin Newsom.

And though you said you don't want to take shots at Dems, that's exactly what you are doing. What a pathetic caricature, Newsom talking about "green energy credits." Maybe he'll start eating tofu live on air! He's become governor of the biggest and most important state, but he's so politically stupid that he can't connect with people, not as well as noted socialite JD Vance. I mean, go fuck yourself with this stupid crap. I don't love Gavin, but you're again pissing up the wrong fucking tree.

The very first thing you can do if you hate Trump is STOP ATTACKING AND CARICATURING DEMOCRATS. Here's the thing: your political instincts are TERRIBLE. If I was a political consultant, I'd call you, ask your advice and do the opposite. The people who you think will be the standard bearers will actually get crushed. You're the McGovern caucus. So dial it down a bit. Listen to other people. Stop siding with Trump.

You’re not actually responding to what I said. You’re reacting to what you want me to have said because it’s easier to dunk on a straw man than engage with the substance.

I didn’t praise J.D. Vance’s politics or character. I said he knows how to tell a story that resonates with voters who feel alienated from the system. That’s not an endorsement. It’s a recognition of the terrain we’re operating in; terrain where a candidate’s affect, background, and emotional pitch matter a lot more than a policy white paper or a LinkedIn résumé.

The people who think they’re the smartest guys in the room have presided over two Trump victories. So maybe your instincts aren’t as airtight as you think.

And spare me the loyalty test. I’ve been crystal clear that I oppose Trump. What I’m not going to do is pretend someone like Newsom is above critique just because he’s a Democrat. That kind of branding loyalty is a big part of why the party keeps losing working-class voters.

If Democrats can’t handle internal criticism without screaming “go fuck yourself” and “you’re siding with Trump,” then we’re in worse shape than I thought.

 

[dukeman92]

The fact that “swing voters” & centrists do not hold both sides to the same standard is the problem. You look for a perfect Democratic candidate while allowing and/or helping 33% of the electorate cast their lot for Donald Trump.

I go back to the slogan Van Jones authored during the election season. “She has to be flawless while he’s allowed to be lawless”

 

[Centerpiece]

JDVance is “compelling” or “his story is compelling”.
I had stuff like that on ignore. My bad for the unignore.
I can’t un-see that shit.
For fuck’s sake!
JD tells “compelling” stories but Gavin is un-electable.
And this is why I’m worried about the future. We got 25 year old, educated males who think this way.
No wonder trump did well with young males. They some dumb muthafuckers.

 

[Paine]

JDVance is “compelling” or “his story is compelling”.
I had stuff like that on ignore. My bad for the unignore.
I can’t un-see that shit.
For fuck’s sake!
JD tells “compelling” stories but Gavin is un-electable.
And this is why I’m worried about the future. We got 25 year old, educated males who think this way.
No wonder trump did well with young males. They some dumb muthafuckers.

It’s wild how saying Vance would frame a compelling story in a general election (not that I admire him, not that I agree with him) is enough to make someone hit “ignore” and start throwing insults.

We’re not going to beat guys like Vance by pretending voters don’t respond to narrative, identity, and emotional resonance. He does have a compelling backstory, and he knows how to use it. That’s not me endorsing him. That’s me saying Democrats need to understand the terrain if they want to win on it.

If pointing that out makes you spiral, maybe the real problem isn’t my take, brother. Maybe it’s how little interest there is in actually thinking critically about political messaging on our side. That’s how we keep getting blindsided in November.

 

[dukeman92]

Nobody authored that ticket because of JD fucking Vance. Give me a break.

 

[Kingpin]

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.

You mean like Ronald Regan?

 

[superrific]

You’re not actually responding to what I said. You’re reacting to what you want me to have said because it’s easier to dunk on a straw man than engage with the substance.

I'm reacting to your mockery of Gavin Newsom as talking about green energy credits. Here's a rule that I follow and you should too: stop attacking Democrats. Here are a couple of ways of discussing the issue:

1. I'm not sure Gavin's image will play well among blue collar voters, and nominating him would be doubling down on the strategy that didn't work in 24.

See, that's respectful. I might even agree with that take. Personally, I'm not interested in thinking about a Dem candidate for at least a couple of years, but this take is non-ridiculous.

2. But you went with "Vance would be hammering that contrast while Newsom is talking about green energy grants and metrics." That the GFY part. If you hate Trump, then you absolutely cannot trash other Dems. Because one of them might end up as the nominee, and meanwhile you and your leftist friends will have created a paper record of problems with him. This is exactly how Bernie lost us the election in 2016. Comey's October surprise shouldn't have been important, and probably wouldn't have moved the needle but for Bernie's six months of attacking HRC as corrupt.

 

[Paine]

You mean like Ronald Regan?

Sure, Reagan was polished. But he also knew how to tell a story that felt personal, even mythic, to millions of Americans. He offered a narrative about struggle, hope, and patriotism that tapped into people’s emotions, not just their policy preferences. You don’t have to admire the guy to acknowledge that he connected.

Reagan’s genius wasn’t in the policies themselves, it was in how he marketed them. He took brutal austerity, union-busting, and upward wealth transfer and wrapped them in the warm glow of patriotism, family, faith, and “morning in America.” He emoted optimism while gutting the very economic foundations of middle- and working-class life.

That’s the concern with Newsom. He’s got polish, but he doesn’t project any lived struggle or emotional depth that resonates with working-class or disaffected voters. Vance, for all his faults, knows how to lean into that populist register. In a contest of emotional contrast, Newsom risks looking like the out-of-touch elite. Quite an accomplishment against Vance.

 

[superrific]

If pointing that out makes you spiral, maybe the real problem isn’t my take, brother. Maybe it’s how little interest there is in actually thinking critically about political messaging on our side. That’s how we keep getting blindsided in November.

Dude. I can't speak for Centerpiece, but he and I are not political twins. We're both liberals. We don't agree on everything. But you've managed to piss us both off. There are plenty of other posters here also taking you to the woodshed. The real problem is how you express yourself.

What you don't seem to grasp is the degree that your posts are personally insulting. Like most leftists, you are most comfortable with the language of intentionality. This is why I say you have no theory of disagreement (which you then confirmed). People who disagree with you are corrupt, or duplicitous, or the many other labels that get attached simply because we are not Marxists. You even offhandedly comment that your theory of disagreement is class consciousness. Since you clearly see yourself as salt of the earth, the obvious implication is that our views are bourgeois. That's insulting, and it's inaccurate. There are a lot of people on this board who have been fighting the GOP for twice as long as you've been alive, son.

Zoo View has talked about his experiences working for . . . Jim Hunt's campaign against Jesse Helms. That was 1984. What have you done?

I get it: you're 25 or 27 or whatever. Your resume isn't going to be as stacked as old timers. But damn, dude, show a little respect and stop accusing everyone of being sellouts.

 

[Paine]

I'm reacting to your mockery of Gavin Newsom as talking about green energy credits. Here's a rule that I follow and you should too: stop attacking Democrats. Here are a couple of ways of discussing the issue:

1. I'm not sure Gavin's image will play well among blue collar voters, and nominating him would be doubling down on the strategy that didn't work in 24.

See, that's respectful. I might even agree with that take. Personally, I'm not interested in thinking about a Dem candidate for at least a couple of years, but this take is non-ridiculous.

2. But you went with "Vance would be hammering that contrast while Newsom is talking about green energy grants and metrics." That the GFY part. If you hate Trump, then you absolutely cannot trash other Dems. Because one of them might end up as the nominee, and meanwhile you and your leftist friends will have created a paper record of problems with him. This is exactly how Bernie lost us the election in 2016. Comey's October surprise shouldn't have been important, and probably wouldn't have moved the needle but for Bernie's six months of attacking HRC as corrupt.

I’m all for respectful debate, but it’s rich to get lectured about tone from someone who told me to go fuck myself twice in the last 24 hours.

My point about Newsom’s “green energy credits” isn’t mockery. It’s a concise way to highlight how out of touch his messaging can feel to many voters craving authenticity.

I get that attacking Democrats carelessly can backfire, but honest critique isn’t the same as self-sabotage. Calling out weaknesses isn’t rooting against the party, it’s pushing for candidates who can genuinely connect and win.

If we can’t have these conversations, how do we expect to improve? Quietly backing the polished, status-quo candidates without question is how we keep repeating the same mistakes.

It’s also odd to act like me discussing these issues on a liberal message board is going to somehow sabotage Newsom’s chances in 2028. If anything, honest conversations help sharpen our understanding of what voters actually want.

 

[Paine]

Dude. I can't speak for Centerpiece, but he and I are not political twins. We're both liberals. We don't agree on everything. But you've managed to piss us both off. There are plenty of other posters here also taking you to the woodshed. The real problem is how you express yourself.

What you don't seem to grasp is the degree that your posts are personally insulting. Like most leftists, you are most comfortable with the language of intentionality. This is why I say you have no theory of disagreement (which you then confirmed). People who disagree with you are corrupt, or duplicitous, or the many other labels that get attached simply because we are not Marxists. You even offhandedly comment that your theory of disagreement is class consciousness. Since you clearly see yourself as salt of the earth, the obvious implication is that our views are bourgeois. That's insulting, and it's inaccurate. There are a lot of people on this board who have been fighting the GOP for twice as long as you've been alive, son.

Zoo View has talked about his experiences working for . . . Jim Hunt's campaign against Jesse Helms. That was 1984. What have you done?

I get it: you're 25 or 27 or whatever. Your resume isn't going to be as stacked as old timers. But damn, dude, show a little respect and stop accusing everyone of being sellouts.

Respect is a two-way street, and I’m always open to it.

The issue here is that you assume my critique means I think anyone here is corrupt or a sellout. Pointing out political disagreements and systemic problems isn’t the same as personal attacks. You can disagree with someone’s views without calling them a fraud or worse.

I don’t see class consciousness as a weapon to dismiss others but as a tool to understand power dynamics and why we keep hitting walls politically. That doesn’t mean everyone here is bourgeois or lacking commitment. Plenty of folks on this board have fought hard for decades, and I respect that. Weird how plenty of other posters besides you seem to understand that perfectly well.

As for what I’ve done, I’m not here to compare resumes. I’m here to push ideas and have real conversations about strategy and messaging. Age or experience shouldn’t be the sole measure of contribution.

I want this board to be a place where we can debate fiercely but respectfully, without resorting to assumptions about character or personal attacks. That benefits all of us.

If I’ve sometimes come across harshly, I’ll reflect on that, but I won’t apologize for pushing hard on the ideas that matter.

 

[TarSpiel]

The California connection is a major hurdle for a national candidate.

That's the success of weaponized right wing propaganda.

The fact is, California has one of the largest economies in the world, and contributes enough money to the federal budget to underwrite the food stamps and Medicare care for much of "real America"

Not saying Cali isn't a hurdle for a national candidate, just that the fact that it *is* a hurdle is testament to how much pubs fear it.

 

[superrific]

Respect is a two-way street, and I’m always open to it.

The issue here is that you assume my critique means I think anyone here is corrupt or a sellout. Pointing out political disagreements and systemic problems isn’t the same as personal attacks. You can disagree with someone’s views without calling them a fraud or worse.

Well, you might want to look around you. I'm not the only one reacting in this way.

The problem isn't that you're disagreeing. It's that you're caricaturing. Saying Newsom would be talking about energy credits is not a concise way to do anything except mock. If you want to say Gavin will come across as out of touch, then say that. You don't have to create a bullshit straw man to knock down.

To be concrete: I have absolutely no problem with this statement of yours: "That’s the concern with Newsom. He’s got polish, but he doesn’t project any lived struggle or emotional depth that resonates with working-class or disaffected voters."

That's a fair critique. Notice that what you're saying here is tightly focused on Newsom's image, one that he chooses to project himself. I'm not sure that projecting lived struggle is actually all that important (and again, your guy Beshear has no more of that quality than Gavin), but that's an opinion. That's worth talking about.

Another way of putting the point is: can you imagine a hundred thousand screaming European fanboys showing out for a visit from Gavin Newsom as they did for Barack Obama? I can't. And while those are Europeans and not directly relevant, there's obviously a difference in relatability between those two candidates, and surely that was a big part of Barack's success.

But you were spending hours yesterday trying to lecture me about corporate finance. How do you think I should respond? It's not that I don't understand your point. I do. As you have surely seen, I'm not some frat boy turned corporate lawyer. I have a depth of experience in the same theory you do -- come on, do you think I don't understand historical materialism? The problem here is that your point is wrong, at least in the way you apply it. Actually, it's not even totally wrong, but you chose to fight over the part that is. Then, when it was explained to you by someone who actually knows the field, you kept coming back with this class consciousness bullshit. Equity finance is not some bourgeois capitalist plot. It existed long before capitalism. One crucial competitive advantage of Flanders and Venice in the early Renaissance was their liberal incorporation law. It made trading possible in a way that it was not elsewhere.

 

[Mundial]

A stupid, tone-deaf opportunistic launch of a presidential campaign.

He absolutely crushed Trump, SecDef, was the most cogent and compelling political speaker since at least this last election cycle, came across as logical, lucid, sane, Presidential and a patriotic American. He almost sounded like a founding father. That he could accomplish such things in response to this administration’s latest antics shows just how far our government has fallen.

You can tell yourself it was tone deaf but I think you are dead wrong. The response has been overwhelmingly positive.

I think Trump is playing with fire.

 

[hedge]

Your hatred of Newsom seems to be emotional and not logical.

I think this is true by definition...