Newsom searches for what went wrong for Democrats
Usually, I'm the one asking the questions.
But last week I flew out to California to appear on Gov. Gavin Newsom's podcast to talk about 'FIGHT,' the new book I co-authored about the 2024 presidential election. And this time it was the governor turning the tables and asking me and my co-author Jon Allen of NBC News about how to make sense of the last presidential race.
'My next guests, they understand it better than anyone,' Newsom said about us in the intro to our episode.
It's clear that Newsom is one of the people trying to figure out what went wrong for Democrats so he can try to make it right.
The governor's name is often bandied about as one of the top Democratic presidential contenders, and he is clearly testing the waters on where Democrats should be and how they can win back the presidency.
He's also doing something many Democrats are refusing to do right now: He's having conversations with unlikely guests. Among them: Steve Bannon, the longtime Trump adviser, and Charlie Kirk, the conservative activist.
Newsom seems to think the Democratic Party needs to stop having conversations with itself and do a better job listening to the other side, based on his remarks during our podcast and an interview with The Hill. He spent some time talking about how he knows what appeals to swing state voters because people often forget that California has agricultural jobs too.
Newsom likes that Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) are doing big, energetic rallies. But he also says there needs to be more.
'And … not or,' he told me last week, meaning both the rallies to the base and more are needed.
It's similar to the approach Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, another top 2028 contender, appears to be taking after not one but two appearances alongside President Trump in recent weeks.
First there was the infamous Oval Office visit where Whitmer tried to hide the fact that she was actually there by seemingly covering her face with a folder. But after she appeared with Trump at an event in Michigan on Tuesday, it appeared to be more intentional.
'My job is to do the right thing for the people of Michigan,' Whitmer told The Associated Press after her appearance with Trump on Tuesday. 'I'm not thinking about anything beyond that, and I know it's hard for people to get their head around [it].'
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker is at odds with that line of thinking. Earlier this week, he slammed the 'do nothing' Democrats — seemingly taking issue with his counterparts in Michigan and California.
Pritzker, who up until this point hasn't been part of the fiery resistance movement, said it was 'time to fight everywhere and all at once.'
'Never before in my life have I called for mass protests, for mobilization, for disruption. But I am now.'
'These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace,' he declared. 'The reckoning is finally here.'
It's clear that none of the governors are confident about their 'lanes' at the moment: Should Democrats be simply energizing their base by taking on Trump and Republicans? Is it too similar to what they did in 2017, during their first resistance run? Or should they be listening to the voices on the other side?
In an interview with The Hill last week, Newsom acknowledged that he was testing those questions with his podcast by inviting on a wide range of guests.
'At the same time, I'm being tested by it, because the reaction has been a little more bumpy than I even anticipated,' he said.
On his podcast, Newsom likened my co-author and I to political psychologists: 'You know more about us than we know about ourselves,' he said.
But he also acknowledged coming to his own conclusions.
'What are the lessons learned?' he asked us. 'The Democratic Party … right now, I've had strong opinions about where I think our party is right now in terms of just truth and trust, and the sense that we weren't being truthful.'
'There's a perception that we were gaslighting the American people,' he added. 'They don't trust us on issues and policies and the ability to deliver.'
2024 Election Coverage
In the final seconds of the podcast, I got to turn the tables and ask him what lessons he took away from the election.
'I think the lesson is we need to have frank and honest conversations, and there's no space for that,' he said. 'And so I have a tactical point. This is the space. This is the place.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
28 minutes ago
- Newsweek
LA's Only Elected Republican Reacts to National Guard Troops, ICE Raids
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The only elected Republican in Los Angeles, Kathryn Barger, warned that there must be close coordination between federal, state, and local agencies if President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to quell the city's riots is to work. Her warning, in an email to Newsweek, comes as Trump clashes with California Gov. Gavin Newsom and LA Mayor Karen Bass, both Democrats, over his deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines. Newsom and Bass oppose the moves, accusing the Republican president of fueling the disorder. Barger, a Los Angeles County Supervisor, is the sole Republican elected to office at the local government level in the LA area. There are no other Republicans on the LA County Board of Supervisors, and none at all elected to the LA City Council. She also called for "transparency, accountability, and respect" from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as it conducts raids across LA, operations that sparked the unrest. Protests in the city against raids by ICE over the weekend have descended into riots and looting. The raids are part of the Trump Administration's effort to deport all illegal immigrants from the U.S., with an emphasis on violent criminals. Newsom and Bass said state and local authorities can handle the situation without National Guard troops. But Trump says he is reestablishing law and order after failures by local and state leadership. "The deployment of National Guard troops is a significant action that must be approached with great care and coordination," Barger told Newsweek. "While I understand the urgency that may prompt federal involvement, I believe any such deployment must be done in close partnership with state and local agencies to ensure the safety and well-being of our communities. "Effective use of this powerful resource depends on clear communication, mutual goals, and a unified command structure. "My focus remains on making sure that all efforts—federal, state, and local—are aligned to deliver real support where it's needed most." This picture taken on June 8, 2025 shows a protestor raising their fist while holding a Mexican flag in front of a Waymo vehicle that was set on fire during a demonstration following federal immigration... This picture taken on June 8, 2025 shows a protestor raising their fist while holding a Mexican flag in front of a Waymo vehicle that was set on fire during a demonstration following federal immigration operations in Los Angeles. More BLAKE FAGAN/AFP via Getty Image Barger also urged ICE to minimize "fear and disruption among law-abiding residents." "Immigration enforcement is a deeply complex and sensitive issue, especially in a diverse region like Los Angeles County," Barger told Newsweek. "Federal agencies like ICE are tasked with upholding the law and I believe it's critical that their operations are conducted with transparency, accountability, and respect for the communities they affect. "My priority is ensuring that all enforcement actions are carried out in a way that upholds public safety while minimizing fear and disruption among law-abiding residents. "Local and federal agencies must work together thoughtfully to maintain trust, protect civil liberties, and ensure due process is respected at every level." This is a developing article. Updates to follow.
Associated Press
34 minutes ago
- Associated Press
What to know about South Korea's approval of new probes into ousted leader Yoon
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — Just a week into his term in office, South Korea's new liberal President Lee Jae-myung moved against his ousted conservative predecessor, approving legislation to launch sweeping special investigations into Yoon Suk Yeol's ill-fated imposition of martial law in December as well as criminal allegations surrounding his wife and administration. The monthslong probes, which will involve hundreds of investigators under special prosecutors appointed by Lee, could dominate his early agenda and inflame tensions with conservatives, as Yoon already faces an explosive rebellion trial carrying a possible death sentence. Here's a look at the bills approved at Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, which Lee is expected to sign into law soon. What the investigations are about The three bills, overwhelmingly passed last week by the liberal-led legislature, call for independent investigations into Yoon's hourslong martial law debacle; corruption and financial crime allegations against his wife; and the 2023 drowning death of a marine during a flood rescue operation, an incident Lee's Democratic Party says Yoon's government tried to cover up. Earlier versions of the bills were rejected nine different times both by Yoon and by the caretaker government that took over following his impeachment on Dec. 14. Lee, who won last week's snap election triggered by Yoon's formal removal from office in April, ran on a platform of unity, promising not to target conservatives out of spite and vowing to ease political polarization. However, Lee called for deeper investigations into Yoon's martial law enactment and allegations involving his wife, citing public demands for accountability. For each of the three investigations, Lee will appoint a special prosecutor from two candidates nominated by his Democratic Party and a smaller liberal ally. The main conservative People Power Party, whose members largely boycotted last week's National Assembly votes, denounced the laws for excluding them from the nomination process. Liberal lawmakers justified the move, citing the conservatives' alleged ties to matters that will be investigated. More than 570 investigators, including some 120 public prosecutors, can be assigned to assist with the inquiries. The special prosecutors are expected to be nominated and appointed in coming weeks, potentially allowing the investigations to begin as early as July. Kang Yu-jung, Lee's spokesperson, said the Cabinet's approval of the bills reflects public demands to 'seek accountability for the rebellion attempt and restore constitutional order.' 'It also carries the meaning of recovering the National Assembly's legislative authority, which had been repeatedly blocked by presidential vetoes,' she said. Why the investigations can be explosive Public prosecutors in Seoul already indicted Yoon in January on charges of masterminding a rebellion and enacting martial law as an illegal bid to seize the legislature and election offices and arrest political opponents. Liberals insisted independent investigations into Yoon are still essential, saying probes by prosecutors, police and an anti-corruption agency were inadequate and hampered by Yoon's refusal to cooperate. Yoon's case will now likely be transferred to the special prosecutor, who will be authorized to expand the existing investigation, including whether he and senior military leaders deliberately sought to provoke North Korea in order to create a crisis that could justify declaring martial law at home. Yoon's martial law decree on Dec. 3, which lasted only hours after a quorum of lawmakers pushed past a blockade of hundreds of heavily armed soldiers to revoke it, came amid heightened inter-Korean tensions, marked by monthslong North Korean flights of trash-laden balloons and South Korean loudspeaker broadcasts at the border. The special prosecutor could also expand the investigation to include PPP lawmakers over suspicions that party leaders tried to obstruct the vote to lift Yoon's martial law, by directing lawmakers to attend an emergency party meeting, instead of the main chamber session. This is almost certain to provoke a fierce reaction from conservatives, already in disarray after Yoon's self-inflicted political downfall. Yoon's wife, Kim Keon Hee, faces multiple corruption allegations, including claims that she received luxury items from a Unification Church official seeking business favors, as well as possible involvement in a stock price manipulation scheme. Kim is also suspected of interfering with PPP candidate nominations ahead of legislative elections in April last year, but has yet to be summoned by law enforcement authorities. While in office, Yoon repeatedly dismissed calls to investigate his wife, denouncing them as baseless political attacks. What's happening with Lee's own legal troubles PPP leaders accuse Lee's government of using its legislative majority to target conservatives – and also shield the presidency from Lee's own legal troubles. Lee faced five separate trials on corruption and other charges, but in three cases where hearings had begun, the courts postponed proceedings until after the election. While South Korea's constitution prevents a sitting president from being prosecuted for most crimes aside from rebellion and treason, it does not clearly state whether that protection extends to criminal charges filed before taking office, leaving room for judicial interpretation. The Democrats, who hold 170 of the 300 National Assembly seats, are pushing to revise the criminal procedure law to suspend all ongoing criminal trials involving a sitting president until the end of their terms – a move PPP leader Kim Yong-tae called a 'distorted' attempt to 'bulletproof' Lee's presidency. 'Becoming president does not erase (Lee's) crimes. Suspending trials do not make the crimes disappear,' Kim said Tuesday, calling for the Democrats to scrap the bill. 'This would be a declaration that power would stand above the law.' Two different courts this week handling Lee's cases — on allegations of violating election laws and granting illicit favors to private investors during dubious development projects while he was mayor of Seongnam — decided to suspend the trials indefinitely, citing their interpretations of the constitution.
34 minutes ago
Hegseth to testify on Capitol Hill as House Dem calls Marine deployment to LA ‘outrageous'
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is expected to testify before a House panel on Tuesday, his first time on Capitol Hill since being sworn in five months ago and as questions swirl about the deployment of troops to Los Angeles as part of an immigration crackdown. Hegseth planned to appear before the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee alongside Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, and acting Pentagon Comptroller Bryn Woollacott MacDonnell to discuss the administration's upcoming 2026 budget request. During the hearing, Hegseth is widely expected to dodge many of the specifics on the military's spending blueprint, which has not been released, and instead highlight recent gains in recruiting numbers and new technology initiatives in the Army. But overshadowing much of his testimony will be the Pentagon's decision to send some 4,800 troops, including 700 Marines, to Los Angeles following several days of clashes between protesters and law enforcement there. The troops, known as Task Force 51, are being called under a law known as Title 10, which allows the president to send military forces to protect federal property and personnel. Gen. Eric Smith, commandant of the Marine Corps, is scheduled to testify separately Tuesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee. On the eve of Hegseth's testimony, Rep. Betty McCollum on Minnesota, the top Democrat on the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, accused President Donald Trump of deliberately escalating the situation in Los Angeles by pushing for military reinforcements not requested by California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. She called decision to send Marines in particular " outrageous." "The active duty military has absolutely no legal role in domestic law enforcement. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth should read the Constitution and follow the law," she said. The Pentagon has not had a news conference since the deployment of troops to Los Angeles, referring reporters with questions about the mission to Hegseth's posts on X. On X, Hegseth said the troops were needed to protect federal immigration officers and detention buildings. "There is plenty of room for peaceful protest, but ZERO tolerance for attacking federal agents who are doing their job. The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE," Hegseth said in a statement. U.S. officials said the troops would carry guns and ammunition separately for use only in self-defense and to protect federal property. They would not patrol the streets or help law enforcement arrest protesters, the officials said. Unclear is whether Trump is preparing to invoke the Insurrection Act, an 1807 law that says the president can call on a militia or the U.S. armed forces if there's been "any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy" in a state that "opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws." On his Truth Social platform on Sunday, Trump referred to the L.A. protesters as "violent, insurrectionist mobs" and "paid insurrectionists." When asked if Hegseth had spoken with Trump on Monday, Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson told ABC News, "the Secretary is in regular contact with the President regarding the National Guard presence in Los Angeles." Following his testimony, Hegseth is expected to travel with the president to Fort Bragg in North Carolina on Tuesday to participate in activities tied to the Army's 250th birthday celebration. Under Hegseth, the military has taken over control of hundreds of miles along the U.S. southern border with Mexico in an effort to tamp down unauthorized entry by migrants. He's also eliminated programs aimed at increasing diversity among military personnel, slashed the number of general officers and initiated efforts to build a $175 billion U.S. missile defense shield. At the same time, Hegseth also faces reports of dysfunction and infighting among his personal staff at the Pentagon. Since his Jan. 25 swearing in, Hegseth has fired or sidelined several of his own top political advisers and he's gone without a chief of staff since April. Tuesday's hearing also would be Hegseth's first appearance since revelations that he relied on a commercial messaging app known as Signal to relay details about a pending military attack to other high-ranking officials and others, including his wife. Hegseth's use of Signal is now under internal investigation by the Defense Department's inspector general.
