Is Newsom’s 2028 Democratic lead or a flash in the pan?

The 2028 presidential election is more than 1,000 days away, but you’d hardly know it from all the guesswork and speculation flowing from Sacramento to the Washington beltway.

Standing at the center of attention is California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is fresh off his major victory over Proposition 50, the ballot measure that gerrymandered the state’s congressional map to boost Democrats and prevent a power grab by Texas Republicans.

Newsom is running for the White House, and has been for the better part of a year, though he won’t say it out loud. Is Newsom the Democratic front-runner or just a flash in the pan?

Times columnists Anita Chhabria and Mark Z. Barabuck disagree on Newsom’s presidential prospects and others. Here the two iron out some of their differences.

Barbuck: So is the presidential race over, Anita? Should I spend the next few years backpacking and snowboarding in the Sierras and return in January 2029 to watch Newsom repeat, see the moment, and willingly be sworn in as our nation’s 48th president?

Chabria: You should spend as much time in the Sierra as possible, but I don’t know if Newsom will be elected president in 2028. That’s about a million light years away in political terms. But I think he has a shot, and is the frontrunner for the nomination right now. He has established himself as a quick punch foil for President Trump, and increasingly as the leader of the Democratic Party. Last week, he traveled to Brazil for a climate summit that angered Trump, with Newsom building an American presence.

And in a recent (albeit small) poll, in a hypothetical race against JD Vance, the incumbent Republican favorite, Newsom leads by three points. However, unexpectedly, respondents still chose Kamala Harris as their choice for the nomination.

For me, it shows that he is popular all over the country. But you’ve warned that California is having a hard time turning out voters in other states. Do you think his Golden State roots will erode his competitive status?

Barbuck: I don’t make any predictions. I’m smart enough to know that I’m not smart enough to know. And, after 2016 and Trump’s election, the words “can’t,” “no,” “won’t,” and “never” remain in my political vocabulary.

That said, I’d bet more than a penny — which is worth something in the end, since they’re phased out of our currency — on Newsome’s prospects.

Look, I’m not giving up on anyone in California love. (And I’ve got the Golden State tats to prove it.) But I do care about how the rest of the country sees the state and the politicians who have a California comeback address. You can be sure that whoever runs against Newsom — and I’m talking about his fellow Democrats, not just Republicans — will have a lot to say about housing, food and gas prices that are higher than anywhere else in the state, and our embarrassing rates of poverty and homelessness.

Not a great idea for Newsom, especially when affordability is all the political rage these days.

And while I understand the governor’s plea – fight back! War! War! – I compare it to the temporary fancy that made the prosecutor for a time, the convicted slander and the rhetorical insult Ram Michael Avanti seriously debated as a candidate for the presidency of the Republic. At a certain point — and we’re still years away — people will judge candidates by their heads, not their viscera.

When it comes to voting, ask Edmund Muskie, Gary Hart or Hillary Clinton how important those votes are in the first round of the presidential race. Well, you can’t ask Muskie, because the former Maine senator is dead. But all three were the first front-runners to fail to win the Democratic nomination.

Chabria: I’m not arguing a historical case against Golden State, but I would argue that these are different days. People don’t vote by head. Fight me in it.

They vote for charisma, clan, and maybe some hope and fear. They vote on issues as social media interprets them. They vote for memes.

There is no truth to our future president being judged rationally on their record – our current president is a criminal and that doesn’t make a difference.

But I think, as we talked about the provocation, that democracy is in danger. Trump has threatened to run for a third term and recently lamented that his cabinet does not show him the same kind of awe that Chinese President Xi Jinping receives from his top advisers. And Vince, if he gets the chance to escape, has made it clear that he is a Christian nationalist who wants to deport almost any immigrant he can catch, legal or not.

Being California may not be the flaw it historically was, especially if Trump’s authoritarianism continues and the state remains a symbol of resistance.

But our governor has an immediate case to contend with. His former boss, Dana Williamson, was just indicted on federal corruption charges. Do you think it hurts?

Barbuck: It shouldn’t be.

There is no evidence of wrongdoing on Newsome’s part. His opponents will try a crime by association. Some already have. But unless something is harmed, there is no reason the governor should be punished for alleged wrongdoing in the case of Williamson or others.

But let’s go back to 2028 and the presidential race. I think one of our fundamental differences is that I believe in people does The candidate’s ideas and records are highly evaluated. Not in the round way, or the way some political scientists might. But voters want to know how a candidate can materially improve their lives.

Of course, there are a large number who reflexively support Donald Trump, or Donald Duck for that matter, if he is the Republican nominee. The same goes for Democrats who will vote for Gavin Newsom or Gavin Floyd, if there is a party nominee. (While Newsome played baseball in college, Floyd spent 13 seasons in the major leagues, giving him the advantage over Governor.)

But I’m talking about the voters who are up for grabs – the ones who decide the race – who make the most rational decisions based on their lives and livelihoods and which candidate they believe will benefit them the most.

Granted, the dynamic is a bit different in early competition. But still, we’ve seen the whole dating/married phenomenon time and again. Like in 2004, when many Democrats “dated” Howard Dean at the start of the primary season but “married” John Kerry. I see electoral merit — as in the assumption that Democrats can win the general election — as merit is there when it comes time for primary voters to make their 2028 picks.

Chabria: Affordability will no doubt be a major issue, especially if consumer confidence declines. And we’re sure to hear criticisms of California, many of which are fair, as you point out. Housing costs are high, leaving the homeless.

But it’s also a problem across the United States, and one that requires deeper reform than even this economically powerful state. More than the past record, the future perspective is important. what is the plan

It can’t be vague tax credits or even student loan forgiveness. We need a solid vision for an economy that brings not only more basics like housing, but the kind of long-term economic stability — higher wages, better schools, living wage jobs — that make the middle class stronger and more attainable.

A Democrat who can deliver that vision while simultaneously fighting the authoritarian roots that are currently eating away at our democracy, in my humble opinion, will be the one voters choose, regardless of the real story. However, it was a message of change with hope that gave us President Obama, another candidate who many initially considered a long shot.

Mark, are there any 2028 prospects you’re keeping a particularly close eye on?

Barbuck: I’m taking things one election at a time, starting with the 2026 midterms, which include the open seat race for governor here in California. The results in November 2026 will go a long way towards shaping the dynamic in November 2028. There’s no shortage of Democrats eyeing the race — too many to list, he said. Will that number exceed the 29 major Democrats won in 2020? We will see.

I agree with you that to stand any chance of winning in 2028, whoever the Democrats run for the nomination needs to come up with some serious and tangible ideas about how to materially improve people’s lives. Decayed democracies and terrifying tyranny on the other hand, that is even now Economics, stupid.

Which brings us full circle, back to our bravery. He may win fans and his national fundraisers with his dog memes and zippy Trump putdowns. But even if he gets past the anti-Californian prejudice among many voters outside our blessed state, he won’t make it to the White House.

I would bet more than a penny on it.