Gavin Newsom is making waves with his exploration of a presidential run in 2028. During a recent CBS Sunday Morning interview, he stated bluntly, “I’d be lying otherwise.” This clear affirmation of ambition places him at the forefront of a reshaping Democratic landscape as potential successors to President Biden emerge.
Responses to Newsom’s announcement have been sharp, particularly from Republican commentators who see his ascent as emblematic of what they view as radical West Coast politics. A recent tweet underscored this perspective, emphasizing a rival candidate—Senator JD Vance of Ohio—whose working-class background could resonate more with rural voters. Vance has successfully built a strong rapport with these communities, contrasting sharply with Newsom’s coastal identity.
In pursuit of the presidency, Newsom appears to be laying groundwork through extensive travels to key states like South Carolina and Georgia. His efforts include engaging with party officials and donors while launching a podcast that aims to reach across the political aisle. This strategic outreach emphasizes his role as a fierce opponent of Donald Trump. Newsom did not hold back, describing Trump as an “invasive species” that threatens foundational truths and institutions. His words signal a dual objective: to challenge Trump while simultaneously carving out a new identity for the future Democratic Party, especially as Kamala Harris also indicates interest in running.
The 2026 midterms serve as a pivotal moment for both Newsom and Harris, who may find themselves contesting in a two-horse race for leadership. As Newsom points out, “I’m looking forward to who presents themselves in 2028, and who meets that moment.” For both candidates, the upcoming election could springboard their national ambitions.
Central to Newsom’s rising profile is his support for Proposition 50, which seeks to redraw congressional district lines to benefit the Democratic Party in California. This initiative frames his narrative as part of a broader defense of democracy against what Democrats characterize as gerrymandering in red states. “If you don’t have that why, you’re doing it for the wrong reasons,” he remarked, highlighting the necessity of a principled approach in politics. However, even within his party, figures like former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger criticize it as a power grab, raising questions about its viability.
The challenge for Newsom is considerable. California is often perceived—fairly or not—as a bastion of leftist excess, which could hinder his appeal outside the coasts. Voter sentiment in battleground states indicates a distrust of candidates associated with elite urban areas. Past elections revealed how Trump made inroads in regions traditionally aligned with Democrats, tapping into economic and cultural concerns that supersede identity politics.
In this context, JD Vance stands out as a competitor with a very different demographic appeal. An author and Marine veteran, Vance represents Ohio and has gained traction by focusing on jobs and trade issues. Recent polls show his popularity among Republican voters has grown substantially, positioning him as a formidable candidate.
While Newsom’s political acumen lies in his sharp rhetoric and media strategy, Vance’s appeal derives from his plainspoken, relatable approach. Vance speaks directly to the issues affecting manufacturing towns and rural communities, counterbalancing the more cultivated image Newsom projects.
Democrats argue that Newsom’s confrontational style is necessary to counter the resurgent nationalist movements within the party. He champions aggressive policies on access to abortion and gun rights, initiatives that motivate the left but risk alienating moderate voters. In an effort to reach those disillusioned by traditional narratives, Newsom has ventured into conservative media, appeared on Fox News, and engaged with a diverse array of voices on his podcast.
Nevertheless, California grapples with significant domestic challenges, including high homelessness rates and a looming budget deficit projected at $73 billion. Such issues threaten to undermine the polished image Newsom seeks to present. The increasing crime rates and drug-related fatalities in cities like San Francisco are also obstacles that might weaken his narrative of effective governance.
Meanwhile, Harris is unlikely to take Newsom’s entry lightly. As both politicians share similar political roots, her team may interpret his ambitions as dampening her chances in the 2028 race. The Democratic Party anticipates a prolonged and contentious primary that could lay bare existing divisions among moderates and progressives. Sources suggest that Newsom and Harris’s relationship has cooled, raising questions about the dynamics of their potential competition.
The complexities of this political landscape lead experts to determine that Newsom is undertaking a high-stakes gamble. As UC San Diego political science professor Thad Kousser noted, “He’s juggling California’s problems, Prop. 50’s partisan implications, and the optics of taking on Trump and Harris at the same time.” The outcome could either elevate or devastate his ambitions.
As Republicans refine their message, candidates like Vance continue to cement their appeal in regions that challenge Democratic strongholds. If the 2028 election pits a polished California progressive against a working-class Republican, voters might be faced with a defining contrast. One Republican strategist captured this sentiment aptly: “It’s Trumpism with new packaging versus the same coastal pitch that’s lost working-class men for 20 years.”
Ultimately, whether Newsom can navigate the arduous path to the presidency remains uncertain. The political theater is already beginning to unfold, with both promise and peril on the horizon.
"*" indicates required fields
