I’m open to the idea behind Gavin Newsom’s new podcast, where the governor of California has been exploding his political bubble, having detailed conversations with right-wing media stars like Charlie Kirk and Steve Bannon. Democrats need to better talk to people who don’t share assumptions and have long-term conversations that require improvisation and spontaneity. They need to be willing to take risks and use conflict to get people’s attention.
Newsom himself debated Ron DeSantis on Fox News in 2023, attracting nearly 5 million live audiences, plus 700,000 times. Trying to use Kirk and Bannon’s infamy to attract new audiences could be an interesting experiment.
Instead, it was a long-term practice for news magazines and any liberals who decided to listen to him. That’s because the Governor is usually less interested in argument than in common without the honest beliefs of people recently. He made the wild right claim unchallenged and repeatedly recognized the Republican venue. When Bannon described the reconstruction movement after his claim to have been stolen 2020 election, Newsom’s answer was: “Well, I thank the concept of the agent.”
It may be a manifestation of intellectual confidence in Newsom, which proves to be a derogatory submission.
Listening to the first three episodes of the podcast, “This is Gavin Newsom,” I feel that News magazine has learned the wrong lessons from Donald Trump’s 2024 election. Indeed, part of what Trump won was because he was able to call on increasingly alienated young people on the right through podcasts and new media. As Newsom told Kirk, the governor’s own 13-year-old son is one of his fans. “We are getting in trouble,” Newsom said.
But despite the fact that Democrats can learn to build alternative media channels from Kirk and Bannon, there is nothing to be gained by likable or seeking mutual understanding.
Newsom asked Kirk to describe his professional trajectory when he spoke to him in the podcast’s first-time episode. Kirk’s story contains some important omissions. Yes, Kirk was shocked to some extent by charging to the left-leaning university campus and challenging opponents to debate, and they felt excluded by their progressive companions. But it is misleading to present the U.S. turning point in introducing the “final start-up” of his young conservative organization.
As a teenager, Kirk was directed by Tea Party activist Bill Montgomery, who described himself as the co-founder of Turning Point, a group that received seed funding from evangelical Megadonor Foster Friess. Obviously Kirk’s way of selling is obviously a real listener, but he wouldn’t be a political power without the wealthy and influential figures fostering him for many years.
That’s it Lessons from the Democratic Party. Their donors should make long-term investments in their influencers, and Democratic politicians should help them grow their audience by appearing on the platform. Somehow, this is something the Democrats have never fully learned.
More than two decades ago, Democratic strategist Rob Stein summed up an influential PowerPoint presentation called the “monetary matrix of conservative message machines” and elaborated on how right-wing donors support interlocking networks of thought tanks, policy agencies, non-profits, non-profits and media businesses. But while Democratic donors sometimes try to build similar infrastructure on the left, they tend to be more fickle and less willing to cultivate and maintain a pipeline of young talents.
Media like Air America and ThinkProgress, helped launch careers of liberal disadvantages – including Rachel Maddow – were allowed to wither and die, and then Democrats wondered where all the young voices were. Instead of trying to get to know himself with Kirk, Newsom might try to elevate the progressives who could one day compete with him.
In particular, it is recommended that the news magazine launch his hub for trans women in conversations with Kirk, who once described trans people as “disgusting, mentally ill, neurotic, neurotic, predatory geeks.” As far as political expediency or simple honesty is concerned, Democrats should be able to admit that it is unfair to expect elite female athletes to compete with trans women who experience male adolescence. But at a time when the Trump administration beats trans people to persecution, Democrats need to defend their recognition of physical differences with broader trans rights.
Instead, Newsom emphasized his and Kirk’s agreement. “The fairness question is totally legal,” he said. “So I’m totally consistent with you. We have to have it.”
If the governor knew what Kirk said to trans people, he should have called him up there. If it weren’t for him, maybe it was because he was ready to prepare for work with the instigator, and Newsom already had a full-time job.
Future “This Is Gavin News” guests will include liberals; an episode with Tim Walz has been recorded. But I suspect that by starting his performance the way he did, Newsom continued to damage his position among the Democrats, who desperately wanted to fight on their behalf, rather than establishing communication with the leaders.
Last week, I received an email from Michael Green, a history professor who ended up on McCarthyite’s turning point “watch list” because he said mean things to Trump. “If we hold a presidential election in 2028, I think the news agency may be possible,” Green wrote. “He just lost me. Totally.” I doubt Green alone.
