Gavin Newsom has high hopes — but rock-bottom results

When New York was the most populous and economically dominant state in the 19th and much of the 20th century, it was natural its governors would be quadrennial contenders for the presidency.

The Empire State sent four of its governors on to the White House (Martin Van Buren, Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt) but supplied nominees or serious contenders in numerous other cycles (Samuel Tilden, Al Smith, Tom Dewey, Averell Harriman and Nelson Rockefeller, to name a few).

After California became the most populous and prosperous state in the early 1960s, it was expected its governors would become top contenders for the Oval Office every four years.

But so far California has only sent Ronald Reagan from Sacramento to the White House.

Other Golden State governors who’ve tried (Jerry Brown in 1976, 1980 and 1992; Pete Wilson in 1996) fell flat.

Gov. Gavin Newsom is hoping to break the dry spell.

Newsom can be opaque at times, but his ambition for the presidency is so obvious that he’s dropped the usual coy clichés about how “I’m focusing on my current job” and instead last week admitted that “I’d just be lying” if he said he wasn’t thinking hard about a presidential run.

This is a notable shift for Newsom, who for the last several years has repeatedly demurred from any hint, saying “I have no idea” “Fate will determine,” and even “Who the hell knows?” whether he would run someday.

One factor that may have forced Newsom’s shift was former Vice President Kamala Harris’s statement that “I’m not done” with public life, hinting she’s strongly considering another run in 2028.

It’s an open secret in California that Harris and Newsom are bitter rivals, and Newsom can’t let Harris get the jump on lining up support — and campaign-contribution pledges — from the state’s formidable Democratic money-and-influence machine.

Newsom and Harris top the early opinion polls for the 2028 Democratic nomination, but at this early point such polls mostly reflect name familiarity. The past several presidential election cycles have featured early front-runners in both parties who fizzled out once real campaigning and primary voting started.

Newsom, however, has been shrewdly positioning himself with aggressive steps to shore up support from the Democratic Party’s ascendant progressive base. He has been visiting early primary states and putting out cheeky social-media posts aping President Trump’s wild style, while Harris is content with a book tour that isn’t moving many copies of her book.

By far his most bold move is Proposition 50, which Californians vote on this week. Prop. 50 will take congressional redistricting out of the hands of an “independent” commission (that Democrats have largely gamed to their advantage already) and return it to the Democrat-dominated state Legislature.

Newsom’s proposed district map will likely cost Republicans five of the nine House seats (out of 52 total) they currently have. It is meant to counterbalance moves in Republican states such as Texas to draw new congressional districts for next year that should yield big GOP gains in the House.

Special-election initiatives in California have often backfired. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger tried a special election package of reforms that lost badly, and Ronald Reagan’s Proposition 1 in 1973 — a tax-and-spending-limitation initiative — also lost badly, damaging his planned 1976 presidential campaign.

But Newsom has promoted Prop. 50 as a way to “fight Trump,” and polls indicate his gamble is going to work, with the initiative likely to cruise to victory this week. It will be a major talking point for Democrats in other states.

There are other reasons, though, to think Newsom’s shooting star will flame out in 2028. New York and California used to be swing states of a sort, electing Democrats and Republicans in roughly equal numbers to statewide office.  But California especially is a deep-blue state today and not representative of the nation as a whole.

Newsom’s record is far to the left, with dreadful results on everything from crime to homelessness, deep budget deficits, poorly performing public schools, a high-speed-rail line to nowhere (that will never be completed), the nation’s highest energy costs, unaffordable housing and an economy seemingly designed to be hostile to the middle class.

It takes almost malevolent misgovernment to drive several hundred thousand residents to leave a state with such beauty and natural advantages, but somehow monopoly Democratic rule has accomplished it.

With Hollywood and Silicon Valley both shrinking their footprint in the state, “dynamic” no longer applies to California, and no one will believe talk of any kind of “California promise.” “Make America California” is not going to be a winning slogan.

By the end of the 2028 campaign Newsom will wish he had just booked more dinners at the French Laundry instead.

Steven F. Hayward is a visiting professor at Pepperdine University’s School of Public Policy.