What Is the Point of Gavin Newsom?

Last year, Governor Gavin Newsom declared that “we” could not allow the extradition of California abortion providers for treating patients in anti-abortion states: “Not today. Not ever,” he said in a statement.

But apparently he meant “not for a year and change.” On Sunday, the self-styled “progressive” vetoed AB 2164, the Care Without Fear Act, which would have enshrined that principle into law, preventing future governors from handing over and helping to criminalize abortion providers, helpers, and patients — as well as prohibiting extradition in cases regarding gender-affirming care. In his remarks, Newsom noted that he was “troubled” by the idea of curtailing executive powers based on “shared policy preferences, regardless of how righteous and well-intended those actions may be.”

In a statement, Reproductive Freedom For All denounced the decision, reminding Newsom that none of this is theoretical: “We have an extreme Republican candidate at the top of the ticket this November who has been clear about his intention to extradite providers.”

That was just one veto of 24 in a legislative update issued by the outgoing governor, and one of several vetoes that appear to be reversals of his previous stances.

Unfortunately, this is a pattern Californians know well. Newsom loves to say the righteous thing when it costs nothing. But when it comes time to actually do something to help marginalized people, he conveniently discovers an out that lets him save face for his future presidential run. He’s a political juker — an advocate for nothing but his own ambitions as the Democrats’ best boy.

Newsom has spent the past year taking notes from political extremists: platforming Charlie Kirk, both-sidesing trans exclusion and oppression, dismissing the abduction of Kilmar Abrego García as a political “distraction,” participating in encampment sweeps with his own hands. His entreaty to Democrats to get more “culturally normal” wasn’t a message for Dems, but for cultural conservatives who dismiss progressives as perverts and freaks. Anything MAGA targets, he now treats as politically untouchable. This raises the obvious question: Where is his line? 

Meanwhile, a new poll by POLITICO found that California Democrats currently favor Newsom over Kamala Harris, but with the caveat that excitement for either has fallen by double-digit percentage points since the spring. Inspiring stuff.

Can you blame voters for not feeling inspired? Every election, liberals talk about “harm reduction.” How electing someone who will at least listen, who is "movable,” is better than the alternative. Sure. But we saw how well that went with Biden, who, in the midst of the genocide in Gaza, moved to support Israel more, not less, further entangling the United States in the war.

This is a symptom of the ongoing nothingness of politics. There’s simply nothing there. Just a void.

Gavin represents this moment well, because he is also a void. He has no vision. He’s a mimic and acting like he's embraced the way of the haint, a phantom after the Gullah tradition by way of the South — endlessly ravenous and willing to put on any kind of mask to pull you into its orbit. You cannot engage with Gavin Newsom in good faith, because what faith can you have in a shell of a person who so baldly pursues wealth, power, the next shiniest thing? I’ve been thinking a lot about what a friend wrote recently, vis-à-vis LLMs: “Once you have adopted the worldview of the haint, you become hungry. You begin to hunt your own people.”

The political consultant class isn’t going to read this, but it’s worth saying anyway: Electability is a fake idea. It’s why we’ve spent 10 years reliving 2016. Hillary was more electable than Bernie, remember? That worked out well. 

That’s also why Newsom can’t be the future of this movement, whatever the polls say about Democrats still liking him more than Harris this month. Who are these people who like him, and what do they like him for? Does anyone truly get excited, inspired, THRILLED when he walks into the room? And would he even care if you liked him, if you’re not a billionaire?

You can’t build anything real around someone whose one fixed point is staying uncommitted. The movement can survive a lot. It can’t survive a leader who stands for nothing.