The 2028 presidential election is more than 1,000 days away, but you’d hardly know it because of all the speculation and anticipation swirling from Sacramento to the Washington Beltway.
At the center of attention is California Gov. Gavin Newsom, fresh off his big victory over Proposition 50, the backatch ballot measure that changed the state’s congressional map to strengthen Democrats and offset a Texas Republican takeover.
Newsom is running for the White House, and has been for nearly a year, although he won’t say it out loud. Is Newsom the Democratic frontrunner or just a flash in the pan?
Times columnists Anita Chabria and Mark Z. Barabak disagree on Newsom’s presidential prospects, and more. Here, the two men address some of their differences.
Barabak: So, the presidential race is over, Anita? Should I just spend the next few years hiking and snowboarding in the Sierra and come back in January 2029 to watch Newsom iterate, meet the moment, and, with intentionality, be sworn in as our country’s 48th president?
Chabria: You should definitely spend as much time as possible in the Sierra, but I don’t know if Newsom will be elected president in 2028 or not. That’s about a million light years away in political terms. But I think he has a chance and is currently the favorite for the nomination. He has established himself as President Trump’s quick foil and, increasingly, as the leader of the Democratic Party. Last week, he traveled to Brazil for a climate summit that Trump ghosted, making Newsom the U.S. presence.
And in a recent (albeit small) poll, in a hypothetical race against JD Vance, the current Republican front-runner, Newsom leads by three points. However, unexpectedly, respondents still chose Kamala Harris as their choice for the nomination.
To me, this shows that he is popular throughout the country. But you warned that Californians are having trouble attracting voters from other states. Do you think his Golden State roots will kill his contender status?
Barabak: I’m not making any predictions. I’m smart enough to know that I’m not smart enough to know. And, after 2016 and the election of Trump, the words “I can’t”, “don’t”, “won’t”, “never” are permanently erased from my political vocabulary.
That said, I wouldn’t bet more than a penny — which could eventually be worth something, as they’re being phased out of our currency — on Newsom’s chances.
Look, I’m not giving in to anyone in my love for California. (And I have the Golden State tattoos to prove it.) But I’m aware of how the rest of the country perceives the state and politicians who carry a California return address. You can be sure that anyone running against Newsom — and I’m talking about his fellow Democrats, not just Republicans — will have plenty to say about the much higher housing, grocery and gas prices than elsewhere in the state and our shameful rates of poverty and homelessness.
That’s not a good look for Newsom, especially when affordability is all the political rage these days.
And although I understand the governor’s call: fight! Struggle! Struggle! — I liken it to the fleeting imagination that, for a time, Michael Avenatti, lawyer, convicted con artist, and rhetorical battering ram, seriously discussed as a Democratic presidential candidate. At some point – and we’re still years away – people will evaluate candidates with their heads and not their guts.
As for the polls, ask Edmund Muskie, Gary Hart or Hillary Clinton how important these polls are at this extremely early stage of a presidential race. Well, you can’t ask Muskie, because the former senator from Maine is dead. But all three were frontrunners who failed to win the Democratic nomination.
Chabria: I’m not making the historical case against Golden State, but I will argue that times are different. People don’t vote with their heads. Fight me on this.
They vote on charisma, tribalism and maybe a little hope and fear. They vote on issues the way social media explains them. They vote on memes.
There is no reality in which our next president is rationally evaluated on his record – our current president has a criminal record and it has made no difference.
But I think, as we have said ad nauseam, that democracy is in danger. Trump has threatened to run for a third term and recently lamented that his cabinet doesn’t show him the same kind of fear that Chinese President Xi Jinping feels from his top advisers. And Vance, if given the chance to run, has made it clear that he is a Christian nationalist who would like to deport almost every immigrant he can catch, legal or not.
Being Californian may not be the disadvantage it historically has been, especially if Trump’s authoritarianism endures and the state remains the symbol of resistance.
But our governor faces immediate scandal. His former chief of staff, Dana Williamson, has just been arrested for federal corruption. Do you think this hurts him?
Barabak: It shouldn’t.
There is no evidence of wrongdoing on Newsom’s part. His opponents will try the trick of guilt by association. Some have already done it. But unless something damning surfaces, there is no reason for the governor to be punished for the alleged wrongdoing of Williamson or others charged in this case.
But let’s get back to 2028 and the presidential race. I think one of our fundamental disagreements is that I believe people TO DO extensively evaluate a candidate’s ideas and files. Not in a granular way, or like a chin-stroking political scientist would do. But voters want to know how and if a candidate can materially improve their lives.
Of course, many would reflexively support Donald Trump, or Donald Duck for that matter, if he is the Republican nominee. The same goes for Democrats who would vote for Gavin Newsom or Gavin Floyd, if either were the party’s nominee. (While Newsom played baseball in college, Floyd pitched 13 seasons in the major leagues, so he has that advantage over the governor.)
But I’m talking about those voters at stake – the ones who decide competitive races – who are making a very rational decision based on their lives and livelihoods and which candidate they believe will benefit them the most.
Certainly, the dynamic is a little different in a primary. But even then, we’ve seen the dating/married phenomenon time and time again. Like in 2004, when many Democrats “dated” Howard Dean early in the primary season but “married” John Kerry. I consider electability – as the perception of which Democrat can win the general election – to be on the same level as affordability when it comes time for primary voters to make their 2028 choice.
Chabria: There is no doubt that affordability will be a major issue, especially if consumer confidence continues to fall. And we will certainly hear criticisms of California, many of which are fair, as you point out. Housing is too expensive, homelessness remains insurmountable.
But these problems also affect the entire United States and require deeper solutions than even this economically powerful state can handle alone. More than the past, it is the future vision that will count. What’s the plan?
It can’t be vague tax credits or even student loan forgiveness. We need a concrete vision of an economy that provides not only more basic goods like housing, but also the kind of long-term economic stability – higher wages, good schools, jobs that pay to live on – that makes the middle class stronger and more accessible.
The democrat who can present this vision while continuing to fight against the authoritarian drift that is currently eroding our democracy will, in my humble opinion, be the one that voters choose, whatever their origin. After all, it was this message of change and hope that gave us President Obama, another candidate many initially considered a longshot.
Mark, are there any prospects for 2028 that you are watching particularly closely?
Barabak: I’m taking things one election at a time, starting with the 2026 midterm elections, which include a race for governor’s seats here in California. The November 2026 results will go a long way toward shaping the dynamics of November 2028. That said, there is no shortage of Democrats eyeing the race — there are too many to list here. Will that number surpass the 29 major Democrats who ran in 2020? We’ll see.
I agree with you that, to have any chance of winning in 2028, the Democratic nominee will need to come up with serious, substantive ideas on how to materially improve people’s lives. Democracy in danger and frightening authoritarianism aside, it is always the economy, stupid.
Which brings us back to our valiant governor. He may be gaining fans and building his national fundraising base with his sarcastic memes and forceful criticism of Trump. But even if he overcomes the anti-California bias inherent in so many voters outside our blessed state, he won’t be able to fight his way into the White House.
I’d bet more than a penny on that.
