Connect with us

Politics

Column: After Biden's debate fiasco, Harris or Newsom could be Plan B

Published

on

Column: After Biden's debate fiasco, Harris or Newsom could be Plan B

As pressure mounts on President Biden to quit his reelection race after a shockingly dismal debate performance, the spotlight will turn more intensely on two Californians: Vice President Kamala Harris and Gov. Gavin Newsom.

And although California won’t matter in the November election — whoever is the Democratic nominee will easily carry the state — its huge delegation to the party’s national convention in August could play a decisive role in choosing a Biden replacement.

Harris would top the initial list of possible substitutes with Newsom close behind.

But Harris, 59, has been less popular than Biden, according to polls. And she’s widely considered a drag on the ticket. One fear of many voters is that if Biden, 81, didn’t last out his second term, he’d be replaced as president by Harris.

Advertisement

The former California attorney general looked sharp, however, in a post-debate interview on CNN. And although I’ve long been a critic, I got the feeling while watching her that she might not be a campaign disaster after all.

In fact, Harris might perform well on the stump. Drop the robotic script and be more spontaneous. She certainly would be a more competitive debater against Republican Donald Trump than the weak Biden.

Harris showed genuine conviction — a look she usually lacks — in pitching Biden’s policies. She tried to put the best face on his debate performance.

“Yes, there was a slow start. That’s obvious to everyone,” she said. “But it was a strong finish.”

Well, no it wasn’t, but he did improve — after badly damaging himself, probably beyond repair.

Advertisement

One Harris hurdle, however, is that party leaders remember she bombed running for president in 2020.

Then there’s Newsom, 56.

If Newsom ever wants to run for president — and he acts like he does — now may be his best opportunity, assuming Biden can be coaxed out. There’s persistent speculation about him running in 2028. But he’s in the limelight now and there could be a Democratic incumbent seeking reelection in four years.

Newsom is already warmed up. The two-term governor has been promoting himself nationally while attacking red state policies and playing the role of an enthusiastic Biden surrogate. He has a veteran campaign organization.

Roger Strassburg wears a cowboy hat as he watches Thursday’s debate between President Biden and former President Trump in Scottsdale, Ariz.

Advertisement

(Ross D. Franklin / Associated Press)

But Newsom would need to compete for the nomination against Harris, his old San Francisco ally. And he has said publicly he wouldn’t do that. If he did, he’d be considered a party pariah, especially among Black women, Newsom has said privately.

Actually, I’ve never thought that a California Democrat could be elected president in this era of hardened polarization. Our politics are just too leftist for most of America.

Newsom has Hollywood looks and oratorical skills. But his biggest political asset — being California governor — is also his biggest vulnerability.

Advertisement

One strength that both Harris and Newsom have, however, is that California’s delegation will be by far the largest at the Democratic convention. Presumably it would back a California candidate.

The 496-member slate will field 22% of the votes needed to win the nomination. So if Biden leaves the race, California could play a big role in choosing his successor.

Who else is a possibility? For starters, two governors of key battleground states: Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan and Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania. There’s also Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg.

There’s no perfect candidate. But Trump is thoroughly imperfect.

Biden loyalists and lethargic naysayers have contended for months that it’s too late to change horses while the presidential race is underway, especially now that it has neared the final lap. Nonsense.

Advertisement

Conventions were invented to fight over nominations. But smoke-filled rooms unfortunately got a bad name and the Democratic Party went overboard on reforms. And the conventions became boring television shows that fewer people watched.

Republicans had the last convention battle in 1976 when they nominated President Ford over Californian Ronald Reagan. Ford then was beaten by Democrat Jimmy Carter. The last good Democratic brawl was in 1972 when the California delegation propelled George McGovern into the nomination. He was pummeled by President Nixon, a native Californian.

So convention battles sometimes backfire on a party. But this year could be different.

A Democratic donnybrook could stir new interest in the party and wake up the slumbering base that keeps telling pollsters it wants a president much younger than the 81-year-old incumbent.

Political leaders have a bad habit of plugging their ears when the public is saying things they don’t want to hear.

Advertisement

Voters aren’t satisfied with either of their choices. Trump, 78, seems healthier than Biden, at least physically. But Trump’s a pathological liar. “The morals of an alley cat,” Biden told him during the debate.

The voters’ anxiety about Biden’s ability to adequately serve a second term was re-stoked in his halting, hoarse-voiced, awkward performance. He seemed to lose his train of thought at least once and had trouble finishing sentences.

It was the worst presidential debate performance ever.

President Reagan blew his first debate against Democrat Walter Mondale in 1984, raising concerns about his age at 73. But he wasn’t nearly as painful to watch as Biden. Reagan fully recovered in a second debate.

Even if Biden’s decision-making is sound, people perceive him as weak. And that means he’d have difficulty leading the country.

Advertisement

If Trump’s election really would endanger democracy, as Biden contends, then the president should step aside to give the party a better chance of defeating the unfit jerk. He’ll naturally resist that. But those he trusts should level with him and push.

“You don’t turn your back [on someone] after one performance,” Newsom told a TV interviewer. “What kind of party does that?”

A winning party that prioritizes its principles and the nation.

Advertisement

Politics

Republicans light cigars, cigarettes on burning photos of Khamenei to show support for Iranian protesters

Published

on

Republicans light cigars, cigarettes on burning photos of Khamenei to show support for Iranian protesters

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Republican lawmakers are jumping on a social media trend to show their support for the anti-regime protesters in Iran.

Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., and Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., posted photos of themselves using burning photos of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light up a cigarette and a cigar respectively. Both lawmakers used the caption “Smoke ’em if you got ’em.”

The lawmaker’s images mirror a social media trend in which people are using burning photos of Khamenei to light cigarettes and cigars. The trend emerged as the people of Iran hold increasingly intense protests against the Islamic regime. The movement against the regime has seen increasing support from abroad as world leaders back the people of Iran.

FREED IRANIAN PRISONER SAYS ‘IN TRUMP, THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC HAS MET ITS MATCH’

Advertisement

People gather during a protest on Jan. 8, 2026, in Tehran, Iran. (Anonymous/Getty Images)

Khamenei’s regime has started to crack down on protests and even instituted a sweeping internet blackout to try to quell the unrest. Some have posited that the internet blackout was also meant to impede the spreading of information about and visuals of abuses committed against protesters by regime-backed forces.

Recently, exiled Iranian crown prince Reza Pahlavi has publicly urged President Donald Trump and the U.S. to back protesters in Iran as they fight the decades-old regime.

Sheehy told Fox News Digital that he takes the issue personally, saying that Iran has participated in the torturing, kidnapping and killing of Americans across the globe, “including friends of mine.”

“The Iranian regime are a bunch of murderous b——- who have been chanting ‘death to America’ for the past 46 years. They have backed up this chant by kidnapping, torturing, and killing thousands of Americans all over the world, including friends of mine. For me, it’s personal; it’s time to take out the trash,” Sheehy said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital via email.

Advertisement

Sen. Tim Sheehy, R-Mont., showed his solidarity with the people of Iran by hopping on a social media trend in which she used a burning photo of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light a cigarette. (Courtesy of Sen. Tim Sheehy’s Office)

US HOSTAGES IN IRAN FACE HEIGHTENED RISK AS PROTESTS SPREAD, EXPERTS SAY NUMBER HELD MAY EXCEED ESTIMATES

The senator also expressed his solidarity with the people of Iran and encouraged them to keep fighting the regime.

“To the Iranian people — we applaud your courage, keep fighting, and know we fully support your brave efforts to topple this evil regime,” he added.

Tenney’s office also spoke with Fox News Digital about the congresswoman’s post, praising the bravery of the people of Iran for standing up to the regime. Additionally, Tenney’s office expressed the congresswoman’s solidarity with the Iranian people.

Advertisement

“The bravery of the Iranian people in the face of decades of oppression by a brutal, extremist regime is extraordinary. Men and women across Iran are risking their lives to stand up to authoritarian mullahs who have denied them basic freedoms for generations,” Tenney’s office said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

Rep. Claudia Tenney, R-N.Y., showed her solidarity with the people of Iran by hopping on a social media trend in which she used a burning photo of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to light a cigar. (Courtesy of Rep. Claudia Tenney’s Office)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“The congresswoman stands firmly with the Iranian people and their demand for dignity and self-determination, and believes their courage must be recognized and amplified. Today, the Iranian people finally have an ally in the White House, President Trump, who has made clear that the United States stands with those fighting for freedom against tyranny,” Tenney’s office added.

Trump has been vocal about his support for the people of Iran and has warned that the U.S. would be ready to step in if the regime used violence against protesters.

Advertisement

“Iran is looking at FREEDOM, perhaps like never before,” the president wrote in a Truth Social post on Jan. 10. “The USA stands ready to help!!!”

Continue Reading

Politics

California launches investigation into child porn on Elon Musk’s AI site

Published

on

California launches investigation into child porn on Elon Musk’s AI site

California announced an investigation into Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI on Wednesday, with Gov. Gavin Newsom saying that the social media site owned by the billionaire is a “breeding ground for predators to spread nonconsenual sexually explicit AI deepfakes.”

Grok, the xAI chatbot, includes image-generation features that allow users to morph existing photos into new images. The newly created images are then posted publicly on X.

In some cases, users have created sexually explicit or nonconsensual images based on real people, including altered depictions that appear to show individuals partially or fully undressed. Others have generated images that appear to show minors, prompting criticism that there are not sufficient guardrails to prohibit the creation of child pornography.

The social media site has previously said “we take action against illegal content on X, including Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM), by removing it, permanently suspending accounts, and working with local governments and law enforcement as necessary. Anyone using or prompting Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content.”

Newsom called the sexualized images being created on the platform “vile.” Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said his office will use “all tools at our disposal to keep Californians safe.”

Advertisement

“The avalanche of reports detailing the non-consensual, sexually explicit material that xAI has produced and posted online in recent weeks is shocking,” Bonta said in a statement Wednesday. “This material, which depicts women and children in nude and sexually explicit situations, has been used to harass people across the internet. I urge xAI to take immediate action to ensure this goes no further. We have zero tolerance for the AI-based creation and dissemination of nonconsensual intimate images or of child sexual abuse material.”

Newsom signed a pair of bills in 2024 that made it illegal to create, possess or distribute sexually charged images of minors even when they’re created with computers, not cameras. The measures took effect last year.

Assembly Bill 1831, authored by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), expanded the state’s child-porn prohibition to material that “contains a digitally altered or artificial-intelligence-generated depiction [of] what appears to be a person under 18 years of age” engaging in or simulating sexual conduct. Senate Bill 1381, authored by Sen. Aisha Wahab (D-Hayward), amended state law to more clearly prohibit using AI to create images of real children engaged in sexual conduct, or using children as models for digitally altered or AI-generated child pornography.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

Published

on

Video: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

new video loaded: Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

transcript

transcript

Supreme Court May Allow States to Bar Transgender Athletes

The Supreme Court heard two cases from West Virginia and Idaho on Tuesday. Both concerned barring the participation of transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports teams.

“It is undisputed that states may separate their sports teams based on sex in light of the real biological differences between males and females. States may equally apply that valid sex-based rule to biological males who self-identify as female. Denying a special accommodation to trans-identifying individuals does not discriminate on the basis of sex or gender identity or deny equal protection.” “West Virginia argues that to protect these opportunities for cisgender girls, it has to deny them to B.P.J. But Title IX and the Equal Protection Clause protect everyone. And if the evidence shows there are no relevant physiological differences between B.P.J. and other girls, then there’s no basis to exclude her.” “Given that half the states are allowing it, allowing transgender girls and women to participate, about half are not, why would we at this point, just the role of this court, jump in and try to constitutionalize a rule for the whole country while there’s still, as you say, uncertainty and debate, while there’s still strong interest in other side?” “This court has held in cases like V.M.I. that in general, classification based on sex is impermissible because in general, men and women are simply situated. Where that’s not true is for the sorts of real, enduring, obvious differences that this court talked about in cases like V.M.I., the differences in reproductive biology. I don’t think the pseudoscience you’re suggesting has been baked.” “Well, it’s not pseudo. It’s good science.” “It’s not pseudoscience to say boys’ brain development happens at a different stage than girls does.” “Well, with all respect, I don’t think there’s any science anywhere that is suggested that these intellectual differences are traceable to biological differences.” “Can we avoid your whole similarly situated argument that you run because I don’t really like it that much either? And I’m not trying to prejudice anyone making that argument later. But I mean, I think it opens a huge can of worms that maybe we don’t need to get into here.”

Advertisement
The Supreme Court heard two cases from West Virginia and Idaho on Tuesday. Both concerned barring the participation of transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s sports teams.

By Meg Felling

January 13, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending