Politics
Newsom attacks 'delusional California bashers' in unorthodox speech
Gov. Gavin Newsom took on “delusional California bashers” and lauded the state’s economic prowess and inclusive values in an unorthodox State of the State speech that he shared in a video Tuesday on social media.
Repeating familiar tropes of past political speeches, Newsom cast the state as a force of light against dark conservative forces. He boasted about California’s work to protect civil rights and attacked Republicans in other states for “telling a woman she’s not in charge of her own body.”
“Our values and our way of life are the antidote to the poisonous populism of the right, and to the fear and anxiety that so many people are feeling today,” Newsom said. “People across the globe, they look to California and see what’s possible, and how we can live together and advance together and prosper together across every conceivable and imaginable difference.”
The prerecorded address marks the fourth year in a row that Newsom has broken the California tradition of the governor delivering the annual address to lawmakers at the state Capitol.
His GOP foes said the decision to reject the conventional setting again is an example of Newsom’s lack of commitment to the job as he expands his national profile.
“The governor has no respect for this institution,” said Assemblymember James Gallagher (R-Yuba City). “This governor acts like he’s too busy to do things that he’s supposed to do. He’s obviously able to do it in person.”
Newsom’s aides defended the governor, pointing out that the California Constitution only requires him to submit a written letter to the Legislature. Newsom invited lawmakers to a private reception at the governor’s mansion in Sacramento on Monday evening.
Prior governors have used the speech, which has been historically delivered in January, to outline their policy agenda for the year to lawmakers from both houses and political parties in the Assembly chamber. The typical address offers an opportunity to show deference to lawmakers, by appearing in person on their floor, and to gather their support for the work ahead.
But critics of the address call it a tired ritual in an era of one-party rule and say the value of the speech has been usurped by the budget, which has become the governor’s main avenue to drive policy change.
Newsom, who dislikes reading off teleprompters because of his dyslexia, has not delivered the State of the State in the Capitol since 2020. Newsom’s address was streamed the following year from an empty Dodger Stadium, a mass COVID-19 vaccination site where the number of seats offered a symbolic representation of the California lives lost in the pandemic at the time.
The governor in 2022 spoke from the headquarters of the California Natural Resources Agency in Sacramento, a 21-story environmentally friendly glass tower blocks from the Capitol, and promised gas rebates to taxpayers. Newsom declined to give a speech last year and instead opted for a statewide press tour, where he sprinkled policy announcements at stops from Sacramento to San Diego.
The governor’s office said Newsom wanted to deliver the speech in the chamber this year and struggled to find a date that worked with the Legislature.
The speech was initially slated for March 13. The address was rescheduled after Newsom’s bond measure to fund mental health services, Proposition 1, remained too close to call for two weeks after the March 5 primary election. His speech was rewritten with a plan to deliver it on March 18 and then delayed again.
Debates over how to solve California’s $46.8-billion budget deficit heated up the following month and continued until last week. Now lawmakers and the governor are staring down an impending deadline to qualify measures on the November ballot and negotiating with interest groups to rescind the initiatives they oppose.
Democratic Sen. Steve Glazer of Orinda was unfazed by Newsom’s nontraditional approach to the speech, saying simply that “we are in changing times,” and he respects the governor’s choice in how he delivers his message.
For one member of an earlier generation of lawmakers, though, Newsom’s video message came off like a snub.
“I hope it’s the last time it ever happens,” said Rusty Areias, who was a Democratic assemblyman in the 1980s and ’90s.
“It’s one of the things that members always look forward to. I understand the governor is very busy. I understand that there are national and international issues that are probably more important, but it is a tradition that in my mind is worth maintaining.”
In his address, Newsom touted his administration’s work to lessen homelessness and crime, two policy areas in which he’s most politically vulnerable.
“When it comes to America’s homeless problem, California’s detractors have similarly offered nothing but rhetoric, moaning and casting blame,” Newsom said. “No state, by the way, has done moreas California in addressing this pernicious problem of homelessness plaguing cities and towns.”
He pushed back on a narrative that California is “defunding the police,” saying the state is recruiting 1,000 California Highway Patrol officers and passing retail theft reforms this year.
In a lighter moment, he described the state as a “weird, wild, free-spirited” creative haven, home to the heavy metal band Metallica and rapper Kendrick Lamar and a place that invented “the popsicle, blue jeans and Barbie.”
Newsom’s speech alluded to the November presidential election, which he referred to as “another extraordinary moment in history — for California, for the country, and for the world.” He compared the moment to an “anxious” time in 1939, when then-California Gov. Culbert Olson in his inaugural address warned about the “the destruction of democracy” as fascism spread throughout Europe.
“We are presented with a choice between a society that embraces our values and a world darkened by division and discrimination,” Newsom said. “The economic prosperity, health, safety and freedom that we enjoy are under assault. Forces are threatening the very foundation of California’s success — our pluralism, our innovative spirit, and our diversity.”
Newsom is expected to travel to Atlanta this week to attend the presidential debate on Thursday as a surrogate for President Biden. The governor, who has built a reputation as a Democrat unafraid of taking the fight to Republicans, was invited by the Biden campaign to participate in media interviews before and after the debate to support the president and the party.
The governor used the speech to attack conservatives nationally over reproductive rights, an issue Democrats have tried to capitalize on in the election.
“When it comes to reproductive rights, their lies are designed to control,” Newsom said. “Their draconian policies are driving women to flee across state lines, as fugitives from laws written by men more than a hundred years ago. Some even go so far as to force victims of assault to give birth to their rapist’s babies.”
Sacramento Bureau Chief Laurel Rosenhall and staff writer Anabel Sosa contributed to this report.
Politics
Video: Trump’s War of Choice With Iran
new video loaded: Trump’s War of Choice With Iran
By David E. Sanger, Gilad Thaler, Thomas Vollkommer and Laura Salaberry
March 1, 2026
Politics
Dems’ potential 2028 hopefuls come out against US strikes on Iran
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Some of the top rumored Democratic potential candidates for president in 2028 are showing a united front in opposing U.S. strikes on Iran, with several high-profile figures accusing President Donald Trump of launching an unnecessary and unconstitutional war.
Former Vice President Kamala Harris said Trump was “dragging the United States into a war the American people do not want.”
“Let me be clear: I am opposed to a regime-change war in Iran, and our troops are being put in harm’s way for the sake of Trump’s war of choice,” Harris said in a statement Saturday following the joint U.S. and Israeli strikes throughout Iran.
“This is a dangerous and unnecessary gamble with American lives that also jeopardizes stability in the region and our standing in the world,” she continued. “What we are witnessing is not strength. It is recklessness dressed up as resolve.”
Former Vice President Kamala Harris, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and California Gov. Gavin Newsom are leading Democratic 2028 hopefuls who spoke out against U.S. strikes on Iran. (Big Event Media/Getty Images for HumanX Conference; Reuters/Liesa Johannssen; Mario Tama/Getty Images)
California Gov. Gavin Newsom delivered some of his sharpest criticism during a book tour stop Saturday night in San Francisco, accusing Trump of manufacturing a crisis.
“It stems from weakness masquerading as strength,” Newsom said. “He lied to you. So reckless is the only way to describe this.”
“He didn’t describe to the American people what the endgame is here,” Newsom added. “There wasn’t one. He manufactured it.”
Newsom is currently promoting his memoir, “Young Man in a Hurry,” with recent and upcoming stops in South Carolina, New Hampshire and Nevada — three key early voting states in the Democratic presidential calendar.
Earlier in the day, Newsom said Iran’s “corrupt and repressive” regime must never obtain nuclear weapons and that the “leadership of Iran must go.”
“But that does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war that will risk the lives of our American service members and our friends without justification to the American people,” Newsom wrote on X.
California is home to more than half of the roughly 400,000 Iranian immigrants in the United States, including a large community in West Los Angeles often referred to as “Tehrangeles.”
DEMOCRATS BUCK PARTY LEADERS TO DEFEND TRUMP’S ‘DECISIVE ACTION’ ON IRAN
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., a leading progressive voice and “Squad” member, accused Trump of dragging Americans into a conflict they did not support.
“The American people are once again dragged into a war they did not want by a president who does not care about the long-term consequences of his actions. This war is unlawful. It is unnecessary. And it will be catastrophic,” Ocasio-Cortez said.
“Just this week, Iran and the United States were negotiating key measures that could have staved off war. The President walked away from these discussions and chose war instead,” she continued.
“In moments of war, our Constitution is unambiguous: Congress authorizes war. The President does not,” she said, pledging to vote “YES on Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie’s War Powers Resolution.”
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker criticized the strikes and accused Trump of ignoring Congress. (Daniel Boczarski/Getty Images for Vox Media)
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, another Democrat often mentioned as a potential 2028 contender, also criticized the strikes and accused Trump of ignoring Congress.
“No justification, no authorization from Congress, and no clear objective,” Pritzker wrote on X.
“Donald Trump is once again sidestepping the Constitution and once again failing to explain why he’s taking us into another war,” he continued. “Americans asked for affordable housing and health care, not another potentially endless conflict.”
“God protect our troops,” Pritzker added.
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro focused his criticism on war powers, arguing Trump acted outside constitutional guardrails.
“In our democracy, the American people — through our elected representatives — decide when our nation goes to war,” Shapiro said, adding that Trump “acted unilaterally — without Congressional approval.”
JONATHAN TURLEY: TRUMP STRIKES IRAN — PRECEDENT AND HISTORY ARE ON HIS SIDE
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro focused his criticism on war powers, arguing Trump acted outside constitutional guardrails. (Rachel Wisniewski/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
“Make no mistake, the Iranian regime represses its own people… they must never be allowed to possess nuclear weapons,” he said. “But that does not justify the President of the United States engaging in an illegal, dangerous war.”
Shapiro added that “Congress must use all available power” to prevent further escalation.
Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg also accused Trump of launching a “war of choice.”
“The President has launched our nation and our great military into a war of choice, risking American lives and resources, ignoring American law, and endangering our allies and partners,” Buttigieg wrote on X. “This nation learned the hard way that an unnecessary war, with no plan for what comes next, can lead to years of chaos and put America in still greater danger.”
Buttigieg has been hitting early voting states, stopping in New Hampshire and Nevada in recent weeks to campaign for Democrats ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., who has been floated as a rising national figure within the party, said he lost friends in Iraq to an illegal war and opposed the strikes.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Young working-class kids should not pay the ultimate price for regime change and a war that hasn’t been explained or justified to the American people. We can support the democracy movement and the Iranian people without sending our troops to die,” Gallego wrote on X.
Fox News’ Daniel Scully and Alex Nitzberg contributed to this report.
Politics
Commentary: With midterm vote starting, here’s where things stand in national redistricting fight
Donald Trump has never been one to play by the rules.
Whether it’s stiffing contractors as a real estate developer, defying court orders he doesn’t like as president or leveraging the Oval Office to vastly inflate his family’s fortune, Trump’s guiding principle can be distilled to a simple, unswerving calculation: What’s in it for me?
Trump is no student of history. He’s famously allergic to books. But he knows enough to know that midterm elections like the one in November have, with few exceptions, been ugly for the party holding the presidency.
With control of the House — and Trump’s virtually unchecked authority — dangling by a gossamer thread, he reckoned correctly that Republicans were all but certain to lose power this fall unless something unusual happened.
So he effectively broke the rules.
Normally, the redrawing of the country’s congressional districts takes place once every 10 years, following the census and accounting for population changes over the previous decade. Instead, Trump prevailed upon the Republican governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, to throw out the state’s political map and refashion congressional lines to wipe out Democrats and boost GOP chances of winning as many as five additional House seats.
The intention was to create a bit of breathing room, as Democrats need a gain of just three seats to seize control of the House.
In relatively short order, California’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, responded with his own partisan gerrymander. He rallied voters to pass a tit-for-tat ballot measure, Proposition 50, which revised the state’s political map to wipe out Republicans and boost Democratic prospects of winning as many as five additional seats.
Then came the deluge.
In more than a dozen states, lawmakers looked at ways to tinker with their congressional maps to lift their candidates, stick it to the other party and gain House seats in November.
Some of those efforts continue, including in Virginia where, as in California, voters are being asked to amend the state Constitution to let majority Democrats redraw political lines ahead of the midterm. A special election is set for April 21.
But as the first ballots of 2026 are cast on Tuesday — in Arkansas, North Carolina and Texas — the broad contours of the House map have become clearer, along with the result of all those partisan machinations. The likely upshot is a nationwide partisan shift of fewer than a handful of seats.
The independent, nonpartisan Cook Political Report, which has a sterling decades-long record of election forecasting, said the most probable outcome is a wash. “At the end of the day,” said Erin Covey, who analyzes House races for the Cook Report, “this doesn’t really benefit either party in a real way.”
Well.
That was a lot of wasted time and energy.
Let’s take a quick spin through the map and the math, knowing that, of course, there are no election guarantees.
In Texas, for instance, new House districts were drawn assuming Latinos would back Republican candidates by the same large percentage they supported Trump in 2024. But that’s become much less certain, given the backlash against his draconian immigration enforcement policies; numerous polls show a significant falloff in Latino support for the president, which could hurt GOP candidates up and down the ballot.
But suppose Texas Republicans gain five seats as hoped for and California Democrats pick up the five seats they’ve hand-crafted. The result would be no net change.
Elsewhere, under the best case for each party, a gain of four Democratic House seats in Virginia would be offset by a gain of four Republican House seats in Florida.
That leaves a smattering of partisan gains here and there. A combined pickup of four or so Republican seats in Ohio, North Carolina and Missouri could be mostly offset by Democratic gains of a seat apiece in New York, Maryland and Utah.
(The latter is not a result of legislative high jinks, but rather a judge throwing out the gerrymandered map passed by Utah Republicans, who ignored a voter-approved ballot measure intended to prevent such heavy-handed partisanship. A newly created district, contained entirely within Democratic-leaning Salt Lake County, seems certain to go Democrats’ way in November.)
In short, it’s easy to characterize the political exertions of Trump, Abbott, Newsom and others as so much sound and fury producing, at bottom, little to nothing.
But that’s not necessarily so.
The campaign surrounding Proposition 50 delivered a huge political boost to Newsom, shoring up his standing with Democrats, significantly raising his profile across the country and, not least for his 2028 presidential hopes, helping the governor build a significant nationwide fundraising base.
In crimson-colored Indiana, Republicans refused to buckle under tremendous pressure from Trump, Vice President JD Vance and other party leaders, rejecting an effort to redraw the state’s congressional map and give the GOP a hold on all nine House seats. That showed even Trump’s Svengali-like hold on his party has its limits.
But the biggest impact is also the most corrosive.
By redrawing political lines to predetermine the outcome of House races, politicians rendered many of their voters irrelevant and obsolete. Millions of Democrats in Texas, Republicans in California and partisans in other states have been effectively disenfranchised, their voices rendered mute. Their ballots spindled and nullified.
In short, the politicians — starting with Trump — extended a big middle finger to a large portion of the American electorate.
Is it any wonder, then, so many voters hold politicians and our political system in contempt?
-
World4 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts4 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Denver, CO4 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana7 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT