Four Reasons Why Gavin Newsom’s Presidential Chances are Dropping FAST - Nate Silver
Nate Silver analyzes Gavin Newsom's declining presidential prospects, noting his poll numbers have dropped from 25% to 15% in Democratic primaries and from 33% to 22% on Polymarket. Silver argues Newsom's strategy of continuity with Biden and Harris has failed electorally, while Democrats increasingly prefer younger candidates with purple-state credentials.
Summary
Nate Silver discusses the deteriorating presidential chances of California Governor Gavin Newsom. Newsom's support has fallen significantly across multiple indicators: his Democratic primary polling has dropped from approximately 25% to 15%, while his Polymarket odds have declined from 33% to 22%. Silver attributes this decline partly to the fading effect of initial name recognition, allowing Democrats to reassess candidates more critically. Silver contrasts Newsom with Jon Ossoff, describing Ossoff as another young, good-looking candidate who possesses a crucial credential Newsom lacks: a demonstrated ability to win elections in purple (competitive) states. Silver notes approvingly that Democrats appear biased toward younger candidates as a category, referencing similar dynamics with other candidates. The core strategic problem Silver identifies is that Newsom is arguing for continuity with the Biden-Harris administration during a period when that strategy has failed both electorally and in California governance. Silver concludes that Newsom is in a defensive position with a weak argument to make to Democratic primary voters.
Key Insights
- Newsom has fallen in Democratic primary polls from around 25% to 15% and on Polymarket from 33% to 22%
- Newsom initially benefited from name recognition, but as Democrats reassess he loses support compared to younger candidates like Jon Ossoff who have won elections in purple states
- Newsom lacks the key credential of having won an election in a purple state, which Silver identifies as increasingly important to Democratic primary voters
- Newsom's core argument for continuity with Biden and Harris has failed both electorally and in California governance
- Democrats are showing a demonstrable bias toward younger candidates, which works against Newsom's candidacy
Topics
Transcript
[0:00] Newsom has fallen in Democratic primary polls from around 25% to 15%. He's fallen on Polymarket from like 33% to 22%. I think he was benefiting from some degree of name recognition, whereas now Democrats see a candidate like Jon Ossoff in Georgia, another good-looking young guy, but like actually has credential, which Newsom will never have of having won an election in a purple state. I think it's good that Democrats are showing a bias toward younger [0:30] candidates, right? Like that's a lot of what happened with Zoran, too. You know, I wouldn't discount, by the way, someone like an AOC. I think ultimately Newsom has like a a hard argument to make. He's arguing for continuity…
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from All-In Podcast
Nate Silver Explains The Democrats' 3 Warring Factions: Progressives, Abundance, Resistance
Nate Silver identifies three distinct factions within the Democratic Party: the progressive left (represented by AOC and Bernie Sanders), the 'abundance libs' (market-friendly centrists influenced by figures like Ezra Klein), and the 'resistance libs' (partisan Democrats focused on opposing Republicans). He argues that Gavin Newsom's support for Biden signals alignment with resistance lib voters who prefer combative leaders.
Nvidia is ready to fight back
The speaker claims Nvidia's open-source LLMs are competitive with Claude for 95% of use cases, and argues that Nvidia has been downplaying these models to avoid concerns from major customers. Now facing competition from chip initiatives by OpenAI, Anthropic, AMD, and Elon Musk, Nvidia is aggressively positioning itself to control the entire hardware-to-software stack by offering competitive models for free.
Friedberg’s Immigration Test: Workers vs Welfare
Friedberg advocates for a selective immigration policy based on economic productivity rather than cultural factors, arguing that immigrants motivated by work create net positive economic growth while those seeking welfare benefits should be denied entry. He contends that productive immigrants naturally assimilate to American values of hard work and individual agency.
Don't trust OpenAI. Use your own models.
A speaker warns founders against partnering with large tech companies like OpenAI, Microsoft, Facebook, and others, arguing they use free offerings to gain access to startups' innovations before ultimately replacing and acquiring them. The speaker advises founders to develop and rely on their own AI models instead of depending on these platforms.
Anthropic is worth HOW MUCH!?
A speaker argues that Anthropic could be valued at $3 trillion as a public company, based on projected revenues exceeding $100 billion by year-end and 85% gross margins on inference-dominated services. The speaker contends that while these valuations appear massive, they represent a natural shift of already-absorbed market capital from private to public markets.