California, the nation’s most populous state and long a bellwether for progressive politics, is at the epicenter of a seismic political shift. In a blistering analysis, historian Victor Davis Hanson declared, “This is THE END of Gavin Newsom!”—a statement that has reverberated across political circles, media outlets, and social networks. Hanson’s critique goes far beyond the usual partisan sparring, exposing what he describes as a desperate gambit by Governor Gavin Newsom to entrench Democratic power through controversial redistricting, all while ignoring the mounting crises that threaten California’s future.

.

.

.

The Rhetoric Heats Up: Newsom’s Combative Stance

Governor Gavin Newsom has never shied away from controversy, but recent remarks have taken his combative style to new heights. When asked about Republican critics—particularly those from Texas—Newsom reportedly said he wanted to “punch these people in the mouth,” even naming former President Donald Trump as a target. The rhetoric, Hanson notes, is more than just political theater; it’s a sign of a leader under pressure and willing to escalate the fight.

Proposition 50: Redistricting for Power

Central to Hanson’s argument is Proposition 50, a ballot measure that would give Newsom’s administration unprecedented authority to redraw California’s congressional districts. Democrats claim the move is a necessary response to Republican-led redistricting in Texas, which has added more GOP seats. But critics, including Hanson, see Prop 50 as a blatant power grab designed to further marginalize Republican representation.

California currently has 52 congressional districts, but only nine are held by Republicans—just 17% of the total, despite the GOP regularly securing around 40% of the statewide vote. Hanson points out that Prop 50 could reduce Republican seats to as few as five, dropping their representation to less than 10%. “That’s not reform, that’s elimination,” he asserts.

The History of Gerrymandering in California

Hanson traces the roots of California’s political imbalance to reforms introduced over a decade ago by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Promoted as a nonpartisan redistricting commission, the reality was a board stacked with left-leaning members who redrew the state’s political map under the guise of bipartisanship. The result? A carefully masked consolidation of Democratic control, with Republicans increasingly squeezed out.

Now, Newsom seeks to go even further. The new maps, Hanson explains, don’t just redraw lines—they “stretch and pull districts well beyond any semblance to geographical reality,” corraling Republicans into a handful of zones and forcing incumbents to battle each other for survival. Meanwhile, dozens of safe seats are freed up for Democrats, ensuring one-party dominance for years to come.

The National Perspective: California vs. Texas

Hanson broadens the lens to compare California’s approach with red states like Texas. While Texas has also engaged in gerrymandering, Hanson argues that its congressional seat distribution still roughly reflects overall voting patterns. California, by contrast, has elevated gerrymandering to an art form, with Democrats already enjoying a significant advantage and now seeking to cement it further.

Newsom’s move isn’t just about state politics, Hanson warns. As the governor positions himself for a 2028 presidential run, the redistricting scheme becomes a national campaign in disguise—a signal to progressives across America that he’s willing to do whatever it takes to defeat Republican opposition.

The Cost: Billions Spent, Representation Lost

The financial cost of Newsom’s plan is staggering. Hanson notes that Newsom is prepared to spend $250 million—taxpayer money—to rush through the legislature and push Prop 50 onto the ballot. The aim? To suspend the current, already gerrymandered plan and replace it with an even more lopsided map, reducing Republican representation to just 8% of congressional seats.

For Hanson, the implications are clear: “Regardless of political leanings, every voter should see this for what it is—a desperate move to dismantle even the pretense of balance.”

California’s Broader Crisis: The State in Decline

Redistricting is only part of the story. Hanson paints a grim picture of California under Newsom’s rule, describing a state in decline on multiple fronts:

Mass Exodus: Over the past decade, 12 million residents—primarily middle-class, entrepreneurial families—have left California, seeking better opportunities elsewhere.
Soaring Costs: Electricity prices are among the highest in the nation, surpassed only by Hawaii. Gas prices hover near $6 a gallon, with new taxes and regulations threatening to push them even higher.
Industry Strangled: Oil refineries are closing, construction is frozen under endless equity mandates, and once-thriving communities like Pacific Palisades are paralyzed by zoning wars.
Infrastructure Crisis: California’s population has doubled since the 1970s, but its infrastructure remains unchanged, leaving highways congested and public services stretched thin.
Regulatory Overload: Environmental and social equity regulations have stifled development and driven up costs, making it harder for businesses and families to thrive.

Performance Art or Governance?

Hanson accuses Newsom of prioritizing political performance over genuine governance. Rather than addressing the state’s pressing issues—high taxes, soaring utility costs, infrastructure decay, and rising crime—Newsom focuses on attacking Trump and reshaping elections for partisan gain.

“He’s doing another performance art, wiggling his head, saying the f-word, daring Trump to stop him—all in performance art for his next presidential run,” Hanson says.

The Broader Impact: Democracy at Risk

At its core, Hanson’s critique is about more than just partisan politics. He warns that Newsom’s actions threaten the very foundations of representative democracy. By targeting Republican incumbents and redrawing districts to force them into head-to-head battles, Newsom risks disenfranchising millions of Californians who will lose meaningful representation in Congress.

Hanson urges voters of all affiliations to recognize the dangers of such extreme measures. “Some call it a conspiracy. Others say it’s politics as usual. But the result is always the same: disoriented people and a system that no longer makes sense.”

The Final Verdict: Is This Really the End?

As Newsom doubles down on redistricting and ramps up his combative rhetoric, Hanson believes the governor is betting that voters will overlook the state’s deepening problems in favor of partisan victories. But with the national mood shifting and California’s crises mounting, Hanson suggests that Newsom’s gamble may backfire.

“He more than any other Californian—as a Bay Area city council person, as a San Francisco mayor, as lieutenant governor, and as governor—has ruined this state,” Hanson concludes.

Whether or not this truly marks the end of Gavin Newsom’s political career remains to be seen. But one thing is certain: the fight over California’s future is far from over, and the outcome will shape not just the Golden State, but the entire nation.