Letters to the Editor: Newsom’s podcast offers insight into what ‘voters really want’

To the editor: I couldn’t disagree more with George Skelton’s column (“Instead of bashing other Democrats, Newsom needs to look inward,” April 7). I listened to Newsom’s podcast the other day — all 90 minutes of it — and couldn’t be more impressed. Newsom is engaging with the other side, which is exactly what needs to be done, especially as the Democrats (of which I am one) become increasingly clueless about what voters really want. I learned a lot about the disillusionment voters are feeling — to the extent they would pick a convicted felon over a candidate from our own party. I encourage everyone to listen and learn.

Manuel “Manny” Padilla Jr., Studio City

..

To the editor: I appreciate what Newsom is trying to do with his podcast. My father and grandfather were both attorneys who enjoyed avid debates at the dinner table. I remember how during many of these discussions, one side might start to raise their voices in argument. At that point, my father would press the hold button and mention that argument is to be done logically, not emotionally. The point was, that as impassioned as one might be on a particular subject, it was better to become better informed and later bring up the argument when you had more ammo in your belt. Emotional and loud argumentation was not tolerated.

Will Shaw, La Crescenta

..

To the editor: I am a left-leaning registered independent — and a huge fan of Newsom’s podcast. Following the election in November, I wanted real answers and explanations, not the repetitive, self-serving excuses that filled the liberal media bubble. So I sought out podcasts, books, news sources and interviews that presented balanced reporting and analysis of both the left and right sides of our political divide. It was through this search for alternative, more-balanced information sources that I discovered the “This is Gavin Newsom,” podcast, which I find refreshing and informative.

I don’t care about the governor’s political plans but greatly appreciate his willingness to ask open and probing questions, to engage in civil discussion and to discuss topics that are at times unfavorable to him personally and/or to the Democratic Party. There is much for his party to learn from these and other similar bipartisan discussions, if it is to be a viable contender in 2026 and beyond.

Kathleen Byrnes, Pasadena