Courage? Defiance? A retirement announcement? Perhaps this is all three at the same time.
Thirty years ago, a statement of support for Israel and Zionism by a presidential contender would barely require reporting, regardless of party affiliation. Twenty years ago, it may have mattered only to keep the radicals out of the way. In 2026, though, having a Democrat presidential hopeful call himself a Zionist almost qualifies as a radical statement of its own.
Of course, coming from Gavin Newsom, it’s more like a Flavor of the Hour event. Still …
Gavin Newsom confirms he is a Zionist.
He says he “reveres the State of Israel” and is “proud to support the State of Israel.”
He also says he regrets using the word apartheid to describe the current state of Israel and clarifies that he was only channeling Tom Friedman’s… pic.twitter.com/QhJKEfvsXp
— Yashar Ali 🐘 (@yashar) March 24, 2026
Newsom made these remarks to Jonathan Martin for his Politico podcast “On the Road.” Martin asked Newsom about his remarks three weeks ago when Newsom called Israel an “apartheid state,” a comment which generated sharp criticism but sounded a lot like pandering to the hard-Left and progressive Democrat activists that will help determine the party’s next nominee. As The Forward reports, Newsom flip-flopped and blamed the war and that lying son-of-a bitch Johnson Benjamin Netanyahu and the “far Right” for his earlier remarks:
The new comments, which Newsom made on the Politico podcast On the Road with Jonathan Martin, followed vocal demands by Jewish leaders to clarify his use of a word they see as unfair or offensive in the Israeli context. And they added to a wider conversation about Israel among Democratic elected officials as support for Israel plummets in the party.
Newsom had said March 5 on the Pod Save America podcast that Israel had been talked about “appropriately as sort of an apartheid state,” referencing New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman’s assertion that annexing the West Bank would “make today’s Israel permanently indistinguishable from apartheid South Africa.” Newsom added in that appearance that a time may come when the U.S. should reconsider its military aid to Israel.
Coming from a leader seen by some as a Democratic party bellwether, the comments had appeared to shift the conversation leftward, alarming Jewish Democrats who viewed Newsom as a longtime ally. …
“Do I consider myself Zionist? I revere the state of Israel. I’m proud to support the state of Israel,” Newsom told Martin. “I deeply, deeply oppose Benjamin Netanyahu’s leadership, his opposition to the two-state solution, and deeply oppose how he is indulging the far-right as it relates to what’s going on in the West Bank.”
Newsom also shifted blame to NY Times columnist Thomas Friedman, who apparently led Newsom down this particular primrose path:
Martin followed up by asking the term-limited governor whether he regretted the apartheid comment.
“I do in this context,” Newsom said. “I said it and I referenced why I used it — a Tom Friedman article, in that same sentence, where Tom used it in the context of the direction that Bibi is going.”
This is utter nonsense. Newsom didn’t use the term “apartheid state” in a Thomas Friedman vacuum. The Hamasniks on the Left have made that accusation for decades, and amplified it up to 11 after the October 7 massacres as justification for the Islamist orgy of rapes and murders that day. Newsom pandered to the Left with that statement, only to realize that he’d stepped out too far toward the radical Left, and now wants to shift blame to Friedman, Netanyahu, and … well …
Now that his pandering has brought consequences, Newsom suddenly is a Zionist. Let’s see how he positions himself when Newsom starts understanding the consequences of that statement in a Democrat primary that will be influenced by the Hamasniks.
Interestingly, Politico hasn’t reported directly on Newsom’s flip-flop despite having the scoop in their hands. They did report yesterday that Newsom is still trying to pander to Dearbornistan when it comes to AIPAC:
NOT INTERESTED: Democrats eyeing White House runs in 2028 are preemptively breaking up with AIPAC, Lisa Kashinsky and Shia Kapos report.
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, who received donations bundled by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee as recently as December, told POLITICO that he’s sworn off the group’s funds (and other PAC money). California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he never has and “never will” take donations from the group.
Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego vowed last week that he “wouldn’t take AIPAC money” anymore. A spokesperson for Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro said he has “never taken money or solicited support from AIPAC,” while a spokesperson for Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear said that “AIPAC has never contributed to Gov. Beshear and they’re never going to. Ever.”
Their retreat underscores how rapidly AIPAC has become a bogeyman for Democrats seeking to criticize the Israeli government, particularly with the Netanyahu administration’s involvement with Trump’s operation in Iran.
AIPAC has existed for 72 years, longer than most of the Democrats in office or seeking it. It represents the interests in common between Israel and the US and has tried to remain bipartisan. It has been active during administrations of both parties in the US and governments under every coalition possible in Israel for decades. Israel has chosen Netanyahu, which Democrats resent (and which Barack Obama and John Kerry tried to obstruct in 2015), and now Democrats want to paint AIPAC as a partisan shop. The ironic outcome is that Democrats are making Israel into a partisan issue here in the US through their resentment of Israelis’ election choices.
If Newsom was truly a Zionist, he would accept those choices and look for common interests to promote. If Democrats were truly democrats, they would support the singular liberal democracy in the Levant rather than the Islamist terror networks run by a theocratic tyranny in Tehran. If Newsom had any integrity, he’d pick one side of this issue and stick with it.
The only good news from this is that Newsom will likely get railroaded out of contention for the party’s nomination in 2028 over this issue, rather than all of the other good reasons to keep one of the most incompetent leaders in the country well away from the Oval Office. Maybe Newsom will get more time to play with his High Speed Railroad to Nowhere in both the literal and figurative senses.
Editor’s Note: Every single day, here at Hot Air, we will stand up and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT against the radical left and deliver the conservative reporting our readers deserve. Sometimes, however, we just point and laugh, and let the radical Left embarrass itself. This is one of those times.
Help us continue to point out, laugh at, and expose the idiocy of progressive elites. Join Hot Air VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership!
