🚨 NEWSOM SAYS AMERICANS WERE BETTER OFF UNDER BIDEN — AND THE TRUMP-ERA COMPARISON JUST IGNITED A MASSIVE POLITICAL FIRESTORM… |
NEWSOM DEFENDS BIDEN'S 'MASTERCLASS' RECORD — BUT THE 'MESSAGING FAILURE' EXPLANATION CAN'T ERASE INFLATION, AFGHANISTAN OR BIDEN'S VISIBILITY PROBLEM
California Gov. Gavin Newsom is continuing to defend former President Joe Biden's record as Democrats debate how much of the Biden era they should embrace heading toward 2028.
Newsom's argument is stronger and more specific than a viral summary claiming he simply said Americans were financially and socially better off under Biden. I could not verify that exact formulation in a reliable source.
What Newsom has said is that Biden delivered major legislative and policy achievements that many voters either never understood or no longer remember. He has called Biden one of the most successful presidents of the last century, described the administration as a "masterclass of policymaking," and blamed a serious communications failure for Democrats' inability to make those accomplishments politically durable.
That defense contains real evidence. Biden signed a major bipartisan infrastructure law, the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act. The economy added millions of payroll jobs after the pandemic collapse, unemployment fell sharply, and real GDP continued expanding through 2024.
But the messaging explanation has limits. Inflation raised the price level dramatically during Biden's term, purchasing power did not rise nearly as fast as headline job totals suggested, the Afghanistan withdrawal became a defining foreign-policy failure for many voters, and Biden's unusually limited exposure to press interviews and formal news conferences contributed to questions about transparency and his ability to communicate his own record.
The accurate claim is that Newsom believes Biden's accomplishments were badly communicated and underappreciated. I did not find a reliable source for the broader quotation that Americans were categorically "financially and socially better off" under Biden.
Newsom Has Become One of Biden's Most Aggressive Defenders
Newsom has moved in the opposite direction from several Democrats who have spent the post-Biden period emphasizing mistakes.
Axios reported in June that Newsom was openly embracing Biden's legacy while positioning himself as a possible 2028 presidential contender.
He has said he will never turn his back on Biden, called him one of the most successful presidents in the last century and praised the administration's legislative performance.
In a March interview, Newsom described the Biden years as a "masterclass of policymaking."
That defense is politically notable because Biden remains unpopular with much of the broader electorate even as some important Democratic constituencies retain warmer views of him.
The 'Messaging Breakdown' Argument Is Real
Newsom's most pointed version of the communications argument came during a June 25 episode of his podcast with progressive media figure Brian Tyler Cohen.
Newsom pointed to what he called landmark legislative victories, including the bipartisan infrastructure law, the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act.
He argued that the administration performed at a high level on legislation but poorly on communication.
His point was that ordinary voters could be asked what Biden actually accomplished and still struggle to name the major laws.
That is not a frivolous political diagnosis. Public policy can produce benefits years after legislation passes, and large infrastructure programs are particularly difficult to translate into immediate household experiences.
A policy can be consequential even when voters do not associate it with the politician who enacted it. But weak communication cannot explain away policies or economic conditions voters directly experienced.
Biden Really Did Sign Major Bipartisan and Industrial-Policy Laws
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act was one of the largest federal infrastructure packages in decades.
Congressional materials describe the law as authorizing about $1.2 trillion in spending, with roughly $550 billion in new infrastructure investment.
The law funded roads, bridges, transit, rail, airports, water systems, broadband, electric-grid projects and other infrastructure.
The CHIPS and Science Act provided $52.7 billion for semiconductor manufacturing incentives, research and related programs, including $39 billion in manufacturing incentives.
The Inflation Reduction Act added major clean-energy subsidies, tax incentives, health-care provisions and prescription-drug reforms while the Congressional Budget Office originally estimated the legislation would reduce the federal deficit over its first decade.
Newsom therefore has a factual basis for describing the Biden presidency as legislatively productive.
Implementation Was Much Slower Than the Political Sales Pitch
Passing a large law and delivering visible results are not the same thing.
The Government Accountability Office reported in April 2025 that the infrastructure law made about $711.8 billion available for grants to states, tribes, localities and territories.
Of funding available for use before fiscal 2026, agencies had obligated almost half and had actually spent about 20 percent by the end of 2024.
Broadband became a particularly damaging example for Democrats.
The BEAD program received more than $42 billion to expand high-speed internet, yet rollout was slow enough that even Democratic officials complained that households were not seeing connections quickly enough.
A 2026 GAO review found that large amounts of infrastructure and energy funding had been obligated, but thousands of projects were still being reviewed, modified or delayed under the new administration.
Newsom is right that major Biden laws created long-term programs. Critics are also right that many voters did not see immediate benefits before Biden left office.
The Job-Creation Record Was Strong — With a Huge Pandemic-Recovery Caveat
Biden supporters frequently point to the enormous increase in payroll employment during his presidency.
Using the Bureau of Labor Statistics' later revised payroll series, total nonfarm employment rose from roughly 142.9 million in January 2021 to about 158.3 million in January 2025 — an increase of roughly 15.4 million jobs.
The unemployment rate fell from 6.3 percent in January 2021 to about 4.0 percent in January 2025.
Those are substantial labor-market improvements.
But Biden took office while the economy was still recovering from the extraordinary pandemic shutdown. Millions of jobs that returned during his term were restorations of positions lost during the COVID collapse rather than entirely new jobs created from a normal economic baseline.
That does not make the recovery irrelevant. It does mean that calling all of the increase unprecedented organic job creation can exaggerate what the numbers prove.
Economic Growth Was Also Solid Through Biden's Final Year
The economy did not enter recession during Biden's final year.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that real GDP increased 2.8 percent in 2024, after growth of 2.9 percent in 2023 and 2.5 percent in 2022.
Consumer spending and business investment remained important contributors.
By conventional macroeconomic measures, the United States finished 2024 with positive growth and relatively low unemployment.
That record is one reason Newsom argues the public memory of the Biden economy is more negative than the aggregate data alone would suggest.
Inflation Is the Biggest Problem With the 'It Was Just Messaging' Defense
The most powerful rebuttal to Newsom is not that Biden accomplished nothing.
It is that Americans experienced one of the sharpest increases in consumer prices in decades during his presidency.
The Consumer Price Index rose from about 261.6 in January 2021 to about 319.1 in January 2025.
That is an increase of roughly 22 percent in the overall price level.
Inflation peaked far above the Federal Reserve's target during 2022 before slowing substantially later in Biden's term.
By January 2025, the 12-month CPI rate had cooled to 3.0 percent, but lower inflation does not mean the previous price increases disappeared. It means prices were rising more slowly from a much higher base.
For households paying more for food, rent, insurance, utilities and borrowing, that distinction mattered more than a White House communications campaign.
Biden did not personally cause every component of post-pandemic inflation; global supply shocks, energy markets, monetary policy and the pandemic itself mattered. But voters experienced the price increases while he was president, and messaging alone cannot erase that.
Wages Eventually Beat Inflation Again — but the Full-Term Picture Was Mixed
Biden defenders can point to a real late-term improvement in wages.
BLS reported that real average hourly earnings increased 1.0 percent from January 2024 to January 2025.
That meant wage growth was again outpacing inflation for many workers near the end of his presidency.
But the earlier inflation shock had already done substantial damage.
Broad BLS real-hourly-earnings measures were slightly lower in January 2025 than in early 2021, although pandemic-era composition effects make simple start-to-finish wage comparisons imperfect.
The fair conclusion is not that workers universally became poorer or universally became richer. It is that strong nominal wage growth was substantially consumed by the rise in prices, especially during the first half of Biden's term.
The Current Economy Does Not Make the Comparison Simple Either
Newsom's defense also comes at a time when the current Trump economy has its own complications.
The latest available BLS report showed payrolls rising by 162,000 in August 2026 with unemployment at 4.1 percent.
But average payroll growth over the previous 12 months was much slower than the monthly gains common during the Biden recovery.
The latest available CPI report showed consumer prices up 3.4 percent over the year through July 2026.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis estimated annualized real GDP growth at 2.1 percent in the first quarter of 2026 and 1.5 percent in the second quarter.
Those figures do not prove Americans are universally worse off now, but they do show that the macroeconomic comparison is more complicated than partisan slogans on either side.
Whether Americans are "better off" depends on the metric: employment, wages, prices, interest rates, asset values, taxes, public services and personal circumstances can point in different directions.
Afghanistan Was Not a Messaging Failure
The 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan remains one of the strongest examples of a Biden-era problem that cannot be reduced to communications.
The State Department's own after-action review said the fall of Kabul exposed weaknesses in contingency planning and crisis preparation.
The final evacuation was also an extraordinary military and diplomatic operation that moved roughly 125,000 people out of Afghanistan.
Both facts can be true.
The evacuation unfolded amid scenes of chaos after the Taliban's rapid takeover, and the ISIS-K suicide bombing at Abbey Gate killed 13 U.S. service members and about 170 Afghan civilians.
For critics, those events became symbols of strategic failure and poor preparation.
For defenders, the airlift showed exceptional performance by troops and diplomats once the crisis was underway.
Neither interpretation can honestly be described as nothing more than a problem of Democratic messaging.
Biden's Limited Press Exposure Strengthens Newsom's Communication Critique — and Also Undermines It
Newsom is right that the Biden administration had a communications problem.
But some of that problem was self-created.
By mid-2024, research cited by Axios found Biden had participated in fewer formal press conferences and media interviews than any of the previous seven presidents at the same point in their terms.
The Associated Press similarly reported that Biden granted fewer interviews than his modern predecessors and held fewer news conferences than any president since Ronald Reagan.
Biden did frequently answer brief questions from reporters in less formal settings, so he was not completely unavailable.
Still, the White House's preference for more controlled appearances limited opportunities for the president to explain policies, confront criticism and demonstrate command of issues in extended unscripted settings.
If Democrats failed to communicate Biden's record, part of that failure came from the administration's own media strategy, not simply from hostile or inattentive coverage.
The Debate Over Biden's Age Became Part of the Record
Newsom was one of Biden's strongest defenders after the June 2024 presidential debate triggered a crisis over the president's age and fitness.
In later interviews, however, Newsom acknowledged at least one private interaction before the debate that had given him pause.
That history matters because the public's assessment of a presidency is not limited to legislation and macroeconomic statistics.
Voters also judge leadership, communication, confidence and transparency.
A president can sign significant legislation while simultaneously losing public trust in his ability to explain or defend it.
Newsom's Biden Defense Also Has a 2028 Political Context
Newsom's unusually warm embrace of Biden comes as he is increasingly discussed as a possible 2028 presidential candidate.
Axios reported that Biden and his circle viewed Newsom more warmly than several other potential Democratic contenders after Newsom continued defending the former president and his family.
That does not prove Newsom's praise is insincere.
It does mean his comments belong to an emerging argument about what the next Democratic nominee should inherit from the Biden era.
One camp wants to preserve Biden's legislative legacy while arguing the party needs a far more aggressive communications apparatus.
Another camp argues Democrats must first admit that inflation, immigration, Afghanistan and concerns over presidential capacity were substantive failures rather than branding problems.
The Strongest Case for Biden Is Not 'Everything Was Great'
A credible defense of the Biden years does not require pretending the public imagined its economic frustration.
The strongest case is narrower.
Biden presided over a rapid labor-market recovery, low unemployment, continued economic expansion and passage of consequential infrastructure, semiconductor, climate and health-care legislation.
His administration also helped create investment programs whose effects will continue for years after he left office.
At the same time, high inflation dramatically raised household costs, major programs rolled out slowly, Afghanistan damaged confidence, immigration became a political vulnerability and the White House's communications strategy did too little to address concerns about Biden's age and visibility.
Those are not mutually exclusive facts.
What Can Actually Be Said With Confidence
Gavin Newsom has become one of the most prominent Democratic defenders of Joe Biden's presidential record.
He has called Biden one of the most successful presidents of the last century and described the administration as a "masterclass of policymaking."
Newsom has argued that landmark Biden accomplishments were not communicated effectively enough and that many voters cannot identify what the administration achieved.
I could not verify a reliable direct statement from Newsom that Americans were categorically "financially and socially better off" under Biden.
Biden did sign major laws including the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the CHIPS and Science Act and the Inflation Reduction Act.
The infrastructure law authorized roughly $1.2 trillion in spending, including about $550 billion in new investment, while the CHIPS law provided $52.7 billion for semiconductor incentives and research.
Implementation of some programs was slow, and substantial portions of infrastructure funding had not been spent before Biden left office.
Revised BLS data show payroll employment rising by roughly 15.4 million from January 2021 to January 2025, while unemployment fell from 6.3 percent to about 4.0 percent. Much of the early increase reflected recovery from the pandemic collapse.
Real GDP grew 2.5 percent in 2022, 2.9 percent in 2023 and 2.8 percent in 2024.
The CPI price level increased roughly 22 percent between January 2021 and January 2025, leaving households with permanently higher nominal prices even after the annual inflation rate cooled.
Real wage growth improved late in Biden's presidency, but the full-term purchasing-power picture was much less impressive than nominal wage or job-growth statistics alone.
The Afghanistan withdrawal combined a massive evacuation of roughly 125,000 people with chaotic conditions and the Abbey Gate bombing that killed 13 U.S. service members.
Biden also participated in fewer formal press conferences and interviews than recent presidents, strengthening criticism that his own White House contributed to the communications and transparency problem.
The current economy under Trump is not an uncomplicated boom either: August 2026 unemployment was 4.1 percent, July inflation was 3.4 percent and second-quarter real GDP growth was estimated at a 1.5 percent annualized rate.
The defensible conclusion is therefore more complicated than either party's slogan.
Newsom is right that Biden's legislative record was more substantial than many voters remember.
May you like
Critics are right that inflation, Afghanistan, slow implementation and concerns about Biden's visibility were real governing and political problems, not simply failures of branding.
The Biden legacy is best understood as a presidency with significant legislative and macroeconomic achievements that failed to overcome several highly visible problems Americans experienced directly.
