The DeSantis-Newsom Debate Was Really a Debate About COVID
Too bad that was only a small part of the 90-minute affair.

Moments into Thursday night's one-on-one debate between Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, the Democrat issued a pointed barb at his Republican counterpart.
"Neither of us," Newsom predicted, "will be the nominee in our party in 2024." (Unlike DeSantis, Newsom is not even running for president—at least not officially.)
After the slapfight that followed, Americans can only hope that's true.
Though it was sold as a showdown between the chief executives of what may be America's most iconic "red" and "blue" states—and perhaps a preview of a presidential campaign next year or in 2028—the debate quickly devolved into a nearly unwatchable mess. The two men kept talking over one another while the moderator, Fox News host Sean Hannity, struggled to keep the conversation focused.
Newsom had little interest in engaging with the premise of the debate: which state had a better style of governance. It's hard to blame him for that. California is losing population, it has a higher unemployment rate than Florida, and its residents suffer under significantly higher taxes. The first 20 minutes of the debate consisted of Hannity teeing up those facts one after the next, letting DeSantis swing away, and then asking Newsom to explain why California seems to suck. That was never going to produce a productive discussion, and it didn't.
Instead, Newsom played the role of loyal Joe Biden surrogate—he started his very first answer of the night with "I'm here to tell the truth about the Biden/Harris record." And since he had little interest in defending his own track record, it quickly became obvious that Newsom was on the debate stage to rope-a-dope DeSantis into losing his cool and looking unserious.
He largely succeeded. "Ron, relax," he chuckled at one point near the end of the 90-minute affair, after hooking the Flordia governor into another loud and meaningless shoutfest.
If there was one area of the debate where a true clash of visions seemed inevitable, it was the COVID-19 pandemic—and, indeed, that topic produced the most telling exchange of the night.
Newsom jumped at the chance to point out that DeSantis locked down many public and private spaces at the start of the pandemic. This is true, but it's far from the whole story, and that should have given DeSantis an opportunity to argue as much—and to point out that Florida's emphasis on personal responsibility is a big part of the reason why the state lured so many people during and after the pandemic.
Instead, DeSantis spiraled off into an answer about excess mortality rates, and Hannity interjected to point out that both Florida and California had lower death rates than the national average. Those statistics are important, of course, but they're not going to convince anyone of much at this point. Anyway, research suggests it made little difference to mortality rates in the long run whether a state had aggressive or permissive COVID policies.
Having already attacked DeSantis for being too aggressive in responding to COVID, Newsom flipped his argument on its head just moments later and claimed that Florida's speedy reopening cost "tens of thousands of lives." It makes little sense to argue that DeSantis did too little but also too much if your goal is to have a productive discussion about governance strategies. Newsom got away with muddying the debate because he has nothing to lose, since he's not running for anything (though, asked directly by Hannity, Newsom refused to say directly that he would rule out a run as Biden's replacement).
Indeed, the very fact that Newsom was trying to argue that DeSantis was "a lockdown governor" says something pretty definitive about which side won that debate, doesn't it? Newsom can't fix his record on COVID, so his only option here was to try to make DeSantis seem equally bad.
DeSantis did eventually find his footing long enough to deliver a retort. "Gavin Newsom did huge damage to people in California. He ruined livelihoods," he said, in perhaps his strongest moment of the night. "We had our kids in school. He had the kids locked out of school because of the teachers union. That is having a generational impact."
Finally, there seemed to be an actual debate happening. One that involved contrasting visions for the relationship between Americans and their state governments. More of that would have been great! But it was time for a commercial break, and when the show resumed it moved on to more obviously partisan issues—guns, abortion, and how they feel about Biden's track record—where the two men's positions aren't as nuanced or illustrative as their responses to COVID.
At least some of the blame for the disappointing event must rest with Hannity, who simply tried to cover too much ground in a limited amount of time. Why were two governors being asked about China policy, or Israel's war in the Gaza Strip? Not everything needs to be a presidential debate, and this certainly shouldn't have been treated like one—particularly since one of the men isn't running for national office. A tighter focus on state policies, and COVID policy especially, would have allowed more clarity to emerge.
Newsom had little to lose on Thursday, and he acted like it. DeSantis needed to use Thursday's debate to prove that he's a stronger candidate in a one-on-one setting than he's appeared in the GOP's larger forums. After struggling to deal with Newsom's mudslinging, DeSantis should probably be glad that Donald Trump keeps skipping the primary debates.
If these two men meet on another debate stage with higher stakes at some future date, perhaps we'll see a better clash of ideas and visions. Of course, that would also mean that one of them is likely to become president—and Thursday's event shouldn't make anyone eager for that.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Two assholes.
DON'T TALK SHIT ABOUT DESANTIS!!!!!!!!!
Pour sarc.
Says the guy who has flipped out on multiple occasions when Reason was mean to the poor, poor Republican. So unfair that they're so mean to Republicans. So very unfair. Did I mention that it's unfair? Yes, it's unfair.
Poor sarc. Just lies and false narratives. Whole world view crumbling around him. Everything he has advocated has turned to shit.
It will be okay buddy. It will be okay.
Cry more about how Reason is so unfair to Republicans. Let it out. You can do it.
Calm down buddy. Take a breath. It will be okay. Shhhh. The final stage of depression regarding being wrong on every topic the last decade is almost over.
It will be okay buddy.
Misdirected to JesseAz
From the pop-up:
"I WANT FREE MINDS AND FREE MARKETS!"
"In a world gone mad, I trust Reason’s fact-based, award-winning journalism."
Which would you choose?
Jeff has assured me this is an opinion site and opinion sites should never be cited for evidence.
Some reason would be nice, as well.
"Though it was sold as a showdown between the chief executives of what may be America's most iconic "red" and "blue" states—and perhaps a preview of a presidential campaign next year or in 2028—the debate quickly devolved into a nearly unwatchable mess."
Like our national government?
"California is losing population, it has a higher unemployment rate than Florida, and its residents suffer under significantly higher taxes."
More to the point, California has more homelessness, inequality, racial strife, and other indicators that contradict the liberal paradise vision.
I was in Newport Beach very recently, and it really puts the spotlight on CA being "the do as I say, not as I do" state. Sure, they hate income inequality, but not as much as they love luxury cars and hot women.
Just own that shit, California. Why would anyone be against awesome cars and hot women?
Have you heard of eco-feminists?
Newport Beach is MAGA country, unlike Chicago.
Newport Beach is a tiny island of wealthy non-leftists surrounded by 16-18 million “progressive” true believers and a few million scattered critical thinking people (referring just to the L.A. Metro area here). Taking that city as an example, or even a representative sample, of the overall State of CA would be like visiting Lancaster, PA and assuming that most residents of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh lead a lifestyle more or less the same as the local Amish population.
Per capita, Florida is losing more residents to California per year. (But only just barely... it's nearly even.) The percentage of California residents that relocate to Florida is a tiny fraction of a percent of the 40 million residents whereas Florida's 22 million residents choose California a tiny fraction more. But given the near 2-to-1 population advantage that California has, there are more net California migrants to Florida (roughly 13K).
California has income tax. Florida does not. "higher taxes" is a meaningless charge. California also has higher wages, lower property taxes, and far lower home insurance rates (even with recent fire issues.) Florida has the nations third largest homeless population, a number expected to increase due to the strength of the Florida housing market.
Not sure how you're measuring "inequality" and "racial strife" here.
Doooooood
You.
Are.
Full.
Of.
Shit.
Florida's "strong housing market" is the result of more people choosing to move into rather than out of the state. The likelihood that rising housing costs might cause an increase in homelessness is low and temporary in a state where county/local governments allow for the construction of new housing when it's determined to be needed and doesn't help the local activist/union groups to hold up that construction with "greenmail" lawsuits under an over-blown "environmental protection" law. By comparison, Los Angeles has been deliberately creating in increasingly severe housing shortage since 1972, and even when those in charge claim that addressing homelessness is their "top priority" and pretending that the problem is "first and foremost a housing issue", the last thing they've been willing to consider as a means to address the problem has been to expand the issuance of building permits and/or streamline the process of getting from obtaining a permit to actually breaking ground (the State of CA literally charges an "excise tax" on building supplies such as lumber as if access to a stack of 2x4s and plywood is some kind of extravagance).
Simply mentioning that Florida has the country's "third highest" homeless population leaves out some critical context, especially in comparison to CA. Total homeless population by state is a number which drops off at an incredible rate, especially in comparison to State population totals; the top three States in terms of homeless population, along with their estimated homeless population numbers are: CA (171,521), NY (74,178), and FL (25,929). California not only has more than 6 times the homeless population of Florida, the state is home to about 25% of the homeless population of the entire USA, and has the highest per-capita rate of homelessness of any state (DC is higher, but has such a small total population that a fairly small homeless population can blow out that ratio for comparison to larger states), and nearly 4 times the per-capita homelessness rate of Florida (43.95 vs 11.97).
As far as taxes go:
The difference between CA State income tax and no State income tax is huge; a 9.3% marginal income tax rate on CA income starts at an income level which below the local poverty line in the major Metro Areas where 75% of the state population lives.
Property taxes in FL apparently vary widely by county, but often include a "homestead exemption" for primary homes, and the median final rate of property taxes assessed in FL is 0.98%; State property tax rate in CA is 1.00% and in L.A. County, the additional levees basically double that burden with no exemptions but also assessments aren't updated based on increase in property valuation since purchase, so the effective rate is much lower for those who have owned most properties for 10+ years, however with the median price of a new home in Miami being 58% of the median price in Los Angeles, even a higher tax rate doesn't equal a higher tax burden.
Sales Tax in CA is 7.25%, with local rates in some cities exceeding 10% when County and Municipal additions are compounded to that. In FL the state rate is 6% with top local totals being 8%
Gas tax in CA is $0.779/gal (which then is also subject to sales tax as well as increasing the cost of anything that's ever moved on a truck with that increase also subject to sales tax), vs $0.3523 in FL.
Just for the record, these things are not debates; they are joint press conferences.
I know that it is not that hard to construct a stage setting where no one can yell over anyone else, because the 'moderator' controls the microphone switches. Only one mike live at a time. If the speaker goes off topic, cut his mike and he forfeits the remaining time.
Maybe more boring entertainment, but definitely more actual information flowing.
If debates actually ran like that, with a seriously neutral moderator, I'd watch just for the entertainment value of two politicians yelling into the void when their microphones were cut.
To be fair, the audience really prefers no rules ultraviolent cage matches to the death, but Fox and Hannity chickened out a bit short of the ultimate "debate" in that regard.
Someone described it as hair spray vs gel.
Can you really take seriously a Presidential Candidate stupid enough to get in this debate? Ron DeSantis had everything to lose and nothing to gain. I think that Ron DeSantis is a smart fellow and could likely do a good job as President. That said he lacks the talent to get elected and I see him making little progress.
I actually agree. This was a pit trap set by the DNC for DeSantis, and he actually jumped into it willingly because of pure unadulterated ego or just because he's afraid of looking 'weak'.
He obviously didn't have a plan during the debate, which seems monumentally unwise when only one of the two of them are planning to run for President.
If Newsome was actually planning on running, or even had a snowballs chance in hell of being the nominee, it might be different but that just isn't the case here.
Newsome, in true California style, was literally just there to throw shit in the hopes some of it stuck. All upside for the DNC, all downside for DeSantis.
Amusingly though, this helps clear one of Trump's contenders for him which tells me the DNC is quite happy to run against Trump again.
If this was a trap, it was a trapped labeled "This is a TRAP" and Ron DeSantis walked right in. That's not what a "smart guy" does.
Newsome had a few smaller goals:
1) present some facts to FOX News watchers who may be moderates that FOX News doesn't like to mention (like Florida's higher murder rate.)
2) give a Biden stump speech without the issues associated with Biden going on FOX News.
3) increase the odds that Biden's opponent is the guy he beat last time.
1) On the contrary, you left this part out:
https://news.wgcu.org/florida/2023-12-01/fact-checking-newsom-desantis-debate-immigration-abortion-book-bans-and-a-poop-map
The statistics:
He showed a graphic with 2022 violent crime rates, based on FBI data. California had the highest rate, with 499.5 violent crimes per 100,000 people. The national average was 380.7 per 100,000, and Florida's was 258.9 per 100,000.
California’s overall homicide rate of 5.7 per 100,000 people was higher than Florida’s rate of 5.0 per 100,000. Both states rank below the national rate of 6.3.
2) If that was the case, then Newsom did a terrible job to the point where he's now claiming Fox News and DeSantis have colluded.
3) Trump and many of his supports have shown evidence disputing the election results. Read this article:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/computer-experts-election-security-experts-warn-serious-threat-georgia-voting-machines
If anyone else wants to refute shawn_dude, please do so.
Doooood is not worth refuting. Like turd, he simply ignores facts and repeats the same lies.
Insult the stupid sumbitch and tell him to fuck off and die.
Doooooooooooooooood,
You.
Are.
Full
Of.
Shit.
What's really sad is that people who could do a really good job as President have to rely on "talent" to get elected to the position. That having been said, I think that DeSantis would do a really terrible job as President of the United States and I'm very glad that he won't get elected. His policy positions are even more terrible than Trump's.
Yeah, Desantis seems to be a competent governor. Probably wouldn't be a bad president. But he's shit at campaigning.
He’s not that competent. The state (of which I’m a former resident) has quite a few problems that he failed to address. The red tide issue, for example, was something he tried to tackle early on, got a few wins there but then walk away from it and the tides are back. Since they’re caused by industrial farming runoff (mostly turf farming), this is a fixable thing if he’s willing to expend political capital. His abortion limits to 6 weeks despite the state being 60/40 in favor of a Roe v Wade set of limits and he refusal to say he would not support a national ban have him out of step with his own voters. (But he’s term limited so he has less to lose there.) He’s run roughshod over his own legislature, the public school system, and just about anyone spunky enough to speak truth to power. He’s one of the most illiberal (as in “liberty”) governors in the country right now. Then there's his whole failed quest to take down Disney. That isn't competency.
Seems like he may have been less of a good governor after he started trying to get more of a national profile. I'm not trying to say I like all his policies or he doesn't do dumb shit like all politicians. Just that he seems competent at doing the actual job.
I will agree here. I think Ron DeSantis's downfall started when he started getting ambitions for the Presidency. Had he focused on doing a good job as Governor and avoided the culture wars he would have done better. Good candidates, with the skill set for the Presidency, often make early mistakes that cost them their chance. In the case of DeSantis he went first to try to take Trump's base with the culture war stuff. He seemed to get little for the effort. As Gavin Newsom noted he is 41 points back.
Doooooooooooooood,
You.
Are.
Full
Of.
Shit.
A lot of time is spent looking back on Covid, the real question is what happens next time a large-scale infection breaks out. Did people learn enough from the pandemic to do better next time?
Your party learned half of the population will be compliant to their demands no matter the evidence. Dems learned a lot.
That's not a question at all. Of course "people" did not learn anything from the pandemic. Our fellow Americans are mostly craven, self-centered clueless rodents who were most upset by not being allowed to attend sports events during the lockdowns. The politicians learned that they could get away with pushing the formerly free American people around with impunity by manufacturing and declaring emergencies whenever they want to.
Given that future pandemics are likely to be different diseases with different vectors and behaviors, it's unlikely anyone learned anything that would be of any use. Hopefully the CDC at least learned that it's not enough to be right but that you have to communicate effectively to your audience.
You think? Seems to me that pandemics are very likely to be respiratory viruses. What other diseases are there that rapidly spread around the world and potentially affect almost everyone?
First Zeb has a good point respiratory viruses pose the greatest risk for rapid and widespread infection. There are many things to learn that don't have to be specific to the infectious agent itself. Governments need to be monitoring for infections and react quicker. They don't want to cause a panic, but they can't wait too long to act. We have a model for making vaccines rapidly, but we need quicker and more accessible testing for infection. Governments need to identify the most vulnerable and work to protect them while minimizing impacts on majority of the population. Governments need to protect the population from serious infection while minimizing impacts to economy and education. Government can expect to spend more, but should not spend where not needed.
Dooooooooooooood,
You.
Are.
Full
Of.
Shit.
Next time there's an emergence of another novel virus strain or any other "pandemic" outbreak, the best we can do is hope that either the virus involved is as mild as Covid-19 was or that the upcoming new leadership of CDC and NIH/NAID can somehow manage to restore at least a modicum of credibility to their respective agencies.
Also, in the case of the USA, we really need to hope that the "pro wrestling" paradigm of partisan politics has subsided at least a bit and that TDS was a phenomena that's unique about how a huge chunk of the public responds to a particular political figure (both the 85% on the "#resistance" side and the 15% of TDS cases which were "deep MAGA"). If we're stuck in a similar dynamic during a pandemic involving an actually dangerous virus, then we're likely just fucked; if half the country is trying to make decisions about what to do based primarily (or in many cases solely) on whether a given action is in-line with or against whatever they choose to think the President wants them to do then the rate at which the actual science manages to get its feet on the ground might not matter very much (and it'll matter less if we once again get stuck with leaders of the science agencies who are acting more as political operators than sticking to what the data points toward).
After struggling to deal with Newsom's mudslinging, DeSantis should probably be glad that Donald Trump keeps skipping the primary debates.
Its the Republican primary voters that should be most upset that Trump skips the debates. As much as DeSantis might not want to square up against Trump in a slug-fest, the fact that Trump is avoiding being on stage with the other candidates means that they all treat him with kid gloves. On social media and interviews, they won't go after him because it is just them. But put a few of them together where they are trying to explain to voters why they should be the nominee and not the others, and they won't be able to avoid criticizing him. Even if they won't dig on him for whining about 2020 all the time, they can still point out how little substance he is bringing on everything else. Other than revenge on his enemies, what is his plan to make our lives better if he wins?
Biden's plans are...what?
MORE suffering?
The people who make Biden’s “plans” haven’t told him yet what they are.
The more they hold back while Biden can still fog a mirror, the more they can pretend was actually Kamala’s idea when the time comes to try to sell her to the country as an actual leader at some level.
Nothing on gay porn for kids, Reason? Otherwise known as Book banning!!!!
>> "I'm here to tell the truth about the Biden/Harris record."
lol-iest thing Gavin has ever said.
You guys might think that both sides were equally bad, but the Newsom side clearly seems to think he lost: They are claiming collusion / cheating between the host/moderator and Desantis.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/01/newsom-desanitis-debate-cheating-00129555
Kinda rich coming from the party that had CNN moderators feed their presidential candidate debate questions in advance.
As well as the conduct of Candy Crowley.
The one superlative that can safely be applied to the Democratic Party is “extraordinarily shameless.” They don’t even recognize the double standard staring them in the face! They’re the good guys because they CARE; and everyone else is the bad guys, no identifiable standard needed. It does not matter to them how much actual harm they do to “marginalized populations” while trying to “help the little guy.”
Schumer kneels in Palestinian cloth - I give it five, six months.
There's always some way for ideologues to pretend that the counter-productive results of their "empathy driven" policies are actually the fault of the opposition. Half or more of the Dems in the country probably sincerely believe that the FY2022-23 deficit would have been smaller if only the full amount of "Build Back Better" spending had been allowed instead of the 25% or so that made it into the "Inflation Reduction Act" (which only served to maybe reduce future inflation by saving the Fed from having to print another $3T to cover BBB.
I think my favorite part was when DeSantis said that California allows kids to come to the state for sexual reassignment surgery without parental consent and Newsom said, "these kids just want to live." No denial or clarification needed there.
How did we get here? …A tyrannical [Na]tional So[zi]alist government. As history predicts time and time again.
Once upon a time the USA was about Individual Liberty and Justice for all. It would be nice if people would help it stay that way by only electing politicians who honor that Supreme Law of the land instead of voting for Al’Capone wanna-be's who promise to go out on a theft-spree for them (free-sh*t).
and Hannity interjected to point out that both Florida and California had lower death rates than the national average. Those statistics are important, of course, but they're not going to convince anyone of much at this point.
Only if you're not paying attention. If social construct A has harsh lockdowns, masking, and a pogrom for anyone who's unvaccinated, and social construct B swivels its hips, says "wear a mask if you want and stuff, but there are no mandates" and is cool with the unvaccinated mixing interracially with the vaccinated and they both have lower than average death rates, then one of those two countries went about COVID the wrong way. I'll let Boehm figure out which one.
I am so tired of guys like this shitting all over DeSantis that the next time I'm asked to pony up for the good of the Reason team, I'll just laugh.
Did anyone besides me see Newsom as terribly slimy? He kept smirking and interrupting.
Does anyone not see Newsome as terribly slimy?
About 10 million women in CA who find their seat getting slimy whenever he appears on their TV or other screen....
I didn't want to comment on this before I got a chance to see this.
But you're wrong.
The DeSantis/Newsom debate was really about humiliating the ever-loving crap out of Newsom and California.
Florida's COVID death rate is 60 percent higher than California's. That is about 32,000 more deaths thanks to the supposedly pro life Governor's policies. And the way statistics are collected the excess is actually much greater because a tourist who contracted COVID in Florida but dies in his/her home state gets the death assigned to the home state.
Florida also has higher homicide rates than California.
That's because the CA government doesn't count the 5 homeless people per day in L.A. (and god only knows how many in SF) to die from generally preventable causes via government negligence to be "homicides".
According to the CDC that's a BS lie as CA had a higher COVID death rate then Florida in 2020. Course BS is all you leftards sell these days.