On September 23, 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom used Stephen Colbert’s Late Show couch to deliver a dramatic warning that “I fear we will not have an election in 2028,” a line he said came from the “core of my soul.” The segment, which played on national television, framed that fear as proof that Democrats must sound the alarm about alleged election subversion under President Trump rather than present clear evidence.
That kind of rhetoric isn’t just political theater; it is radical alarmism dressed up as statesmanship. Newsom has been cultivating a national profile — from lawsuits against the former president to aggressive redistricting efforts — and now he’s using apocalyptic language to stoke panic instead of laying out concrete, verifiable facts.
Serious leaders don’t float doomsday scenarios on late-night television and then shrug when critics point out the lack of evidence. Conservatives have every right to call out a governor who traffics in worst-case scenarios; when public officials resort to speculative conspiracy rather than transparent proof, they erode trust in democratic institutions far more effectively than any political opponent.
Worse, this is exactly the kind of overheated messaging that invites misinterpretation and fuels unrest. Within hours of Newsom’s remarks, critics and commentators on both sides linked the broader climate of incendiary rhetoric to violent incidents, and Republican voices blasted the governor for irresponsible language that could inflame already-tense situations. Responsible debate means naming real problems and marshaling facts, not seeding fear and claiming proprietary ownership of patriotism.
Late-night hosts and liberal media outlets like Colbert’s have a choice: they can interrogate these claims or provide them with a friendly stage. Too often the latter happens, turning opinion into orthodoxy without the pushback viewers deserve. Real accountability should come when politicians make extraordinary claims on national television — demand evidence, demand specifics, and refuse to let theatrical fearmongering pass for governance.
Conservatives and independents who want stability and rule-of-law must push back against the spectacle. If American institutions are to survive, they will be defended by clear-headed facts and rigorous scrutiny, not apocalyptic pronouncements and cable-friendly theatrics. Leaders who traffic in conspiracy-style warnings should be challenged to show their work, or step aside while serious people get to the business of preserving free and fair elections.
