CHARLOTTE, North Carolina — President Donald Trump is less popular by the day, and Republicans are facing increasingly fierce political headwinds ahead of the Nov. 3 midterm elections. But Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) is warning Democrats against overconfidence, pointing to a stark GOP cash edge and possible election chicanery by the Trump administration and its allies.
“I think we should be cautious not to spike the football right now,” Newsom told the Washington Examiner during a recent multiday Southern swing through Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, where he was campaigning for downballot Democrats. “These guys, they just got a good ruling as it relates to ad buys with joint committees, which is significant. I think very significant.”
That warning by the likely 2028 Democratic presidential candidate, age 58, follows the Supreme Court’s June decision that struck down federal limits on coordinated expenditures by political parties. It gives party committees more latitude to spend alongside candidates, an election rules change of sorts widely considered to favor Republicans.
That’s certainly Newsom’s take. The California governor, in the waning months of what will be an eight-year tenure due to state term limits, said the ruling, combined with the cash available to Trump-aligned political groups, could leave Democrats at a disadvantage.
“They have a huge cash-on-hand advantage, at least at the Trump-related accounts,” Newsom said. “And if he wants to spend, he can spend at a scale that the Democratic Party is not able to. And so that’s a threat in terms of my mindset that we have to be sober about.”
The political spending ruling is one of several on which the Supreme Court has weighed in to one degree or another, with some recent, major rulings going Democrats’ way.
Justices this month blocked Missouri from using its newly drawn, Republican-backed congressional map for the midterm elections. Missouri Republicans had tried to redraw the map to increase their 6-2 House delegation edge over Democrats to an overwhelming 7-1 split. Then the Supreme Court left in place a lower court ruling that prevents the U.S. Postal Service from requiring specialized ballot envelopes and collecting sensitive voter information.
On both issues, justices still have yet to rule on the broader merits of the cases. But crucially for Democrats, the rulings took them off the table for the November elections. And the mail ballots case removed what has been a major Democratic concern about the Trump administration using the levers of government to help Republican candidates and hinder their Team Blue opponents.
Still, Newsom and other Democrats warn that the Republican money advantage could dilute significant Democratic gains this fall. Trump’s approval ratings are steadily falling — down to between 33% and 36%, depending on the poll. It’s a trajectory spurred largely by surging inflation, high gas prices, and the military conflict with Iran.
And campaign cash figures paint an ominous picture for Democrats. At the end of July, the Republican National Committee had $130 million in cash on hand, per financial disclosure filings. The Democratic National Committee reported roughly $16 million in cash with $17.9 million in debt.
The House campaign arms showed a closer money fight, but nonetheless a clear Republican advantage. The National Republican Congressional Committee, in its most recent filing, reported $92.3 million in cash on hand, compared with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s $80.1 million.
The story is similar on the Senate side. Through late summer, the National Republican Senatorial Committee reported $55.9 million in cash on hand, compared with the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee’s $41 million.
More money, more power — but not necessarily more votes
As for the political spending coordination case, political professionals say it’s not necessarily a win for Republicans. Jeff Burton, a GOP strategist and former NRCC official, said Newsom is right that the ruling changes how political money can be deployed. Burton added that Democrats operate under the same rules and could seek to use them to their advantage if they so chose.
“The Supreme Court didn’t give Republicans more money. It made the money they already have more powerful,” Burton said. “Republicans can now coordinate directly with candidates and buy television at dramatically cheaper candidate rates.”
But Burton said Newsom may be getting ahead of himself.
“Gov. Newsom is starting to sound like he’s writing the post-election excuse before the election happens,” he said. “Democrats can play by exactly the same rules, and they will have plenty of money to compete — just not as much.”
Natalie Jackson, founder and principal at Centerline Research & Strategy, said the ruling itself does not create a structural advantage for either party.
“Both parties have the same opportunity to coordinate and spend more,” Jackson said. “It’s simply an artifact of who is raising more money.”
The practical question is whether Republicans can turn their resources into an advantage in the relatively small number of competitive races that could determine control of Congress. Democrats need to net three seats to win a majority in the 435-member House. The party faces a more daunting challenge in overturning Senate Republicans’ 53-47 majority. With 36 governors’ races on the ballot, Democrats have several opportunities to pick up seats. There are now GOP governors in 26 states to 24 for Democrats.
“The real concern for Democrats is the combination of the [Supreme Court] ruling and Republican financial strength,” said Irina Tsukerman, a geopolitical analyst and president of Scarab Rising Inc.
Steve Adler, former mayor of Austin, Texas, and author of Hot Seat — Hot City: The Austin Mayor’s Story, said the financial picture is more complicated than a simple Republican-versus-Democrat advantage.
“The Republican net advantage this cycle is real and should be sobering,” said Adler, a Democrat, noting that the balance varies among national party committees, congressional campaign committees, and outside groups.
“The real story and the real threat sitting over all of that is something unusual: MAGA Inc. alone reported more than $403 million in cash at the end of July,” he added.
Still, money has limits.
“Money matters, but at some point, another $10 million in television ads is just another $10 million in television ads, which doesn’t mean much in $200 million Senate races,” said Burton, the GOP strategist. He added that money can “amplify a good candidate and a good message,” but that it “can’t manufacture either one.”
A warning against complacency
Political strategist James Christopher said Newsom’s larger message may be less about campaign finance than about Democrats avoiding premature confidence.
Christopher calls that tendency “Trump Defeat Syndrome” — treating favorable political momentum as if the election has already been won.
He urges campaigns he advises to practice what he calls “Sober October,” when polling, fundraising, and endorsements give way to the harder work of organization, turnout, legal preparedness, and Election Day operations.
“Democrats cannot afford to become intoxicated by favorable indicators and confuse momentum with inevitability,” Christopher said. “Whatever assumptions existed about Donald Trump’s political vulnerabilities in 2024, the only result that ultimately mattered was the vote.”
During his interview, Newsom also pointed to the Postal Service as a potential vulnerability, particularly in California, Colorado, and Utah, where mail voting is widely used.
NEWSOM’S HARRIS GAMBLE: CLEARING THE FIELD OR BETTING SHE WON’T RUN?
The concern centered on a Trump administration rule that would have required states to provide voter information to the Postal Service and use specially designed, trackable envelopes for federal mail ballots. USPS could have rejected mail that did not meet the new requirements. Courts blocked the rule before it could take effect for the 2026 election, and the Supreme Court on Monday declined to lift the injunction.
For Newsom, the episode illustrates why Democrats should not assume the election will be decided solely by polling, candidates, or campaign messages. For his critics, however, the question is whether the term-limited governor is identifying vulnerabilities Democrats need to prepare for, or building a political explanation if Republicans score a November upset.
Barnini Chakraborty (@Barnini) is a senior political reporter at the Washington Examiner.