Once hailed as the charismatic, Kennedyesque future of the Democratic Party, California Governor Gavin Newsom now finds himself at the center of a political firestorm. His carefully curated image, once his greatest asset, is now cracking under the weight of mounting criticism and a growing perception of hypocrisy. From his infamous dinner at the French Laundry to his family’s winery remaining open during the pandemic, a narrative has emerged of a leader who preaches sacrifice while indulging in a life of luxury, a man who is all style and no substance.

The story of Newsom’s fall from grace is a complex one, a tale of political ambition, double standards, and a growing disconnect between the governor and the people he represents. It’s a story that has been amplified by his sharpest critics, who paint a picture of a “synthetic fraud,” a man so consumed by his own image that he has lost touch with the realities of the state he governs.

At the heart of the criticism against Newsom is the charge of hypocrisy, a charge that gained significant traction during the COVID-19 pandemic. While Californians were being told to stay home, to shutter their businesses, and to sacrifice for the greater good, Newsom was caught dining at the French Laundry, one of the most exclusive and expensive restaurants in the country. He was maskless, surrounded by lobbyists, and seemingly oblivious to the optics of his actions.

The backlash was immediate and fierce. The French Laundry dinner became a symbol of Newsom’s hypocrisy, a clear example of the “rules for thee, but not for me” mentality that many believe pervades the political elite. It was a moment that crystalized the growing sense that Newsom was not a leader who was in touch with the struggles of ordinary Californians, but rather a man who was more interested in rubbing elbows with the rich and powerful.

But the French Laundry dinner was just the beginning. It was later revealed that Newsom’s family-owned winery had remained open during the pandemic, even as other small businesses across the state were forced to close their doors. The revelation added fuel to the fire, further cementing the perception of a governor who was using his power to protect his own interests while the rest of the state suffered.

The charges of hypocrisy extend beyond the pandemic. Newsom has long styled himself as an environmental champion, a leader who is committed to fighting climate change and protecting the planet. Yet, he has been criticized for his frequent use of private jets, a mode of transportation that has a massive carbon footprint. It’s a contradiction that has not been lost on his critics, who see it as another example of Newsom’s do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do approach to governance.

Beyond the charges of hypocrisy, Newsom has also been criticized for his lack of substance. His critics argue that he is a master of political theater, a man who is more interested in delivering a good soundbite than in developing and implementing effective policies. They point to his record as mayor of San Francisco, a city that saw a dramatic increase in homelessness and crime under his leadership, as evidence of his inability to solve complex problems.

They also point to his performance as governor, a tenure that has been marked by a series of crises, from wildfires to a homelessness epidemic to a mass exodus of residents and businesses from the state. His critics argue that Newsom has been more focused on building his national profile and positioning himself for a presidential run than on addressing the pressing issues facing California.

This focus on image over substance is something that has been noted by many political observers. They describe Newsom as a “shampoo commercial” governor, a man who is always perfectly coiffed and ready for his close-up, but who lacks the depth and seriousness of a true leader. They point to his theatrical hand gestures, his carefully rehearsed speeches, and his obsession with social media as evidence of a man who is more interested in performance than in governance.

The criticism of Newsom is not just coming from the right. He has also faced a backlash from the left, who see him as a corporate Democrat who is too cozy with big business and not progressive enough on issues like healthcare and criminal justice reform. This has left Newsom in a precarious political position, a man who is trying to be all things to all people, but who is ultimately satisfying no one.

The recall election that Newsom faced in 2021 was a clear sign of the growing dissatisfaction with his leadership. While he ultimately survived the recall, the fact that it even happened was a major blow to his political brand. It was a sign that the golden boy of California politics was not as invincible as he once seemed, a sign that the cracks in his carefully crafted image were beginning to show.

As Newsom looks to the future, he faces a number of challenges. He must find a way to address the pressing issues facing California, from the housing crisis to the homelessness epidemic to the state’s struggling economy. He must also find a way to rebuild trust with the voters who have grown disillusioned with his leadership.

But perhaps his biggest challenge will be to overcome the perception that he is a man who is all style and no substance, a politician who is more interested in his own ambition than in the well-being of the people he represents. It’s a perception that has been fueled by his own actions, by his hypocrisy, and by his seeming inability to connect with the struggles of ordinary Californians.

The unmasking of Gavin Newsom is a cautionary tale for any politician who believes that they can build a career on image alone. It’s a reminder that in the end, it’s not the soundbites or the photo-ops that matter, but the real-world impact that a leader has on the lives of the people they serve. And for Gavin Newsom, the verdict on that is still very much out.