California’s 2026 gubernatorial race is shaping up to be unusually fragmented, raising quiet anxiety among Democrats in a state long considered safely blue, according to a recent report in The New York Times. Eight candidates are competing, but only a handful have reached double digits in polling. Under California’s top-two primary system, where the two highest vote-getters advance regardless of party, there is a plausible, if still remote, scenario in which Democrats could be shut out of the general election entirely.
That possibility has revived a lingering question among party insiders and observers alike: what if Kamala Harris had entered the race?
The former vice president, who lost her 2024 presidential bid, was widely expected at one point to pursue the governorship. High-profile Democrats, including television host Sunny Hostin, have publicly suggested it might have been a better fit. “California is like running a country,” Hostin remarked, arguing that Harris’s deep ties to the state could have made her a formidable candidate.
Instead, Harris ruled out a gubernatorial run last July. She has since focused on a national book tour and left open the possibility of another presidential bid in 2028. That decision has drawn mixed reactions. Matt Bennett, a centrist Democratic strategist, said Harris would likely have been effective as governor and a strong asset for the party. At the same time, he noted that a future presidential run would require her to address lingering political baggage.
Without Harris, the Democratic field is crowded but lacks a clear front-runner. Candidates include Xavier Becerra, Katie Porter, Tom Steyer, Matt Mahan, Antonio Villaraigosa, and Tony Thurmond. Republicans Chad Bianco and Steve Hilton are also in contention.
Some Democratic leaders have privately described the field as underwhelming, even as they avoid public criticism. Rusty Hicks has urged candidates to reassess their campaigns, while activists are encouraging voters to delay casting ballots until a clearer favorite emerges.
A year ago, Harris effectively froze the race while considering her options. Polls at the time showed her far ahead of any potential rival. Now, with filing deadlines passed and no indication she ever seriously wanted the role, her absence looms larger.
As strategist David Axelrod put it, the race resembles a “high-stakes NASCAR” event with plenty of jostling but no clear leader. For some Democrats, that uncertainty only sharpens the sense that a different decision by Harris might have reshaped the contest entirely.
