CA-GOV: Harris gives California governor's race a serious look

[RandySF]

Kamala Harris is leaning toward entering the California gubernatorial race, sources familiar with the former vice president’s thinking tell The Hill.

While the sources caution that Harris hasn’t made a final decision yet and is still considering all her options, they say she has made it clear that she is not done with public service and is giving the race strong consideration.

Those who have spoken to Harris about the possibility of entering the race say it has given her a renewed sense of excitement and, as one source put it, “a glimmer in her eyes.”
“She has a lot of people in her ear telling her that it makes the most sense and she can do the most good,” said one source who has spoken to Harris about a potential run.



https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5361287-harris-governor-race-decision-timing/

[W_HAMILTON]

1. Our nation's loss is California's gain.

[Cha]

2. And, Why Not.. if that's what Kamala Harris

decides is best for her, California and the World!

Mahalo, RSF

[Celerity]

3. Katie Porter will drop out of the race if VP Harris runs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/11/us/politics/katie-porter-california-governor.html

snip

After losing the presidential election in November, Ms. Harris returned home to Los Angeles and has contemplated a run for California governor. Ms. Porter will drop out of the race if Ms. Harris runs, a spokesman said.

In the interview on Tuesday, Ms. Porter said that Ms. Harris would have “a powerful, field-clearing effect” for Democrats in the race, and that she has long been a supporter of the former vice president. In 2012, when Ms. Harris was California’s attorney general, she appointed Ms. Porter to monitor a legal settlement with major banks over the foreclosure crisis.

[SSJVegeta]

4. NO

[Auggie]

5. Why?

[obamanut2012]

11. It doesn't work that way

[SSJVegeta]

13. It would if we were more of a democracy

And not dictated by name recognition and disproportional resources.

[RandySF]

20. Sounds like you want it dictated

that Porter is the nominee.

[SSJVegeta]

22. Actually I think I prefer Harris

On edit:...or Villaragosa TBH. My primary issue is expanding public transit. Villaragosa and Harris have proven themselves on those issues, I think, more than Porter.

But I do believe in that principle pertaining to a more even playing field, nonetheless.

[obamanut2012]

42. It literally doesn't work that way -- you seem to want it to NOT be fair

Why?

She has held several state and local offices in CA already. And excelled.

[SSJVegeta]

48. Porter has signaled she will drop out of the race if Harris runs

More candidates are better than fewer candidates. At the very least I simply dont want Porter to drop out

[Renew Deal]

15. Kamala might be the better candidate

It would be a tough break for Porter to run into another big Dem name, but that’s how it goes sometimes.

[SSJVegeta]

17. Agreed.

As i said in my follow up post, I really like her previous positions and support for public transit and high speed rail. Those are by far among my top issues as a Californian. That being said, Porter is also very supportive of public transit, but has thrown cold water on hsr, which im not happy with.

[SSJVegeta]

25. I also saw somehwhere how Porter will drop out if Harris wins

Thats part of why I said "no" as my knee jerk reaction. Since I think more democracy is better than less democracy. Between the two Im definitely leaning towards Harris for now.

[tinrobot]

21. Porter also had her chance. She got third in the statewide Senate race.

Harris has won all of her statewide California elections, including the last one for California's electoral votes.

I'm going with the proven winner.

[SSJVegeta]

26. Fair point.

[OnDoutside]

28. I like her but Porter made a terrible misstep. I hope she re-ignites her political career and maybe the coming Midterms

might offer a chance for her to comeback.

[SSJVegeta]

29. What do you think her misstep was?

Personally I dont like that she is lukewarm at best with high speed rail. Whereas Harris fought for the funds as a Senator.

[OnDoutside]

30. I thought she should have stayed in the House and continued to do what she was garnering great kudos for, holding

Republicans and allied chancers to account. She should never have gone for the Senate seat, it was way too soon. I feel she rubbed too many House Dems up the wrong way, and I would contrast her exploits with AOC.

[SSJVegeta]

31. I think youre right. Might be tough to come back from that.

[OnDoutside]

34. Yes, I can't imagine she made too many friends, which is a pity because she is so clever.

[mcar]

35. So women running for office only get one shot?

Ok.

[SSJVegeta]

37. Thats a weird interpretation

😒 🤔

The meaning of my comment is that it takes Porters shot away if Harris runs. (It is reported that Porter will drop out if Harris declares)

[obamanut2012]

43. That si what you said, though -- since she's already held state offices, too bad

[SSJVegeta]

45. What I clarified with is what I intended to say.

Apologies for the misunderstanding.

[mcar]

46. Why does Porter get a second shot at holding office

but Harris should be banned from running for something again? That makes no sense.

It's not Porter's "turn."

[SSJVegeta]

47. Where the heck did i say she should be banned from running??

My gosh. I do not believe that in the slightest.

[mcar]

49. You deleted your statement so I can't refer to it

I see that you have clarified it some. Thanks.

[SSJVegeta]

50. Yeah I deleted it cause people seemed to get the wrong idea from it.

How many interpreted it was far from what I intended. I appreciate your kindness.

[calguy]

38. If Katie Porter wants her chance, she'll have to earn it

As far as I’m concerned, Katie blew up her promising political career by her bone-headed decision to run against Adam Schiff for the Senate.

[SSJVegeta]

7. Maybe. I dont know.

I actually really like her stance on public transit. Which is largely my number one issue. So maybe I could get behind her... 🤔

[obamanut2012]

10. I live here, yes

[kkmarie]

8. We need whoever can win CA

I love Kamala! I love Katie!
Not being from CA I didn't follow the CA senate race that Katie was a candidate. Searching for info I found the OLD democratic guard didn't want Katie to win. And threw all their weight (pelosi) on getting Schiff elected.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/11/us/politics/katie-porter-california-governor.html

I have no opinion I just found Katie's last run interesting, with the alleged games played by the democrats.

Basically I'm just typing out loud and wondering what others are thinking.

Again, I think, the only goal we should have is to make sure CA is won by a democrat.

[Sympthsical]

18. Literally any Democrat will win California these days

Anyone at all.

If Harris runs, the party will clear the path for her.

Same ole entrenched power. Nothing revelatory. Nothing interesting. Nothing new.

We need a new direction. I won't vote for another decade of same old shit.

[cadoman]

23. do you think a Black woman is not capable of taking us in a new direction?

Do you notice a pattern here?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_governors_of_California

You have to be out of your mind to think that Harris would not bring something new to the table, on multiple levels: gender and race.

[OnDoutside]

27. Very fair point

[fujiyamasan]

32. Sorry I don't vote solely based on a candidate's race or gender

By that logic, voters in Virginia should support winsome sears. Why not? She’s a black woman. I’m sure shes capable of moving that state in a different direction. It may be the wrong direction, but it is new.

[cadoman]

55. Winsome Sears is a clinically insane, KKK apologist, school shooter in the making

I don't think she's comparable to Kamala in any way.

:large

[fujiyamasan]

66. Hence my point

Voting based on identity alone is ridiculous.

If you want to make the point that Kamala is the best candidate for governor, by all means go ahead. Point to her proposed policies, her record as AG, senator, and VP.

She has already been elected several times state wide. I don’t think her race or gender will play a role in the primaries, at least I sure hope not.

At this point, personally I’d prefer someone else for multiple reasons. I’m willing to keep an open mind and look at all of the candidates based on their respective merits (and no, their race and gender will not be a factor one way or the other).

[Sympthsical]

39. I do not vote identity. I vote policy.

These are public servants. They are not celebrities, and I am bored stiff by people who behave more like fans than citizens.

There are people who think if the identity is diverse, then the policies will be. Well, we have sufficient experience by 2025 to know that politicians of different gender and racial identities will happily play ball with monied interests and the status quo just as easily and readily as any white male.

I am interested in ideas.

Remember when President Obama quite infamously said, "I am the change!" when asked what changes he intended to bring in policy?

Identity is not policy. It is not a qualification. It is not telling me what you want to do differently. It does not explain to me why I should trust you with power. If I voted strictly on identity, I'd be voting for every LGBT candidate who came along.

I do not do that either.

[cadoman]

54. if a Black woman can't be elected as Governor in the most Democratic state in the country...

Then what exactly are we doing here? She was our Presidential candidate and frankly spun circles around Joe in terms of campaign effectiveness. Why wouldn't you want her and her ideas to lead CA?

Do you realize that the MAGAT fiefdoms of Alabama and Arkansas actually have more diversity in their governorship than we do?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_governors_of_Alabama

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_governors_of_Arkansas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_governors_of_California

If we can't vote for a Black woman in CA, then what credibility do we calling out the racists and misogynists who didn't turn out for Harris in 2024?

[Sympthsical]

56. She would be elected if she ran. So what's your argument?

I don't think anyone in California believes she wouldn't practically be elected by acclaim in this state if she ran. She'd certainly win the primary.

I'm discussing my vote and my preference. And my preference is that I'd rather look at other options. And many of the people whose names have floated around are not male or not white. Anthony Villaraigosa, Betty Yee, Katie Porter, Eleni Kounalakis.

In fact, if we were taking odds, I think our next governor is more likely to be a woman.

You seem to be saying the only diversity that counts for you is if it is a Black woman. That other women or other ethnic minorities aren't diverse enough for your tastes.

Which is a little . . . weird. It's weird. It's a little . . . racist maybe? Particularly when you consider this state is a plurality Latino, and we haven't had a Latino governor in 150 years. Hell, we just got our first Latino senator in Alex Padilla.

Where's our AAPI representation? This state is three times more AAPI than Black (roughly 15% vs. 5% respectively).

I truly do not understand your argument. In a state as diverse as ours, and with so many Democratic options out there, you're making a very strange argument that unless the candidate is one specific identity, everyone's kind of being racist in some way.

It's an argument I find in itself racist. Sorry. It kind of is.

[kkmarie]

9. I love Kamala! I love Katie!

Not being from CA I didn't follow the CA senate race that Katie was a candidate. Searching for info I found the OLD democratic guard didn't want Katie to win. And threw all their weight (pelosi) on getting Schiff elected.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/11/us/politics/katie-porter-california-governor.html

And even though I'm not in CA and would love to see Kamala in the job. Another part is telling me Katie is the better option.

Basically I'm just typing out loud and wondering what others are thinking.

[tinrobot]

24. As a Californian, it seemed like it was always Schiff's to lose.

He was much more of a leader in the House. He took on Trump directly as chair of the Intelligence Committee and as an impeachment manager. He had the resume points.

Katie was more the type that threw grenades from the sidelines. Staying in her swing-district house seat would have served California and the nation better. That seat got filled by a republican, putting us one vote further away from a majority.

[Unwind Your Mind]

61. I agree

I’m a Californian too and I’m hardly old guard

I supported Schiff because he had the experience and was so excellent in the impeachment hearings

I like Katie, I wish she was still in Congress

And, I’m sure she can have a meaningful job in Harris’ administration if she wants it

[Prairie Gates]

12. Oh Jesus help us

[mcar]

36. What do you mean by that?

[obamanut2012]

40. As a Californian, I hope she runs, sorry you don't like her

[Renew Deal]

14. She should do it

It would give her critical executive experience and a large platform.

[Sympthsical]

16. Nope

My state is not a consolation prize.

No.

No more status quo.

[obamanut2012]

41. Also my state, and I hope she runs

[Sympthsical]

44. And nothing will change

And that's fine if people are fine with that.

But when the usual complaints about Sacramento come along, I'll just roll my eyes.

[W_HAMILTON]

62. Weren't you just up further in this thread saying you vote for policy and not identity?

Yet here you are, not one word about policy, but rejecting Kamala outright because of her "status quo" identity?

[Sympthsical]

63. Status quo is a description of policy

Unless there's a brand new identity that's been crafted from whole cloth while I wasn't looking. Which, hey, given how goofy everything else in this vein is, I will not dismiss that possibility out of hand.

Could that make me quo-ist?

So many possibilities to be pointlessly had.

[Starbeach]

19. CA Prominence

CA is critical as an anti-MAGA stronghold. Kamala should lead that.

[fujiyamasan]

33. I really hope she decides against it

I just hope this time there’s a vigorous primary in this state for the nomination.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

51. Oh, okay

"...sources familiar with the former vice president’s thinking..."

"Those who have spoken to Harris about the possibility of entering the race say it has given her.... 'a glimmer in her eyes.'”

The eye glimmer proves it!!

[Bayard]

52. Would governor be a step down from the VP spot?

Although getting admin experience would be a real plus.

[Bayard]

53. Would governor be a step down from the VP spot?

Although getting admin experience would be a real plus.

[Kaleva]

57. John Quincy Adams served in the House after being President

[Bayard]

58. I did not know that

Thanks!

[Kaleva]

60. One of the very few presidents to do something like that

I’ll have to check but I believe President Tyler later served in the Confederate Congress

[obamanut2012]

59. No, we are the 4th largest economy in the world, too

[cadoman]

64. if it's a step down it's a very small one

As others have stated, CA is massive in both size and economic and moral power.

It's probably the greatest and most important state of the USA.

If Harris wishes to, she should run an "I Told You So" ticket. Always wish Hillary would have gotten that chance...

[SocialDemocrat61]

65. From VP

It might be a step up, considering the size of California.