Barabak: The real question isn’t whether Harris will run for governor. It’s why.
For some folks, this summer will be a time of relaxation: picnics, barbecues, vacation. For others, a mad scramble between work and swim meets, baseball tournaments or shopping before shelves go bare and the Trump tariffs price everything beyond reach.
For Kamala Harris, it’s a time for deciding.
The former vice president is expected to spend a chunk of her summer weighing various options — whether to retire from politics after more than 20 years seeking elected office, whether to mount a 2026 bid for California governor or whether to make a third attempt at the White House in 2028.
According to several who’ve spoken with Harris, she is genuinely undecided, torn between concern and affection for her home state and an undimmed desire to be president.
Of the three options, the most pressing is whether to enter the race to replace her fellow Democrat, the term-limited Gavin Newsom, as governor.
The contest is already well underway — 10 serious (broadly speaking) candidates have so far announced their candidacies. While Harris’ near-universal name recognition and nationwide fundraising base allow her to wait longer than others, a serious gubernatorial bid will take more than a few months to mount.
That forces a decision and a public announcement sooner rather than later.
If she does run, one thing Harris must avoid at all costs is anything that bespeaks arrogance, entitlement or anything less than a 100% commitment to serving as governor. It’s not hard to imagine one of her first utterances as a candidate would be pledging to serve a full four-year term and vowing not to use the office as an interim step toward another presidential bid.
Failing that, voters have every reason to send Harris packing. California doesn’t need another governor with a wandering political eye.
Another imperative Harris faces is offering a compelling reason why she wants to be governor. Seeking the office for the same reason climbers tackle Mt. Everest — because it’s there — won’t do.
A cautionary tale
History offers a lesson.
In November 1979, Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy was preparing to launch an upstart bid for president against the unpopular incumbent, Jimmy Carter. He gave a television interview that was so legendarily awful it’s become an object lesson in how not to start a campaign.
Asked why he wanted to be president, Kennedy paused at length, appearing stricken. He then unspooled a long-winded, curlicued, two-minute response that mentioned natural resources, technology, innovation, productivity, inflation, energy, joblessness and the economy, among other things. His answer was lucid as a fog bank and inspiring as a stalk of celery.
“Kennedy was on a rocket ship,” said Dan Schnur, a veteran communications strategist and political science professor, who uses the Kennedy interview as part of his curriculum at USC, Pepperdine and UC Berkeley. Carter was in dreadful shape, Kennedy was political royalty and the enthusiasm for his candidacy at the Democratic grassroots “looked like it was going to sweep him to the nomination.
“And then he did that one interview,” Schnur recollected, “and he couldn’t answer the most basic question.”
Though Kennedy ended up giving Carter a stiff challenge, he never fully recovered from leaving that terrible impression.
Harris should take heed.
A recent poll by the L.A. Times and UC Berkeley gave her a 50% approval rating among California voters, which is not exactly a number to beat the band. Still, she would enter the governor’s race as a heavy favorite to at least make the runoff under the state’s top-two election system.
If a Republican nabbed the second spot, Harris would be strongly positioned to win in November, given California’s strong Democratic leaning.
But, again, neither is a reason for Harris to be governor.
Some of those close to the former vice president wonder how much she really wants, or would enjoy, the job.
In 2015, when the governorship and a U.S. Senate seat both came open, Harris — the state’s attorney general at the time — opted to seek the latter. Her reasons were both personal, involving family considerations, and professional, given the platform and opportunities afforded a member of the Senate.
In short, Harris has never burned with a passion to be California governor.
Figure it out
That makes it all the more important for her to explain — clearly and convincingly — why she’d want to be elected.
“She’s got to give some affirmative reason why she’s running and why it would be good for the voters of California,” Schnur said. “And it’s not just a matter of constructing several words into a sentence.
“It’s not hard for someone as smart as Kamala Harris and her team to concoct a lab-tested phrase that tests well,” he went on. “The challenge isn’t typing out a sentence. It’s developing a core purpose that can then be explained in a sentence.”
Harris has all summer to look inward and figure that out.
If she can’t, California voters should choose someone else for their next governor.
Mark Z. Barabak is a columnist for the Los Angeles Times. ©2025 Los Angeles Times. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency.