Without Unity, a Very Narrow Path for California Republicans Becomes Possible

Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco both ran serious campaigns. Both built statewide networks of donors, activists, volunteers, and supporters. Both gave Republican voters a real choice in a race where the party badly needed credible candidates making the case for change.

But it was always true that when the primary was over and the dust settled, there would be only one Republican moving on to November. And given California’s top-two primary system, even that was not guaranteed. For much of the race, Republicans worried that two Democrats could emerge from the primary and leave GOP voters without a candidate in the general election at all.

That didn’t happen. Instead, Republicans find themselves with an opportunity that many doubted would materialize. Hilton is headed to a general election showdown with Democrat Xavier Becerra. Ever since the race was called, the expectation has been that Bianco would endorse Hilton. That has not happened.

The question now is not who Republicans preferred in June. The question is what Republicans hope to accomplish in November.

California Republicans begin every statewide election at a disadvantage. Democrats hold an overwhelming voter registration advantage. They dominate constitutional offices and control the Legislature with supermajorities. They possess larger donor networks, stronger institutional support, and a political environment that naturally favors their candidates. For Republicans to win statewide in California, they have to do almost everything right — and then they still need to catch a break.

That is simply the reality of politics in the Golden State. And that is why Bianco should endorse Hilton and call on his supporters to unite behind the Republican ticket. This cannot be merely a pro forma endorsement. The kind of unity California Republicans need now is not just Bianco saying the right thing and moving on. It requires the voters, donors, activists, volunteers, and local leaders who supported Bianco to make a strong pivot to Hilton.

That does not mean forgetting why they supported Bianco in the first place. It means recognizing that the fight they joined was always larger than one candidate. Primaries are hard fought. Supporters get invested. Harsh words get exchanged. None of that is unusual or disqualifying. But primaries end, and general elections begin.

Throughout the campaign, Hilton and Bianco often differed on style, emphasis, and approach. But on the central question facing California, they were largely making the same argument. Both argued that decades of one-party Democratic rule have left California less affordable, less safe, and less functional than it should be. Both criticized a Sacramento willing to spend billions on healthcare for those here illegally while struggling to provide basic services to citizens. Both pointed to California’s high-speed rail project as a symbol of government failure — a project that, after nearly two decades, tens of billions of taxpayer dollars, and countless promises, has yet to carry a single passenger.

Both campaigned against some of the highest gasoline prices, electricity rates, housing costs, and insurance premiums in America. Both argued that Californians deserve a government that prioritizes affordability, public safety, economic opportunity, and accountability over ideology and political theater.

If that diagnosis is correct, then replacing one-party rule becomes more important than lingering disagreements from a Republican primary campaign. Hilton may not have been Bianco’s first choice for governor. But Becerra represents the continuation of the very policies Bianco spent his campaign opposing. That is the point.

An endorsement does not require Bianco to abandon his own ideas, his own message, or his own political future. It does not require him to become Hilton’s biggest fan. It simply requires acknowledging that Hilton’s California would look far more like the California Bianco campaigned for than Becerra’s would.

Unity alone will not elect a Republican governor in California. But a lack of unity makes an already difficult race even harder. Hilton cannot build a winning coalition without the voters who stood with Bianco. He needs law enforcement voters. He needs grassroots conservatives. He needs the working families, small-business owners, and frustrated Californians who believed Bianco was the better choice. He needs the people who knocked on doors, wrote checks, and invested themselves in his campaign.

And those voters deserve to hear from Bianco that the fight isn’t over.

Bianco deserves enormous credit for the campaign he ran. He gave voice to frustrations shared by millions of Californians who feel ignored by Sacramento and forgotten by the state’s political establishment. He energized grassroots conservatives, built a statewide movement, and reminded many Republicans that fighting for California is still worthwhile even when the odds are long. Nothing in an endorsement changes any of that. Nor should it. Bianco’s voice matters precisely because of the campaign he ran and the supporters he inspired. Which is exactly why his endorsement matters now.

The cause Bianco’s supporters fought for did not end when his campaign did. But if Republicans are serious about changing the direction of California, he may owe the party — and the voters who supported him — a clear call for unity behind the Republican nominee.

Bianco ran because California is worth fighting for, and it still is. He should stay in the fight.