With California's gubernatorial primary just two weeks away, Republican frontrunner Steve Hilton is accusing Gov. Gavin Newsom of running a calculated fear campaign, one designed not to prevent a Republican lockout of the general election, but to engineer an all-Democrat matchup by splitting the GOP vote.
The accusation follows Newsom's remarks at a news conference last Thursday, where the governor acknowledged he has a "break the glass scenario" ready if Democrats appear at risk of being shut out under California's top-two primary system. Newsom offered few details but made his posture clear.
Hilton, who leads the field in RealClearPolitics polling averages, says Newsom's public hand-wringing is the real play, not the contingency plan behind it. And the logic of his argument deserves a closer look.
California voters approved the top-two primary system in a statewide referendum in 2010. Under the rules, all candidates from all parties compete on a single ballot. The top two vote-getters advance to the general election regardless of party affiliation. That means two Republicans or two Democrats can face off in November, and it has happened before.
Former Democratic state senator and legislative strategist Dario Frommer pointed to the 2018 California U.S. Senate primary, when Republicans were shut out entirely. The top two finishers were Kamala Harris and Rep. Linda Sanchez, both Democrats.
Frommer told Fox News Digital that Democrats had early, genuine concern about this governor's race:
"I think early on there was genuine, genuine concern of the Democratic party, because there were so many Democratic candidates that Hilton and Bianco were going to be the top two vote getters."
But Frommer said the landscape has shifted. Based on current polling, the top two vote-getters now appear likely to come from among Hilton, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, and Democratic candidate Tom Steyer. Becerra sits in a close second behind Hilton in the RealClearPolitics averages, while Republican Chad Bianco trails in fourth place.
Still, Frommer cautioned that Democrats are not "in the clear." He flagged an unusual pattern in voter behavior this cycle.
"Usually, there's a lot more people overall voting by this point, and they're not, and so I think that concern is real for Democrats, that people wait too long to fill out their ballots, and there's only two Republican candidates."
That math matters. With only two Republicans in the field but multiple Democrats splitting the left-leaning vote, a late surge of conservative voters could push both Hilton and Bianco into the top two, locking Democrats out of their own state's general election.
Newsom's comments at his Thursday news conference were brief and deliberately vague. He acknowledged the stakes but declined to explain what his contingency plan would actually involve.
"There's many people that have a deep understanding of what it would look like if Democrats were locked out, and we're going to do everything to make sure that doesn't happen."
Asked for specifics, the governor added only: "I'll leave it there." Fox News Digital reached out to Newsom's office for further comment, but no response was reported.
That opacity is part of what drew Hilton's fire.
Hilton argues that Newsom's public alarm about a two-Republican general election is not a warning, it is a weapon. In a video posted to X on Tuesday, Hilton called on Bianco to drop out of the race. His reasoning was blunt: Bianco cannot win, and his continued presence only serves Democratic interests.
Hilton framed the situation this way:
"He's not trying to stop a 'top two Republican' outcome because that is not possible and never was. Chad Bianco is far behind in the polls and fundraising, and has no chance of being in the top two."
The real danger, Hilton contended, runs in the opposite direction. By publicly stoking fears of a Republican-versus-Republican general election, Newsom and the Democrats encourage Republican voters to split their support between two candidates, fragmenting the conservative vote and making it easier for two Democrats to finish first and second.
"[Newsom and the Democrats are] fearmongering over a R vs R matchup in the general election precisely to encourage Republicans to split their votes, thus guaranteeing an all-Democrat top two."
Hilton also connected Newsom's maneuvering to the governor's broader political ambitions. A two-Democrat general election, Hilton argued, would be Newsom's "ideal scenario", shielding the party from a competitive Republican challenge in November and deflecting attention from what Hilton called Newsom's "appalling record" as the governor eyes a 2028 presidential run.
Richard Winger, owner of Ballot Access News, offered independent context that underscores the volatility of this contest. Winger told Fox News Digital that this is the first gubernatorial election under the top-two system where there is "no obvious winner."
"This is really the first gubernatorial election where there's no obvious winner, so that's why it's such a tense thing."
Winger pointed to other races where an open seat and the top-two format produced same-party general election matchups. The system, by design, can produce outcomes that leave millions of voters without a candidate from their party on the November ballot.
The jungle primary itself may not survive much longer. Democratic strategist Steven Maviglio is organizing a ballot initiative campaign to eliminate the top-two system entirely. The measure could appear on the 2028 ballot.
Maviglio's reasoning cuts across party lines. He suggested that a same-party general election, whether two Republicans or two Democrats, would generate enough voter outrage to build support for repeal.
"I think if two Republicans make the ballot, or if two Democrats make the ballot, then voter outrage will be high, and that will only focus on just what a failed experiment this is."
That a Democratic strategist is openly calling the system a "failed experiment" tells you something about where California's political class stands on a reform it championed just sixteen years ago. Voters approved the top-two system in 2010 with the promise that it would produce more moderate, broadly appealing candidates. Instead, it has produced anxiety, gamesmanship, and the prospect of general elections where one party's voters have no real choice at all.
The governor's refusal to detail his contingency plan leaves a gap that Hilton has filled with a plausible accusation. Newsom could be preparing to rally Democratic voters behind a single candidate. He could be planning a late intervention to clear the field. He could be doing nothing at all beyond generating headlines.
But the effect of his public remarks is measurable regardless of his intent. By raising the specter of a two-Republican general election, an outcome that current polling suggests is unlikely, Newsom puts pressure on the exact fault line that benefits Democrats most: the split between Hilton and Bianco on the Republican side.
If Bianco stays in and draws enough conservative votes away from Hilton, the path widens for a second Democrat to slip into the top two. Hilton's call for Bianco to exit the race is a direct response to that dynamic.
California has not elected a Republican governor since Arnold Schwarzenegger. The state's one-party dominance in statewide offices makes this primary the most consequential moment for Republican voters in years. Hilton's lead in the polls represents a rare opening, but only if the conservative vote consolidates behind a single candidate.
Frommer, the former Democratic senator, acknowledged the tension. The low early-voting turnout he described adds another layer of uncertainty. If Democratic voters wait too long to return their ballots, the two-Republican scenario becomes more plausible, but so does the scenario where a fragmented Republican electorate hands Democrats exactly the general election they want.
The jungle primary was supposed to fix California politics. Instead, it has turned the governor's race into a chess match where the sitting governor publicly announces he has a contingency plan, refuses to explain it, and dares the other side to react.
When the people running the system won't tell you what they're planning to do with it, the system isn't working for voters. It's working for the people who know how to game it.
