As the 2028 presidential race begins to take shape, two high-profile Democrats from California—former Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Gavin Newsom—are quietly moving toward what could become a major political showdown. While this contest might seem like an internal party matter, it raises serious questions about the direction of American foreign policy, national security, and global leadership in the years ahead.
Both Harris and Newsom have long histories in California politics. They’ve worked in similar roles—Harris as state attorney general and U.S. senator, and Newsom as lieutenant governor and now governor. But despite years of overlapping careers and shared political networks, they’ve managed to avoid direct conflict. That may be about to change.
With President Trump now serving his second term and restoring America’s strength on the world stage, Democrats are already looking to 2028 as their next opportunity to regain the White House. Harris, having failed to mount a successful campaign in 2024, is seen by many within her party as a spent force. Her recent memoir, “107 Days,” offers a behind-the-scenes look at her brief campaign and takes veiled shots at fellow Democrats, including Newsom. The book didn’t help her standing—it upset allies and left future donors skeptical.
Newsom, on the other hand, is positioning himself as the fresh face of the Democratic Party, despite being a career politician. He has not officially entered the race, but his moves—national interviews, shadow diplomacy trips abroad, and high-dollar fundraising—suggest he’s getting ready. His team believes Harris won’t run again and is acting accordingly. Still, Harris has quietly built a campaign infrastructure, such as forming a political action committee and reaching out to key political figures across the country.
Why should Americans outside of California care about this rivalry? Because the outcome could shape the national security and foreign policy positions of one of America’s two major political parties for the next generation.
Harris has shown a tendency toward globalist policies, often aligning with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Her record on foreign affairs is thin and marked by hesitation. During her time as vice president, she failed to take the lead on key issues like the border crisis, the China threat, or the Afghanistan withdrawal. Her soft approach to adversaries like Iran and North Korea raised concerns about her ability to lead in a dangerous world.
Newsom, while also a progressive, has tried to present himself as more pragmatic. During his shadow visits abroad, including to China, he tried to play the role of a statesman, though critics noted that his meetings with Chinese officials often appeared more theatrical than strategic. Still, his willingness to engage internationally and his effort to appear competent on foreign affairs signal that he intends to make national security a talking point in a future campaign.
What’s most troubling is that both candidates represent a return to the same failed policies that weakened America’s global standing under the Biden administration. Whether it’s open borders, climate deals that benefit China, or appeasement strategies in the Middle East, neither Newsom nor Harris offers a real break from that legacy. Their rivalry may seem personal, but its outcome could have major consequences for America’s ability to defend its interests abroad.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is at risk of internal division. Top donors and political consultants are being forced to choose sides, and party unity is beginning to crack. As these two power players maneuver for the spotlight, the Democrats are left without a clear direction on the world stage. That uncertainty could embolden foreign adversaries who hope for a weaker, more divided America after 2028.
For now, President Trump continues to lead with a focus on peace through strength, secure borders, and energy independence. But Americans must stay watchful. The battle between Harris and Newsom isn’t just about who gets to sit in the Oval Office—it’s about what kind of America we leave for the next generation. And if either of these California politicians wins, the consequences could stretch far beyond our shores.