Maybe Thomas Golisano is afraid to win. Mr. Golisano was a sure loser for governor in 1994, but that didn’t stop him from spending more than $6 million to win 4% of the vote. At the time, Mr. Golisano had just helped create the Independence Party and his candidacy seemed more about putting his new party on the map than putting himself in Albany.

But Mr. Golisano’s motivation looked more personal in 1998, when again he ran with no chance of actually winning. $13 million brought him 8% on election day.

Mr. Golisano really did appear determined when he spent $75 million on his third run for governor in 2002. He won the Independence Party primary – handing Governor Pataki the only electoral loss of his career. Talk about a Pyrrhic victory, though: As Mr. Pataki went on to win a third term, Mr. Golisano chalked up just 14% of the vote.

On the upside, Mr. Golisano’s campaign spending routinely paid off on Wall Street. The stock of his payroll-processing company, Paychex, went up every time he ran. Mr. Golisano became a billionaire who could afford to run for governor by founding Paychex, and running for governor made Paychex more valuable. Everybody wins even as the candidate loses.

Mr. Golisano also brought important issues to the forefront, and his basic message – combining government reform and fiscal prudence – was built on sound ideas. While his relentless attacks on Mr. Pataki angered Republicans, the substance of Mr. Golisano’s candidacy was sound and in some ways ahead of its time. Mr. Golisano was among the first to highlight the dysfunctional nature of state government, which reached the tipping point in the last few years. Reform has gone from idea to practice – as lobbyists face more restrictions and lawmakers are forced to show their faces if they want to vote.

With reform front-and-center in Albany, this seems like the perfect time for Mr. Golisano – especially because this is the first time in 25 years an incumbent governor isn’t running for reelection. After spending more than $100 million on races he couldn’t possibly win, you’d think Mr. Golisano would run the one time running could be more than just a hobby.

His reasons for sitting this race out are not yet entirely clear. He recently remarried, bought the Buffalo Sabres hockey team and stepped down as CEO from the company that made him a billionaire. In some respects these would all be reasons for a fourth try.

Mr. Golisano’s decision has been characterized as good news for Republicans (less infighting) and bad news for Democrats (more attention on their primary battle). The opposite may be true.

The Republican frontrunner, Bill Weld, can only benefit from attention right now. His biggest problem is a fraud investigation into the bankrupt Kentucky trade school he ran. Mr. Weld argues the for-profit vocational college helped mainly minority students learn valuable skills. His opponents argue Decker may have done a better job winning federal scholarship money than teaching students.

Mr. Weld would have had a chance to settle that debate now if Mr. Golisano had stayed in the race. If Decker is fatal for him, let it be fatal now. Republicans gain nothing by waiting to find out whether their frontrunner is already toast. Decker is now certain to remain an issue well into the general election campaign if Democrats show patience and put the potent issue on ice until voters are really paying attention.

Other Republican candidates, such as Assemblyman Patrick Manning and former Assemblyman John Faso, have the conservative side of the aisle to themselves and will surely cut into Mr. Weld’s support. But on a practical level, neither has the political cachet or fundraising network that Mr. Weld brings to the race. Mr. Golisano would have guaranteed a high-profile Republican primary in an era where Democrats are enjoying more attention.

The spotlight now belongs to the Democratic primary, with frontrunner Eliot Spitzer fending off insurgent Thomas Suozzi. This would be great news for the Republicans if they had a popular or well-known candidate. Republicans hope attention on the Democratic primary will mean negative attention on Mr. Spitzer. They might get that wish. But they’d be better off with some attention on their own candidates.

Mr. Golisano created political intrigue when he became a Republican last fall. He had a real chance to win for governor this year. He would have helped his party distract attention from the Democrats. And he would have ensured that Republicans settle on a strong candidate going into the November election. Now Republicans have little choice and little attention.

Mr. Goldin’s political column appears weekly.