Don’t look now, but it’s already time for the DNC and the states to figure out the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar, so I wrote an overview at New York:
The first 2028 presidential primaries are just two years away. And for the first time since 2016, both parties are expected to have serious competition for their nominations. While Vice-President J.D. Vance is likely to enter the cycle as a formidable front-runner for the GOP nod, recent history suggests there will be lots of other candidates. After all, Donald Trump drew 12 challengers in 2024. On the Democratic side, there is no one like Vance (or Hillary Clinton going into 2016 or Joe Biden going into 2020) who is likely to become the solid front-runner from the get-go, though Californians Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris lead all of the way too early polls.
But 2028 horse-race speculation really starts with the track itself, as the calendar for state contests still isn’t set. What some observers call the presidential-nominating “system” isn’t something the national parties control. In the case of primaries utilizing state-financed election machinery, state laws govern the timing and procedures. Caucuses (still abundant on the Republican side and rarer among Democrats) are usually run by state parties. National parties can vitally influence the calendar via carrots (bonus delegates at the national convention) or sticks (loss of delegates) and try to create “windows” for different kinds of states to hold their nominating contests to space things out and make the initial contests competitive and representative. But it’s sometimes hit or miss.
Until quite recently, the two parties tended to move in sync on such calendar and map decisions. But Democrats have exhibited a lot more interest in ensuring that the “early states” — the ones that kick off the nominating process and often determine the outcome — are representative of the party and the country as a whole and give candidates something like a level playing field. Prior to 2008, both parties agreed to do away with the traditional duopoly, in which the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary came first, by allowing early contests representing other regions (Nevada and South Carolina). And both parties tolerated the consolidation of other states seeking influence into a somewhat later “Super Tuesday” cluster of contests. But in 2024 Democrats tossed Iowa out of the early-state window altogether and placed South Carolina first (widely interpreted as Joe Biden’s thank-you to the Palmetto State for its crucial role in saving his campaign in 2020 after poor performances in other early states), with Nevada and New Hampshire voting the same day soon thereafter. Republicans stuck with the same old calendar with Trump more or less nailing down the nomination after Iowa and New Hampshire.
For 2028, Republicans will likely stand pat while Democrats reshuffle the deck (the 2024 calendar was explicitly a one-time-only proposition). The Democratic National Committee has set a January 16 deadline for states to apply for early-state status. And as the New York Times’ Shane Goldmacher explains, there is uncertainty about the identity of the early states and particularly their order:
“The debate has only just begun. But early whisper campaigns about the weaknesses of the various options already offer a revealing window into some of the party’s racial, regional and rural-urban divides, according to interviews with more than a dozen state party chairs, D.N.C. members and others involved in the selection process.
“Nevada is too far to travel. New Hampshire is too entitled and too white. South Carolina is too Republican. Iowa is also too white — and its time has passed.
“Why not a top battleground? Michigan entered the early window in 2024, but critics see it as too likely to bring attention to the party’s fractures over Israel. North Carolina or Georgia would need Republicans to change their election laws.”
Nevada and New Hampshire have been most aggressive about demanding a spot at the beginning of the calendar, and both will likely remain in the early-state window, representing their regions. The DNC could push South Carolina aside in favor of regional rivals Georgia or North Carolina. Michigan is close to a lock for an early midwestern primary, but its size, cost, and sizable Muslim population (which will press candidates on their attitude towards Israel’s recent conduct) would probably make it a dubious choice to go first. Recently excluded Iowa (already suspect because it’s very white and trending Republican, then bounced decisively after its caucus reporting system melted down in 2020) could stage a “beauty contest” that will attract candidates and media even if it doesn’t award delegates.
Even as the early-state drama unwinds, the rest of the Democratic nomination calendar is morphing as well. As many as 14 states are currently scheduled to hold contests on Super Tuesday, March 7. And a 15th state, New York, may soon join the parade. Before it’s all nailed down (likely just after the 2026 midterms), decisions on the calendar will begin to influence candidate strategies and vice versa. Some western candidates (e.g., Gavin Newsom or Ruben Gallego) could be heavily invested in Nevada, while Black proto-candidates like Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and Wes Moore might pursue a southern primary. Progressive favorites like AOC or Ro Khanna may have their own favorite launching pads, while self-identified centrists like Josh Shapiro or Pete Buttigieg might have others. Having a home state in the early going is at best a mixed blessing: Losing your home-state primary is a candidate-killer, and winning it doesn’t prove a lot. And it’s also worth remembering that self-financed candidates like J.B. Pritzker may need less of a runway to stage a nationally viable campaign.
So sketching out the tracks for all those 2028 horses, particularly among Democrats, is a bit of a game of three-dimensional chess. We won’t know how well they’ll run here or there until it’s all over.
yep… everyone has gotta tell someone.. .create the cells and keep talking… it works.
Even then, we’re going to have to feel the pain. Sort of like cutting a leg off to stop the gangrene before it kills the patient.
AlleyKat, I’m talkin to every one I can. I lost a job because my boss was a Republican. My bumbper sticker says”Left Wing Christian For Kerry” you be surprised how many of us out there. I was always pretty much middle of the road voter untill this guy got selected by the supreme court. I know it’s not cool to have one party in control of the whole thing but, this time I hope the Dems get control of the House and Senate with Kerry as President. It’s going to take at least 2 to 4 years to get this mess GW and rest of the R controled Congress has screwed-up…..
Sara, you’re a little off on your medieval history. Connally served in the Trickster’s first term, then got caught up in the AMPI scandal. He joined the Republican Party in the spring of 1974, which prompted the great line that it was the first known instance of a rat jumping onto a sinking ship.
Bless you, Ed. Please talk to any Bush-supporting friends. I wish I could understand how Republicans can support Bush when there are intelligent, consistent, well-informed Republicans (who I may not necessarily agree with) who could move their party forward with honor.
I was one of those misinformed voters who voted for Bush. I liked that compassionate conservative bull XXXX . Personally, I think the extrmeist religion thing he has going on is a big turn off with me and I was happy Kerry made reference to it in his speech. When did God become a Republican?
The bounce may not have shown up much in the first horse-race polls Monday, but all polls I’ve seen later in the week have shown at least some Kerry-ward movement, and various state polls (from ARG and not-so-credible Rasmussen) also look brighter. Plus, as many have said, the poll internals are all so solid Kerry that you have to figure many of the undecided are just Kerry votes waiting to happen.
I heard reports that on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade this morning, traders seeing the job numbers broke into a chant of “Kerry! Kerry!”. Can anyone confirm this? We may view this as the day the back of the Bush administration was broken — a clear end to job growth (maybe going to negative territory), and renewed fierce fighting in Iraq.
Sara, that’s an extraordinary report if true. It reminds me of 1980, when Gene McCarthy and Ralph Abernathy came out and endorsed Reagan. It was obvious Carter was in unusually deep trouble. Any guesses on who these mystery statesmen are?
I understand plans are in the works for a leadership PAC made up of at least four retired GOP Senators, all with extensive Foreign Affairs experience, to announce a week before Bush’s Convention, a Republicans for Kerry effort. I gather the idea is full page ads in Wall Street Journal, Barrons, NYTimes and WaPo and maybe others with lots of recognized signatures, and with the theme being the need for significant changes in approach to Foreign Policy. (My source is someone who knows about one of these retired Senators efforts to solicit signers.) The advertisement would then be reprintable, and available for easy distribution in places where such “names” would influence things.
So — as we celebrate the 30th anniversary of the resignation of Richard Nixon, we can call it the Ghost of Nixon/Conally play — for those who remember John Connally’s leadership of Democrats for Nixon — for which he was paid off by being made Sec. of Treasury in Nixon’s second term — but the dastardly act was done in the 1972 McGovern race.
The Senators involved are so senion, they will not be looking at appointments — and well fixed enough that Bush cannot do them in.
The post ends with the comment that getting people to the polls is crucial. Yes it is but persuading moderate Republicans and independents is also crucal and possible. Many moderate REpublicans are open to the idea of not voting or voting for Kerry if apraoched politely one o one. There is a lot of dissatisfaction about Bush’s extremist religion, budgt deficets, and misiformation about the war.
The Kerry campaign needs to set up a means for us to write personal letters to undecideds. And we all need to talk to our Republican friends about how party loyalty might mean getting rid of a leader who is leading the party the wrong way.
This is what I postulated on the bounce threads before, that it didn’t really increase Kerry’s support so much as deepen it.
> I can’t wait to hear the spin from the White
> House and Treasury Security John Snow-job on
> these numbers. 32,000 new jobs in July is an
> absolute shocker and will change the dynamics
> of the race in terms of how many Americans will
> view the economy. The consensus number
> predicted from July from a cross section of
> economists prior to the report’s issuance was
> 243,000 new jobs. To top it all off, the already
> bad June numbers were downgraded from
> 112,000 new jobs to 78,000.
From WaPo:
‘We’re not satisfied,” Treasury Secretary John Snow told reporters in Pittsburgh. “We’re encouraged, though, by the fact that the unemployment rate came down.” ‘
So the “unemployment rate came down?” Let’s see what Karl Rove can make of that line, in the Chimp’s TV commercials.
—
I’m sitting here in Finland, thinking this is sweet on so many levels. 11 more weeks, and unless Kerry turns out to be absolutely abmysmally bad in the TV debates or Al Qaeda does “Shrub” a big favor, we are going to see America resume its leadership of the free Western world again. After four long years of Bushit.
Can’t wait.
MARCU$
On the basis of your analysis, Ruy, as well as my own gut feeling, I just left a message for my county Democratic Chair volunteering to help with our local GOTV efforts. This is something we need to start talking up among the party faithful.
I can’t wait to hear the spin from the White House and Treasury Security John Snow-job on these numbers. 32,000 new jobs in July is an absolute shocker and will change the dynamics of the race in terms of how many Americans will view the economy. The consensus number predicted from July from a cross section of economists prior to the report’s issuance was 243,000 new jobs. To top it all off, the already bad June numbers were downgraded from 112,000 new jobs to 78,000.
This is Bush’s worst nightmare. The economy needs to create 150-200,000 new jobs each month just to keep up with population growth.
Yup, we’ve certainly turned the corner with the economy. Bush has taken us down a blind alley. I’m seriously looking forward to observing how the Bush Admin will spin its “Stay The Course” economic message after two straight months of these horrible job numbers.
More goo- ,er, I mean *bad* news for “Shrub”:
http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/06/news/economy/jobless_july/index.htm?cnn=yes
Job growth shock
July payroll growth far shy of Wall Street forecasts; unemployment rate slips to 5.5%.
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) – Hiring by U.S. employers slowed significantly in July, according to a government report Friday, as the number of new jobs added to payrolls came in far below Wall Street expectations.