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.
I see VoteHillary.org which pushed a 2004 Hillary Rodham Clinton Draft presidency is now pushing her for president in 2008. The site is http://www.votehillary.org I have heard it will be launched as early as next week.
Ruy:
Since you don’t have trackback enabled…I wanted you to know that I used your piece on a blog post:
http://preemptivekarma.com/2004/08/we-are-sultans-of-swing.html
send them a few emails… tell them just how you think… in English.
I watched Inside Politics and was pissed off because they spent more than 10 min talking to that lier spewing out his poison about Kerry’s record on the swift boat and they knew all to well that the Washington Post article, with proof from the military records, that his story was a lie. They didn’t even give equal time to Kerry’s side nor did they even mention the story as reported in the Washington Post. Maybe they are taking over for FOX as being “Fair And Balanced”.
I suppose its easy and somewhat expected for persons to start sweating beads of anxiety and why not?
About 8 months ago, everyone was thinking that Kerry had very few of the qualities needed to be president and most were hoping that he would pick a prospective VP that would swing the line his way. Right now however, everyone is somewhat surprised that this same Kerry is now in the lead on every issue and seems to be holding his own quite well, even with his cool, relaxed, calculated, timely demeanor and his long face too.
Its this lead from a person who wasnt quite expected to lead that has everyone wondering and calculating and figuring out stuff, and polling and working out the neck and necks and every other thing.
However, when I stop to think about it, I dont think that Kerry is surprised by his current position. I think that he is truly a reflection of his demeanor. I get the feeling that this game is playing out according to plan, even tho its causing some people to be drenched in sweat with worry and anxiety.
I remember hearing some people say that they are glad that he picked Edwards because Edwards could back him up with better speeches and better facial presentations etc… but, from the looks of it, I dont get the impression that Kerry is even thinking of Edward much.
So much so, that he has sent Edwards off to spread the word, while he handles his end of the campaign. I dont and cant think of anyone who can come right out and say that Kerry is making a mess of things. Kerry is rising like cream to the heart of the game. I read his response to the swift boat ads today and he was right on the mark. hard hitting and yet using the best of English and with words well chosen and well placed. Personally, I dont think todays speech is his best speech yet, but from what I read, I get the distinct impression that he has more to say and will say it.
From what I read today, I dare Bush to personally launch an attack on Kerry to the tune of Kerry’s response to the Swfit boat ad. I dare Bush to change his tune and not continue in his previous mode of saying that Kerry is an honorable Veteran.
Kerry is on the move and hence I agree with the other posts which note that someone needs to check on the GOP and Pat Roberts and Jerry Falwell and that crowd. Someone needs to monitor things and challenge the republicans to be clean this time around.
I dont think that there is any real need for anxiety about Kerry. He seems to know what he is about and he is playing his cards the way he wants to. I have not seen or heard any recent mis-steps from him and currently he is under relentless attack from the GOP fronts.
Even tho I have noticed alot more support from the rank and file dems and various supporting organisations, I still think that its important that every kerry supporter beat the streets, wear out some soles and tell somebody to vote for Kerry.
The world needs a change in the White House. One thing that is certain, is that the world will breathe a sigh of relief when Bush departs this White House. The world stands a better chance of quelling the attacks of terrorist under a Kerry regime. The World stands a better chance of getting help to fix Iraq and the world under a kerry umbrella. The World is much more prone to getting help with just about every world issue if people vote for Kerry.
Unfortunately Americans are not voting for a president this year, the burden is now to vote for a leader of the free world and thats not a role the George Bush can fulfill.. I am very sorry GWB but you just dont cut it. Kerry deserves his opportunity to prove his metal.
Cheers
to SC. Thanks for clearing that up I read it like the writer meant it and didn’t notice the spelling.
I read somewhere that the Kerry campaign had recruited about 2000 lawyers who were going to spearhead efforts in targeted states to monitor the election and respond to fraud. In my state the Kerry campaign is recuriting volunteers with the goal of having a pollwatcher at every polling site. So I think there is concern at the top and actions are being taken. I do think that it is important to publicize every attempt at fraud as widely as possible now so that when the fraud occurs on election day, people will not be surprised. Of course some fraud is hard to detect. I was a poll watcher at an election about twenty years ago and we had a high number of people who came in to vote only to discover that their names were not listed at that site. We gave them absentee ballots so they could vote anyway. It turned out that the business responisble for printing the voting lists had “accidently” printed the names of Democrats at the wrong polling sites. The business was a small local concern owned by the chair of the county Republican party.
Also our state Kerry campaign is calling all Democratic and independent voters and urging them to switch to absentee ballots.
The Republicans will cheat in this election. I expect that soon they will start rumors of Democratic cheating since accusing us of their crimes is part of their way of operating.
If you think your state Kerry campaign is not planning for for ways to deal with election fraud, then call them up, get active, voice your concerns. But the fact that the kerry campaign in my safe Kerry state is planning for fraud should be reassuring. If steps are being taken here, they must be taking steps in Ohio and Florida.
Link is to WashPost article this AM discrediting central claims of one of Kerry’s most vocal Swift boat critics:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13267-2004Aug18.html
Wonderful letter, BT. Honestly, I find myself in a lather of anxiety over the coming election. It has long been my contention that Republicans do not really want educated voters or honest elections because that would be a losing situation for them. When we have a media which is also corporately owned and pretty much do the bidding of the people in power, what hope is there. I feel like we are spitting in the wind!
I don’t usually get so discouraged, but we’ve just been treated to 2 weeks of swift boat ads by the Republican slime machine, and I have a bad, bad feeling that there’s going to be more mud thrown by them shortly, and they are so carefully crafted that they are difficult to dispute. Josh Marshall has a good article this morning about this. We’re going to have to get as good at throwing dirt as the Republicans. God knows, Bush has given us enough to work with!
I’d like to see an ad that talks about the 500 or so men that Bush skipped over to get into the TANG. How many of those men were subsequently drafted to Viet Nam and how many of them died so that the shrub could sit on his ass swigging beers and not showing up for duty?
I’m angry about the dirt these Republicans throw, and I think it’s time we threw some back.
I think Fact Checker is referring to the use of “then” instead of “than”. It’s a common mistake, unfortunately.
“than” means you are making a comparison. “then” means that something else happened next. Very different words, even thought there’s only one letter different.
The headline should be
“Pew Research Center Report Shows Swing Voters Closer to Kerry Than Bush”.
By using “then”, it makes it sound like swing voters were closer to Kerry, but are now closer to Bush.
BT, that’s a terrific letter! (I have read Toobin’s book.) Of course, this problem is bigger than Florida, enormous as Florida is. Maybe we need lawyers to get started filing suits (or something) now. The NY Times has a good editorial this (Thursday) morning on this subject in its broadest context.
BTW, if you or sympathetic others you know are having trouble getting worked up about free and fair elections I’d recommend as page-turner bedtime reading Jeff Toobin’s book on the Florida recount, Too Close to Call.
Michael, I couldn’t agree more, with one exception.
I agree wholeheartedly with Bel’s pleas to ordinary citizens to get involved and help our cause, recognizing that many are doing so now.
While it would be comforting to believe that the DNC, state Dem parties, and advocacy organizations can and will take care of these problems for others of us who share these concerns, I think we are better off assuming they need all the help they can get.
Re Florida, I sent this letter to an influential, sympathetic national columnist this morning:
Dear ,
Pardon my language, but what in the hell has the federal government been doing on election reform during the Bush Administration? The changes they enacted awhile back were mildly helpful as I understand it, but nowhere near what obviously needed to be addressed following the Florida debacle. The buck stops at the White House for this for yet another example of abysmal, utterly failed leadership–this time, at inexcusable peril to the health of our democracy.
What does it say about the level of confidence people have in our voting systems when the Florida Republican party is urging voters to vote absentee, and when many other citizens in jurisdictions with electronic voting machines but no paper trail backup are deciding for themselves that if they want their votes counted, absentee is the way to go?
Regarding the circumstances reported in Bob Herbert’s column earlier this week in the NY Times, why is it that no one–absolutely no one–evidently even believes it is appropriate to demand that Governor Bush see to it that an immediate, impartial, and thorough investigation be launched to determine whether federal voting rights laws have been violated in this instance?! The investigation needs to be completed swiftly and the results shared openly with the public.
Evidently, by the lights of Republican doctrine, it’s just fine for the US Supreme Court to find a sufficiently compelling federal interest in how Florida does its voting to shut down the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court in 2000. But it’s not enough of a federal interest for the other two branches of the federal government–controlled by the same party– to take vigorous action to see to it that the problems which led to this extreme and unusual (and of course unjustified) intervention be rectified.
How can we possibly find ourselves in the situation we are in 11 weeks before this election? Amazing.
(end of letter)
Fact Checker, I don’t understand your comment? It looks fine to me.
The is not directly relevant to the Pew poll but is nonetheless extremely important, I feel: There have been a spate of stories in the press lately–notably Paul Krugman’s latest column–concerning the honesty of the coming election. Will all the votes be accurately counted? Will all eligible voters who wish to vote be permitted to do so? I hope the Democratic Party at the highest levels as well as the various “good government” organizations and the media are monitoring these issues very closely. They obviously go to the very core of our democracy.
“Swing Voters Closer to Kerry Then Bush.” So, which is it? Typo perhaps?