"Democrats battle over who votes first in 2028, a proxy for the party’s future"

Maeve Reston and Dylan Wells at The Washington Post provide the latest on deadline day as state parties scramble to apply to be among the early states on the 2028 calendar:

"The lobbying campaign is one of the most aggressive in a battle royal among states seeking to get early spots in the party’s 2028 nominating calendar. The fight over the order formally begins Friday when about a dozen states are expected to submit proposals to the Democratic National Committee to get early spots, a privilege that gives their voters and politicians added influence and attention.

"The contest is not only important to the party and individual states involved but also exemplifies the broader debate among Democrats over how — both in its policies and its process — to improve their positioning for presidential contests.

"Many Democratic insiders argue that their viability could hinge on designing an early state gauntlet that better pressure-tests their 2028 nominee and more accurately reflects the racial, socioeconomic and geographic makeup of the party. The decisions of where to campaign affect which voters get to shape the conversation and the set of issues that candidates prioritize. Iowa’s longtime hold on the nation’s first caucuses, for example, is credited with helping farmers preserve subsidy programs, while South Carolina’s large population of Black Democrats helped Joe Biden overcome earlier losses in Iowa and New Hampshire in 2020.

This year, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina are among the states pushing hardest for the first spot, according to interviews with more than a dozen DNC members, party strategists and state chairs. Michigan, Georgia, North Carolina, Iowa and Virginia are also vying for either the first spot or at least a spot in the early window, before a busy day of state contests known as Super Tuesday. And the lobbying — which includes a fair amount of state-on-state jousting — has been going on behind-the-scenes for several months."

--

Noteworthy: One thing that is consistent across this round of news dispatches ahead of the Democrats' early state application deadline is that the group of states listed as "fighting hardest for" and/or likely to end up first in the order of states on the 2028 presidential primary calendar has shifted. It is a slight shift, but it is a shift. 

Calendar news trickled out in 2025, but what little there was tended to be dominated by mentions of three states likeliest to be at the head of the queue for Democrats in 2028: Michigan, Nevada and New Hampshire. In addition, the reporting throughout 2025 also painted a bleak picture of the prospect of the first state on the 2024 calendar, South Carolina. 

It is different now on both fronts. 

Michigan and South Carolina have seemingly reversed roles. The former is now seemingly to repeating the "just happy to be in the early window" line that was earlier associated with South Carolina. Meanwhile, the latter in now more often mentioned as a distinct possibility for the first slot. 

Why? What changed? [There is a question for you, reporters.]

Some of the explanation, FHQ suspects, boils down to the combination of timing and sources. It was early enough in the process in the summer that the notion of which state would lead the calendar in 2028 was still theoretical and sources were willing to speculate. Now that state parties are starting to actually apply for the honor of being sanctioned the first contest, there are some actual states in the mix, no longer just theoretically so. 

Earlier sources tended to have been DNC members as well and they often discussed which states could go first. This go-round of reporting ahead of the deadline appears to have incorporated more state-level voices in the discussion, voices that are actively lobbying to go first. There is a difference there in what is being covered.

Anyway, it should not be lost on anyone that regardless of the above distinctions between Michigan and South Carolina, the two states that are in both sets of reporting -- summer 2025 and now -- are Nevada and New Hampshire. That is not by mistake. Read into it what one might, but there is a signal in there and folks following the 2028 calendar process should probably take heed. 

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Deadline day approaches for would-be early Democratic states for 2028 

Some thoughts from FHQ now that the deadline has drawn the attention of the media

"Inside Democrats’ Brewing Debate Over Which States Should Vote First in 2028"

Shane Goldmacher at The New York Times has an update on the Democrats' consideration of the 2028 primary calendar as the early state application deadline approaches:

"Democratic Party insiders are beginning to puzzle over one of the more consequential decisions for the party’s future: which states should vote first in the 2028 presidential primary elections.

...

"The Democratic National Committee has set a Friday deadline for states to apply to be placed in the so-called early window, the month leading up to Super Tuesday.

"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."

...

Noteworthy: Honestly, there is not much news in this piece. Goldmacher is merely providing a refresher on where things stand early in the DNC's consideration of the 2028 pre-window states. And things stand about where they have for some time: still at or very near the starting gate. That said, a couple of things...

1) Goldmacher spoke with sources from the usual suspect states: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and Michigan. In addition there were the obligatory (for the 2028 cycle anyway) quotes from party officials in Georgia and North Carolina, two neighboring states vying to theoretically replace South Carolina in the early window. Thus, it is the same seven states that have been routinely mentioned in these conversations since the 2024 election. 

In Goldmacher's telling of where the process is to name the early states on the Democratic presidential primary calendar for 2028, it is a status quo story. In other words, there may be a shake up to the order of states in the early window relative to 2024, but it will not see much change in terms of the actual states in that window outside of a piece or two (which is not nothing!).

2) Minnesota, which was in the mix in 2022 for the slot that ultimately went to Michigan on the 2024 calendar is not applying for an early window position for the 2028 cycle. It was not raised in Goldmacher's piece, but one has to imagine that this has much to do with former Minnesota DFL Chair Ken Martin now being at the head of the Democratic National Committee and wanting to avoid any appearance of playing favorites in the process.  

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Deadline day approaches for would-be early Democratic states for 2028 

Some thoughts from FHQ now that the deadline has drawn the attention of the media

Missouri bill prefiled to reinstate presidential primary

If at first you don't succeed, try, try again. 

Missouri state Senator David Gregory (R-15th, St. Louis) has prefiled legislation -- SB 1139 -- in the upper chamber to reestablish the presidential primary election in the Show-Me state. The bill is exactly the same as the legislation the senator filed in February 2025 to bring back the primary that was eliminated by an act of the legislature in 2022. 

Here is an edited FHQ summary of the early 2025 legislation:

[L]egislation has also been introduced in the Missouri state Senate to bring back the state-funded presidential preference election eliminated by the General Assembly in 2022. SB 670, introduced by Senator David Gregory (R-15th, St. Louis), would basically reset conditions to where they were with respect to the parameters of the presidential primary prior to 2022. That is to say that the primary election would revert to a position on the presidential primary calendar following Super Tuesday. 

However, Gregory's SB 670 would schedule the presidential preference election for the second Tuesday in March as opposed to the second Tuesday after the first Monday in March as was the case prior to 2022. 

That is a small difference and would not have any impact on the positioning of any Missouri presidential primary reinstated under this bill for 2028. 

Efforts to reestablish the primary prior this latest bill have fallen short since 2022, often victims of the logistics of scheduling the presidential primary either concurrent with or in addition to primaries for other offices. Several possible proposed dates have emerged because of that: Super Tuesday, the week after Super Tuesday or the first Tuesday in April (alongside local primaries). None of them have passed muster with a majority of both the Missouri House and Senate. 

Perhaps 2026 will be the year.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The 2028 Presidential Primary Calendar Plus 

Tracking the evolution of the timeline of delegate selection events that will determine the next presidential nominees

"Scoop: S. Carolina Dems enlist influencers for primary fight"

Holly Otterbein at Axios has the latest on South Carolina Democrats ramping up their defense of an early calendar spot:

"South Carolina will host a "creator" briefing alongside the national party's meeting in Los Angeles this week — a reflection of the growing importance of Democrat-friendly influencers as the party seeks to recapture young voters from the GOP.

"It's part of an increasingly hot battle within the party over which states will get the earliest slots on the 2028 primary calendar — and likely have outsized sway in determining who wins the Democratic nomination."

...

Noteworthy: One's mileage may vary on just how significant it is that South Carolina Democrats are turning to influencers in the state party's effort to retain an earlier (or the first) spot on the 2028 presidential primary calendar. More notable I would argue is the fact that Palmetto state Democrats are taking this approach in a public way ahead of and concurrent with the upcoming DNC meeting. No decisions will be made on the calendar this week, but South Carolina Democrats are following in the footsteps of their counterparts from New Hampshire who lobbied the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) during the panel's October meeting. 

This activity will likely only escalate between now and when waiver requests to the RBC are made by state parties in the lead up to (and very likely after) the January 16 deadline. 

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Are Democrats really considering putting Michigan's primary first for 2028? 

The early answer appears to be yes. But why when the Great Lakes state is not a perfect fit for the national party's selection criteria?

"Iowa Democrats split on defying DNC in 2028 presidential calendar fight"

The Des Moines Register's Brianne Pfannenstiel has the summary of the Iowa Democratic Party survey on the 2028 caucuses:

"Most Iowa Democrats who responded to a state party survey want to be in the early voting window when it comes to presidential primaries, but they’re split over whether they should defy national Democrats to make it happen.

"The Iowa Democratic Party’s State Central Committee voted Saturday, Dec. 6, to release the results of a survey the party conducted to gather feedback about the future of its presidential nominating caucuses.

"The results offer insight but no clear consensus for a party that is continuing to grapple with the fallout of major shifts in the national presidential nominating calendar."

--

Survey of 750 Iowa Democrats (results):

Timing of the Iowa caucuses

Iowa should go first: 

44.7 percent

Iowa should go early: 

20.6 percent

Iowa should go on Super Tuesday (or later): 

12.6 percent

Don't care (where Iowa is on the 2028 calendar): 

22 percent

Following DNC timing rules

Work within the early state selection rules and accept the DNC's decision on timing (even if Iowa is not early): 

51.1 percent

Work within the rules but flout them if Iowa is not granted a waiver for an early contest: 

34.4 percent

Go rogue without regard for the decisions on Iowa's scheduling at the DNC level: 

14.4 percent

...

Noteworthy: The state central committee also voted at its December 6 meeting to not surprisingly move forward in the DNC's early state selection process. Those waiver proposals -- state party cases for why their contest should be early in the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar -- are due to the Rules and Bylaws Committee by January 16. 

The split results on the two questions above will not necessarily make it any easier for the Iowa Democratic Party (IDP) either in the state or with the national party. It is not the united, near-consensus front IDP Chair Rita Hart would otherwise like to present to the DNC and it means that no matter what the state party opts to do for 2028 with respect to the caucuses, that some sizable enough faction is going to be less than happy with the direction the party chooses. 

--

Much more on the results to the survey from on the ground in Iowa from John Deeth.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

How long will Democratic presidential contenders keep going to Iowa? 

Possible 2028 Democrats keep trekking to the Hawkeye state but those visits aren't guaranteed to last. Here's why.

"New York lawmakers aim to move 2028 primaries up to Super Tuesday"

Edward-Isaac Dovere at CNN has the latest 2028 calendar news from Albany:

"James Skoufis, a New York state senator who previously ran for Democratic National Committee chair, told CNN he will introduce a bill Thursday to move the Empire State’s 2028 presidential primary to Super Tuesday, traditionally the first time a large batch of states votes on the same day and often the day that presidential front-runners separate themselves from the also-rans.

"Skoufis has already lined up what he believes will grow into enough support to pass. His proposal has the potential to reshape the next White House race for Democrats, who would need to put together larger-scale campaigns early, given the size and diversity of New York’s electorate and the expense of the state’s media markets."

...

Noteworthy: The New York primary was a Super Tuesday regular from 2000-2008, even moving up to the at-the-time new February Super Tuesday for 2008. When both parties restricted February primaries for 2012, New York legislators moved to the current protocol they have used in every cycle since. Basically that has entailed leaving the primary in February until June-ish of the year prior to a presidential election at which time the legislature (in coordination with both state parties) sets the date and the delegate allocation rules for the cycle. The date of the primary then reverts to February at the end of the presidential election year and the process starts all over again. 

Skoufis' proposed legislation would break from that established post-2008 protocol. 

--

More at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

New York? On Super Tuesday?

It has happened before and history may repeat itself in 2028. What are the implications?

"Scoop: Dems eye ranked-choice voting for primaries"

Holly Otterbein at Axios has the details on the push to bring ranked choice voting to Democratic presidential primaries in 2028:

"Democratic politicians and activists are quietly lobbying to upend the way the party picks its presidential nominee by urging the use of ranked-choice voting.

"It's a tool that drew national attention when it propelled New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani to a decisive primary win.

"Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin and other top party officials have met privately with advocates who are pushing for the voting method to be expanded for the 2028 presidential primaries, three sources tell Axios."

...

Burying the lede: "For the DNC to approve the use of ranked-choice voting in primaries, it would need the support of the powerful rules and bylaws committee and a majority of the 450-member body. State parties also would need to OK it, and many states would need to amend their election laws."

--

More at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The latest trial balloon for ranked choice voting in presidential primaries.

Recent lobbying efforts to bring RCV to the Democratic presidential nomination process face obstacles in and outside of the national party.

"Booker backs national party returning N.H. to FITN"

Kevin Landrigan at the Union Leader:

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) on a visit to New Hampshire saying things that people who are thinking about (if not actually) running for president say in places they often say them:

"'This is my second favorite new state after New Jersey. The culture up here blew me away when I ran. There’s something special here in New Hampshire and I support your efforts to be the first-in-the-nation primary,' Booker told WMUR during an interview Friday."

--

Noteworthy: Usually, the extent to which presidential candidates, prospective or otherwise, weighed in on the order of a primary calendar in the past was behind the scenes and through proxies at and/or on the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC). This is not that. And, in fact, Booker's statement may be the first of many ahead of any calendar decisions being made in 2026. It is a byproduct of the DNC opening up the process for states beyond the traditional ones to become a part of the early calendar lineup. There was some of this during the 2024 cycle, but the input was mainly coming from the incumbent Biden administration/campaign and the president's marginal challengers complaining, rightly or wrongly, about thumbs being put on the (rules) scales. 

Prospective 2028 candidates may be much more involved in voicing their opinions on the early calendar as those discussions continue within the RBC into 2026.

For what it is worth, Booker received votes in the 2020 New Hampshire primary, but he had withdrawn (in January) from the race for the Democratic nomination before any votes were cast (in February) in either Iowa or New Hampshire during the last cycle under the old early calendar rules.

"Iowa Matters Less Than Ever for Democrats, but They Can’t Quit It"

Reid Epstein at The New York Times looks at why prospective 2028 Democratic presidential candidates are still going to Iowa:

Not only did Democrats in the Hawkeye state lose their spot among the states in the early presidential primary calendar in 2024, but...

"This summer, Ken Martin, the new D.N.C. chairman, took Iowa’s delegates off the party’s powerful rules committee, which is expected to begin debating the 2028 calendar at its meeting in Washington next month and make a final determination by next summer. So far, D.N.C. members have shown little appetite for returning Iowa to its first-in-the-nation status.

"One major reason Democrats keep going to Iowa, though, is the media attention that still follows."

--

Noteworthy: FHQ has seen this question posed a few times elsewhere over the course of 2025 and NYT's Epstein does well to hone in on the media attention a trip to Iowa (even an Iowa with a delegate selection event likely outside of the early window for Democrats in 2028) at this stage can potentially bring a prospective candidate.  But is that draw inevitable? Will it be perpetual if so? Or is Iowa likely to turn back into a pumpkin at some point before the race for the 2028 Democratic nomination really heats up? We walk through a discussion of those questions at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

How long will Democratic presidential contenders keep going to Iowa? 

Possible 2028 Democrats keep trekking to the Hawkeye state but those visits aren't guaranteed to last. Here's why.

"2028 presidential hopefuls flock to key battleground states: Where have they traveled?"

Oren Oppenheim at ABC News:

"One year out from the 2026 midterms, major Democratic Party names have been taking the show on the road, saying that they’re helping the party lay the groundwork to battle for the U.S. House.

"They also might be preparing to run for president."

...

"ABC News has tracked at least 43 visits or planned visits so far in 2025 and 2026 by Democratic presidential hopefuls to key early or battleground presidential election states. Some of those states are also expected to be key House battlegrounds in 2026."

courtesy of ABC News

--

Noteworthy: This is not the first and will not be the last glimpse at the travel of prospective 2028 Democratic presidential candidates, but it is a check-in following the 2025 off-year elections. There is nothing all that surprising in the pattern of the candidate visits thus far. 

However, despite its double billing as both (very likely) early 2028 primary state and general election battleground, Nevada still does not garner that much attention. ABC News could have (should have?) discounted travel by candidates to neighboring states. Under those conditions, the Silver state has had just three candidates drop in during 2025 (or that are scheduled to trek that way in early 2026). 

Nevada has been a part of the early window on the Democratic calendar for nearly 20 years now -- five, and likely six, cycles -- and in many ways that still has not translated. By comparison, Iowa, a state that is very likely to be excluded from the early window on the 2028 calendar (but could go rogue!), is seeing more visitors. A visit to Iowa still carries more weight.

Will that affect Nevada's attempt to nail down the lead-off spot in the order for 2028? It may be a knock on Silver state Democrats' case. But it is still early yet.