2028 primary calendar on the line as Democrats meet in Austin

Mike Catalini at The Associated Press on the stakes as Democrats prepare to finalize the party's 2028 primary calendar:

"Democrats are gathering to finalize their 2028 presidential primary calendar this week, setting the stage for a wide open contest to succeed President Donald Trump and chart a path ahead as the party’s voters oscillate between progressive and more moderate candidates.

...

"The party is expected to give final approval to a calendar that has South Carolina’s primary first on Jan. 22, followed by Nevada on Feb. 1. New Hampshire, New Mexico, Michigan and Virginia would round out the early states, voting throughout February.

"The overhaul shows Democrats’ effort to give greater influence to states reflecting the party’s coalition, particularly Black and Latino voters. It follows years of a calendar led by Iowa and New Hampshire, two states with overwhelmingly white electorates.

"The proposed calendar would cement South Carolina at the start of the calendar, reflecting a change former President Joe Biden pushed for after that state revived his struggling 2020 campaign.

"South Carolina has long been the first Southern contest and has served as a key test of candidates’ support among Black voters."

--

Noteworthy: Despite some discontent in some corners of the party over the calendar, the calendar rules and the whole 2028 rules package the Rules and Bylaws Committee will report to the full DNC is likely to pass. The rules will get the green light from the national party at a more traditional point in the cycle than was the case four years ago when the early calendar was not settled (at the national party level) until after the 2022 midterms. This will give the party more runway to not only attempt to smooth over the discontent, but to nail the calendar down earlier ahead of the 2028 primaries.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Let's talk about the Democrats' 2028 presidential primary calendar, part two 

What are the implications on the race of the six states selected to hold contests in the Democrats' early window?

At FHQ Plus: What's up with Democrats and ranked choice voting for 2028?

Over at FHQ Plus...

More than two months ago the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) initially passed some changes to the party’s delegate selection rules for 2028 that would effectively ban the use of ranked choice voting (RCV) in the delegate allocation process for the upcoming presidential nomination race. It was a bit of news that remained mostly quiet in the immediate aftermath as FHQ noted at the time. And all remained that way when the panel revisited the issue at its June meeting and rejected an amended version, sticking with the original tweak to Rule 14.A.

Now, the entire set of changes made by the RBC to the rules for 2028 is on the verge of coming before the full DNC for a final vote at its summer meeting in Austin, TX. And with it, rumblings about the RCV change are seemingly increasing. But the budding backlash to the change is, on the one hand, misguided and, on the other, missing some context that is important to the consideration of why the DNC may be heading down this particular path for this cycle. Over at FHQ Plus, I will contextualize matters a bit.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The Democrats and ranked choice voting in the 2028 presidential nomination process

Coming off a Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting primarily devoted to the primary calendar, the headline maybe instead should be about RCV.

--

Subscribe below and consider becoming a paid subscriber for access to the remainder of the post.

--

RNC Chair expects Iowa to be first on Republicans' 2028 presidential primary calendar

Stephen Gruber-Miller at the Des Moines Register provides an update on the Republican primary calendar and Iowa's likely place in it:

"The chair of the Republican National Committee says Iowa is all but certain to lead off the GOP presidential nominating process in 2028 after Democrats removed the state's first-in-the-nation status.

"'The road to the presidency starts here in Iowa,' RNC Chair Joe Gruters said Wednesday, Aug. 12, in an interview with the Des Moines Register. 'The fact that the Democrats just voted to remove Iowa from the primary calendar versus what we did. I put Chairman (Jeff) Kaufmann, your Republican Party of Iowa chairman, front and center. He's the chairman of our primary calendar. That's how much we value Iowa.'

"The RNC tapped Kaufmann in October 2025 to lead the committee tasked with determining the order of the 2028 presidential nominating calendar. Kaufmann held the same post ahead of the 2024 election, when Iowa went first and President Donald Trump overwhelmingly won the Iowa Caucuses.

"The party has not formally set its 2028 nominating calendar, but Gruters expressed confidence about Iowa's place."

--

Noteworthy: It has not exactly been a mystery that the Republican Party would carry on with the traditional four states -- Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina -- atop its presidential primary calendar for 2028. However, the unanswered question is whether those four will be joined by other states ahead of Super Tuesday due to the new Democratic primary calendar. Yes or no, there are implications for the early calendar on the Republican side and how the nomination race may progress.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The Annotated 2028 Presidential Primary Calendar 

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

At FHQ Plus: Let's talk about the Democrats' 2028 presidential primary calendar, part two

Over at FHQ Plus...

So, the Democrats have a calendar for 2028.

Well, the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) has adopted calendar rules and waivers for six states to hold early presidential primaries on the following dates:

• South Carolina, January 22, 2028
• Nevada, February 1, 2028
• New Hampshire, February 8, 2028
• New Mexico, February 15, 2028
• Michigan, February 22, 2028
• Virginia, February 29, 2028

Now those rules, as part of the amended delegate selection rules, the early state waivers, an updated Call for the Convention and amendments to the Charter and Bylaws all head to the full Democratic National Committee (DNC) for final approval next week at the party’s summer meeting in Austin, TX.

For now, let’s assume that the calendar rules pass as is as part of the broader package of changes the RBC will present to the full party membership in Austin. What then? That is a good question, followed by a near infinite set of additional, attendant questions. I want to spend a little time addressing some of those questions below the fold.

But before I jump in I want to note how little we know right now. There is a calendar. It will have one to two more states in the early window than was the case during the last competitive Democratic presidential nomination cycle in 2020. Additionally, there will very likely be A LOT of candidates who initially throw their hats in the ring. Of course, some may run for 2028 but not actually end up running in 2028. Oh, and there are also some delegate allocation rules too.

While there are also other things that we know, there is more that we do not know at this stage. Standing between the here and now and January 1, 2028, to choose one arbitrary date before primary season truly kicks off, is a sea of invisible primary activities that will help fill in many but certainly not all of those blanks. Primary season itself will finish that job.

All of that is to say that a bit of caution is warranted. The coulds in the direction this thing could go are numerous. Anyway, over at FHQ Plus I pose and answer some questions.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Let's talk about the Democrats' 2028 presidential primary calendar, part one 

A closer look at the Rules & Bylaws Committee meeting where the early calendar decisions were made

--

Subscribe below and consider becoming a paid subscriber for access to the remainder of the post.

--

"New Mexico's push for 2028 early primary status could encounter logistical challenges"

Dan Boyd at the Albuquerque Journal looks into the hoops New Mexico official will have to jump through to get the state's primary moved to align with the new DNC calendar rules for 2028:

"New Mexico’s push to move to the front of the line — or at least close to it — in the 2028 presidential primary calendar could place the state in the national political spotlight, while also causing some logistical headaches.

"While a Democratic National Committee panel recently voted to include New Mexico among the first six states in the 2028 calendar, shifting the state’s primary from early June to mid-February would require lawmakers to approve legislation during next year’s 60-day session.

"And it’s not yet certain whether such a change would mean moving up all state primary races — or just the state’s presidential primary."

...

"Lindsey Bachman, the communications director for Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, said an analysis of the proposed date change’s impact is being conducted in the wake of the DNC’s recent vote. That review will include what laws would need to be updated and the associated costs, she added.

"But Bachman also confirmed at least some statutory changes will be required if the DNC approves the proposed schedule."

--

Noteworthy: These are common refrains in the primary movement space. Both the move-everything-from-June-to-February option or the one creating a separate presidential primary have price tags. The former would move state legislative primaries into the window in which the legislature in Santa Fe is still in session in 2028. That is a matter that has derailed more than a few proposed primary moves in the past. And obviously, establishing a new and separate presidential primary election comes with a hit to the state's budget, something that New Mexico Republican gubernatorial nominee, Greg Hull, raised in his reaction to the possibility:

"Before this Legislature votes on anything, the people of New Mexico deserve to know what it costs and who’s paying for it,” Hull said in a statement. “If the answer is that taxpayers get stuck funding two statewide elections in the same year so a national party committee in Washington, D.C., can hit its calendar — that’s a bill sent to New Mexico families for someone else’s convenience."

Hull added this to KOB 4 in Albuquerque last week:

"If this was just bringing one party primary forward, and not every party primary forward then I’d have to object to it, because it would become very expensive and very confusing on New Mexico voters,” Hull said. “Because if you had one primary in February and then you didn’t have another primary until June, that puts things into a real tailspin."

...

"I don’t see either party just saying, 'Yeah, if you move, we’ll move' and just acquiescing to that,” Hull said.

Left unmentioned by Hull or Republicans associated with the state party? Anything about the possibility of either the need for a waiver from the RNC or the potential RNC penalties associated with a February New Mexico presidential primary. It is early but there could also be a push for Republicans in the Land of Enchantment to shift to caucuses, a repeat of 2024.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Let's talk about the Democrats' 2028 presidential primary calendar, part one 

A closer look at the Rules & Bylaws Committee meeting where the early calendar decisions were made

"Republicans in Concord draft bill to counter DNC move against NH primary"

Adam Sexton at WMUR on the backlash in New Hampshire to the new DNC calendar rules for 2028:

"In the wake of a vote against the New Hampshire primary by the Democratic National Committee, Republicans at the State House are drafting a bill to tie taking part in the primary to access for the November ballot for presidential nominees.

"Republicans are preparing a legislative counterpunch to the DNC's move against New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation presidential primary status."

"'The Democratic National Committee can make whatever sets of rules that they want in respect to our New Hampshire primary,' said state Rep. Joe Sweeney, R-Salem. 'We as a state can also make any sets of rules that we want in respect to who has ballot access in the state of New Hampshire.'

"Sweeney is drafting a bill to tie November election ballot access for presidential nominees to participation in New Hampshire's presidential primary."

--

Noteworthy: This is the first of what will be many, many (formal) responses to the new DNC calendar rules recently passed by the party's Rules and Bylaws Committee in the Granite state. It is also, as Kathy Sullivan noted in the Sexton's piece, unconstitutional. The matter of which side takes precedence in these matters where state laws conflict with national party rules has been repeatedly litigated over the years. And the courts more often than not side with the parties. It is they who ultimately get to determine the rules of their nominations (with some limits). But yes, that has been complicated over the years by states becoming more directly involved in the process via the state-funded primary. 

But this move by Rep. Sweeney is trying to win a battle while likely losing the war. If this draft bill were to become law, it would likely further erode the first-in-the-nation primary law by putting even more space between the state government and the state parties on the issue than the DNC calendar rules already have over the last two cycles. 

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Democrats devise their own super penalty for primary calendar violations 

The Rules and Bylaws Committee adopted new enhanced penalties to punish states and candidates who break timing rules in 2028

"Maine Democrats fight national party on ranked-choice voting in 2028"

Benjamin Kail at the Bangor Daily News reports on the reaction in Maine to a DNC rule proposal on ranked choice voting:

"Democratic lawmakers in Maine alongside ranked-choice voting advocates are fighting a proposal by the national party that would restrict the process in 2028’s presidential primaries.

"The Democratic National Committee in a little more than two weeks will decide on a proposed rule change that would bar ranked-choice tabulation for delegate allocation. Maine lawmakers who embraced the voting system years ago say the change could keep the state’s delegates from being seated at the 2028 convention."

...

"The DNC says ranked-choice voting is incompatible with the party’s delegate allocation process, but that its new rules will include a carveout for states like Maine where it is on the books. If the proposal goes into effect along with DNC rules after a full meeting on Aug. 15, only the first round will be considered for delegate allocation purposes."

--

Noteworthy: I will have more to say on this over at FHQ Plus either over the weekend or early next week, but for now I will say that state-based concern over delegates not being seated at the national convention is probably a tad premature if not overblown. The rule under consideration by the full DNC next month -- it already passed the party's Rules and Bylaws Committee twice -- would not "bar states from using a ranked ballot." Under the rule, the Maine ranked choice voting and tabulation can proceed, if necessary, after the likely Super Tuesday primary in 2028. But only the results from the first round would be used for the purposes of allocating national convention delegates slots. 

For Democratic delegates from the Pine Tree state to be affected at the convention, the Maine Democratic Party would have press on with a plan to use the ranked choice tabulation for determining delegate allocation in their delegate selection plan, a document that has to be submitted to, reviewed and approved, yes, the Rules and Bylaws Committee. All of that will happen next year, starting in the spring with submissions, continuing with reviews in the summer and perhaps into the fall. That is a lot of back and forth and a lot of opportunities to square the differences between the two sides and bring some plan into compliance with the DNC rules. 

...you know, if the proposed RCV rule is adopted next month. That is the next thing to watch for in all of this.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The Democrats and ranked choice voting in the 2028 presidential nomination process

Coming off a Rules and Bylaws Committee meeting primarily devoted to the primary calendar, the headline maybe instead should be about RCV.

"Has New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation law outlived its usefulness?"

UNH political scientist Dante Scala provides some Granite state perspective on the the FITN presidential primary:

"New Hampshire’s political elites quickly pointed fingers after a Democratic National Committee panel voted Friday to strip the Granite State of its first-in-the-nation status on the presidential nomination calendar. Republican elites blamed Democrats for the Rules and Bylaws Committee decision. Democratic elites blamed their national party leadership. What neither side did, but should, is consider the following: On their watch, New Hampshire has become much less capable of defending its role in the process."

--

Noteworthy: Look, I would like to just copy and paste all of Scala's piece here. It is such helpful grounding for understanding the place of New Hampshire's presidential primary in an ever-changing nomination system and the utility of the infamous law that has protected its early position in the process for decades. Highly recommended piece. Go read it.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Democrats devise their own super penalty for primary calendar violations 

The Rules and Bylaws Committee adopted new enhanced penalties to punish states and candidates who break timing rules in 2028

At FHQ Plus: Let's talk about the Democrats' 2028 presidential primary calendar, part one

Over at FHQ Plus...

So, the Democrats have a calendar for 2028.

Well, the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) has adopted calendar rules and waivers for six states to hold early presidential primaries on the following dates:

• South Carolina, January 22, 2028
• Nevada, February 1, 2028
• New Hampshire, February 8, 2028
• New Mexico, February 15, 2028
• Michigan, February 22, 2028
• Virginia, February 29, 2028

Now those rules, as part of the amended delegate selection rules, the early state waivers, an updated Call for the Convention and amendments to the Charter and Bylaws all head to the full Democratic National Committee (DNC) for final approval next month at the party’s summer meeting in Austin, TX. Yes, that is another hurdle the complete rules package for 2028 has to first clear.

No, it is unlikely that there will be much resistance or that any that arises will be enough to derail the rules package the RBC will report to the full body. For example, the 2024 calendar rules and waivers were brought before the DNC in February 2023 and while the package was opened to discussion on the floor of the meeting, the rules were adopted as is.

A cycle earlier, in 2018, when the proposed delegate selection rules came before the full DNC, the calendar process was operating under the old (pre-2024) rules — the early calendar positions of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina were written directly into the rules — there was more discussion than there was in 2023. But it was not over the calendar. Rather, the heated discussion at the DNC meeting that adopted rules that cycle was over the superdelegate changes recommended by the Unity Reform Commission with language later crafted by the RBC. There, some amendments were heard and adopted, but they were minor in scope.

A similar discussion, if not debate, may arise in Austin. There may even be some subtle changes made to the rules package. But, again, that is unlikely to include changes to the calendar proposal above. That, or something close to it, will be the schedule that commences the voting phase of the Democratic presidential nomination process in 2028.

But before weighing on the impact of that calendar of primaries and caucuses for 2028 (the future part two of this series of posts), I want to talk some about the Friday session of the RBC meeting. There were a number of state-level responses, both jubilant and defiant, from state parties and the local media and a number of national accounts that mainly focused on the divisions on the committee (and in the broader party coalition) over which state should be first. However, to FHQ’s mind, there were, big surprise, a few things that flew under the radar that deserve some attention. I will focus on those items over at FHQ Plus.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The Annotated 2028 Presidential Primary Calendar 

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

--

Subscribe below and consider becoming a paid subscriber for access to the remainder of the post.

--

"Iowa Dems call 2028 presidential calendar snub a 'slap in the face'"

Brianne Pfannestiel at the Des Moines Register shares the reaction in Iowa as Hawkeye state Democrats are on the outside looking in on the early calendar again for 2028:

"Iowa have been shut out of an officially sanctioned spot on the 2028 presidential primary calendar, despite national Democrats expanding the map to include two additional early voting states.

"The Rules and Bylaws Committee, the powerful arm of the Democratic National Committee that sets the presidential nominating calendar, voted Friday, July 24 to again bypass Iowa and instead start the 2028 primary process in South Carolina."

...

"But even as they [the Iowa Democratic Party] left the door wide open to holding a rogue first-in-the-nation caucus in defiance of the national party, Iowa’s next steps remain unclear.

"[Iowa Democratic Party Chair Rita] Hart and other Iowa Democratic Party leaders said Friday they intend to first focus on the 2026 winning elections."

...

“'We’ll have more to say after November,' Hart said."

--

Robin Opsahl from the Iowa Capital Dispatch with a quote from former Iowa RBC member, Scott Brennan: 

"Scott Brennan, an Iowan serving on the DNC and a former member of the Rules and Bylaws Committee, said in a news conference Friday he expected Iowa would not be chosen in the early window once again. Brennan lost his spot on the RBC in 2025, after the election of DNC Chair Ken Martin earlier that year.

“'Look, I’m not surprised by this decision,' Brennan said. 'It was probably decided 18 months ago when the new members of the Rules and Bylaws Committee were appointed by Chair Martin. … When we lost the White House, we did make a good faith effort to share our concerns, but clearly, our case was not heard by this committee or Chair Martin.'”

More on the RBC membership decisions by DNC Chair Martin here.

...

More from Hart via Iowa Capital Dispatch:

"'I had this conversation with Ken Martin and with some of the members of the RBC, that it’s pretty hard to defend any kind of situation that we’re in right now,” Hart said. “When we got slapped last time, when we worked in cooperation with the DNC and lost our representation on the RBC, in comparison to other states that did not cooperate and got rewarded. So it’s really hard to make a case to these people that say, you know, ‘why work with the DNC going forward?’ But I would say that that is a conversation that is not doesn’t need to be taking place right now. As we, when we get to November, and we have some newly elected Democratic officials, they’re gonna have some things to say about that, along with the rest of our Democrats.'"

--

Others in Iowa politics also weighed in: 

Democratic US Senate nominee Josh Turek:

"Speaking with reporters after a joint event in Des Moines, Turek was asked whether Iowa should go first regardless of the committee's decision.

"'Yes,' Turek said. 'Iowa law is really clear. We go first. And in the U.S. Senate I’m there to represent Iowa and Iowans regardless over any other interest or group.'"

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Democrats devise their own super penalty for primary calendar violations 

The Rules and Bylaws Committee adopted new enhanced penalties to punish states and candidates who break timing rules in 2028