Nevada a part of both parties' early state lineups for 2028

Richardo Torres-Cortz at The Las Vegas Review-Journal provides the lay of the land in Nevada as the Silver has now officially secured spots in the early window of the 2028 presidential primary calendar for both major parties:

"Nevada voters from both major parties will again have an early say in who they want to be their next presidential nominee.

"During its atypical Republican National Committee midterm convention in Texas last week, the party affirmed its 2028 presidential primary schedule that maintains the Nevada Republican Party’s third position."

...

"Last presidential election cycle, the Nevada Republican Party unsuccessfully sued to block the state’s official process for Republicans. Nevertheless, the party and President Donald Trump skipped it in favor of caucuses two days later, which designated delegates.

"It wasn’t clear Monday what direction the party will take in 2028. The Nevada Republican Party and Chairman Michael McDonald did not immediately return messages seeking comment."

--

Noteworthy: The Nevada side of this story is the opposite of that in South Carolina as the two have formally switched places for 2028. Yes, the Republican National Committee claimed coming out of the Dallas summer meeting that "no states were added, removed or changed in its 2028 lineup decision," but that is somewhat misleading.

The four states in the Republican early window are the same as they were in 2024 and in the same order as each ended up being in the last cycle. However, unlike 2024, the Rules of the Republican Party were amended for 2028 last week to reflect an official flipping of Nevada's and South Carolina's positions on the Republican calendar. 

Yes, that is a nitpicky little detail, but a change was made. 

Some of what drove that change is no doubt a desire on the part of Republicans in the Palmetto state to, as Democratic kingmaker Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC) has said, bat clean up in the early window before Super Tuesday. 

But FHQ is curious if Silver state Republicans were passive bystanders in the RNC fulfilling a South Carolina preference. If, alternatively, the Nevada Republican Party was a more active participant in that process, then was that spurred by the state-run primary being so early in February (earlier than where South Carolina Republicans preferred to schedule their presidential primary)? By extension, is that any indication of the state party's intention to use the state-run primary option for 2028, one the party sued to stop and opted out of during the last cycle? 

Those questions, among others regarding the Republican calendar process/rules, remain unanswered at this point.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Is calendar chaos in the offing for 2028? 

The notion is neither farfetched nor on anyone’s radar as the focus shifts to the Republicans’ calendar

Possible 2028 candidates talk DNC calendar, penalties in New Hampshire

WMUR's Adam Sexton caught up with potential 2028 presidential candidates, Mark Kelly and Ro Khanna, during their recent trips to the Granite state and asked each about the new DNC calendar and candidate penalties:

Sexton: What are your thoughts on this new DNC calendar?

Khanna: Well, look, New Hampshire's obviously going to matter. We're standing here on pure Americana, all the signs. Anyone here will know democracy is alive and vibrant, and New Hampshire has a special place. They'll figure it out. But the fact that I'm here, that (Mark) Kelly's here, that (Pete) Buttigieg comes here, (J.B.) Pritzker's here, uh, New Hampshire's going to play a key role. 

Sexton: And down the line if the DNC were to say something like, "Hey, don't go here anymore." Is that going to be a problem for you? Or will we cross that bridge when we get to it?

Khanna: I don't think that will happen. I think (New Hampshire Democratic Party Chair) Ray Buckley has shown very skilled leadership of the (state) party. He's going to work it out with the DNC. It is an appropriate test to be in South Carolina, Nevada, Michigan and New Hampshire. And you've watched these campaigns long enough. As long as New Hampshire is in the early window, it's going to have an enormous impact.

...

Sexton: What do you think of this DNC calendar and the early voting states? 

Kelly: Yeah, well, you know, I don't get a say in which state goes first. I think that New Hampshire plays a very critical role in, you know, how we select the nominee for the party for president. I experienced this a little bit last night when I had 12 Granite staters around a table, and just the kind of questions you get from them. You really get the sense of how engaged people are in this process. 

Sexton: If the DNC starts to tell a candidate where they can and can't go, is that something that you're not going to stand for potentially or we'll cross that bridge when we get there? 

Kelly (with quizzical look on his face when the campaign restrictions are mentioned): I really believe that New Hampshire plays a critical role in this process. I also don't think this discussion is over yet. 

...

Sexton (in wrapping up the segment): There's a tacit acceptance (from the two potential candidates) of the DNC's calendar alongside an affirmation of New Hampshire's importance, and they think it's just not possible the DNC will do its worst.

--

Noteworthy: The video link above appears under the headline "Potential 2028 contenders don’t think DNC will enforce toughest penalties on NH." That along with Sexton's closing comments are somewhat misleading. 

Both Kelly and Khanna pandered to a the New Hampshire audience to whom they were speaking, but both dodged the question about candidate penalties in the event that New Hampshire Democrats opt into any rogue state-run primary. Khanna said that it would get worked out. It will! One way or another and at some point. And Kelly said the discussion is not over yet. It isn't!

But two things:

1) September 15 is the initial deadline for the New Hampshire Democratic Party to have responded to the tasks given them in the DNC waiver granting a party-run primary (or a state-run primary if it can be moved) an early spot. That is tomorrow. Democrats in the Granite state have to have reached out to the secretary of state in Concord about setting the primary for DNC-prescribed date or submit a delegate selection plan for a party-run contest by September 15. 

Regardless of progress made, the state party may get an extension from the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) to continue that work. Or they may not. But September 15 will be our first indication of both how defiant New Hampshire Democrats are going to be about this and how tolerant the RBC is going to be about any signs of rogue calendar activity for this cycle.

2) Additionally, the dodges from Kelly and Khanna are understandable. I don't know that either, no offense to them, really knows the specifics of the new candidate penalties the DNC has put in place for the 2028 cycle. They are not alone. Kelly, in particular, looked surprised at the suggestion of campaigning penalties when they were raised by Sexton. 

But they all will know the rules and penalties for breaking them upon formal entry into the race. As part of Rule 13 of the delegate selection rules, all candidates must sign an affirmation that they are running for the presidential nomination as Democrats. The same sort of document was used in 2020. However, it, too, has been amended for 2028 to include an acknowledgement that the candidates have "reviewed and agree to abide by the 2028 Delegate Selection Rules with the full understanding that if I or my campaign violate the rules, I and my campaign will be subject to the sanctions..." Breaking that pledge is what is going to potentially cost candidates access to primary debates. 

--

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: When are bound delegates unbound?

Over at FHQ Plus...

When are bound delegates unbound? 

For Republicans, there is incrementally more clarity (required) for 2028

The question of when national convention delegates are bound and when they are unbound has been a sort of Wild West in recent presidential cycles. Well, in comparing the rules of the two major parties, it has been a study in contrasts. Whereas the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has offered top-down clarity on the matter for years now, their counterparts at the Republican National Committee (RNC) have typically deferred to the states and state parties with respect to the binding of delegates. And that deference, in turn, has led to broad variation across the more than 50 jurisdictions conducting delegate selection events in the Republican presidential nomination process.

They have run the gamut.

On the one hand, there were states that had state party-run events with presidential preference votes at the earliest stage of the caucus/convention process, but subsequently selected delegates without regard to the results of that preference vote. Rick Santorum could “win” the Iowa caucuses, for example, but Ron Paul supporters could overrun the district and state conventions to actually fill the state party’s national convention delegate spots. Paul supporters in the Iowa delegation (and in other states) had their preference in 2012, but they were not bound to it, much less Santorum, the “winner” of the caucuses, at the convention in Tampa. Iowa Republicans were not alone. Republicans in the Hawkeye state and those in several other states in 2012 (and for years before that) held non-binding caucuses like these, sending unbound delegates to national conventions.

On the other end of the spectrum, however, were states like Maryland, where the specifics of the binding and unbinding of delegates was specifically laid out in state law and/or state party rules. In the case of Maryland in 2012, the Republican delegates were bound based on the results of the presidential primary in the Old Line state until either 1) the candidate to whom those delegates were bound won the nomination, 2) the candidate to whom they were bound received less than 35 percent of a convention vote or 3) two presidential nomination votes at the national convention had been completed.

But those were just two ends of a continuum. There were many variations in between and some of them were clear (or clearer) about the binding process while often leaving some or all of the unbinding process either unsaid or open to interpretation. After 2012, however, the RNC became more involved in this area and has steadily increased the regulation of this process in its rules for successive cycles. And 2028 is no different. Over at FHQ Plus, I will more fully explore the latest evolution in this regulation of the binding and unbinding of national convention delegates for the upcoming cycle.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Republicans ease into bonus delegates for 2028

The RNC rules revamp the delegate apportionment formula with a modest new incentive

--

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

--

RNC keeps the South Carolina presidential primary First-in-the-South

Ian Grenier at The Post & Courier in Charleston, SC shares the reaction from the Palmetto state to South Carolina Republicans retaining their early position on the 2028 Republican presidential primary calendar:

"South Carolina’s Republican presidential primary will remain “first in the South” and fourth overall in 2028 after the Republican National Committee this week agreed to keep its existing early-state order.

"An exact date for the contest here has not been set, but it will follow Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, and will probably again be held in mid to late February.

"'I’m extremely happy about that, it’s what we expected to happen, and it’s what’s worked for every cycle basically for the last 40 years,' S.C. Republican Party Chairman Drew McKissick said.

"The calendar, approved as Republicans met in Dallas for an unusual midterm convention focused around President Donald Trump, confirms the Palmetto State will be a key primary battleground for both parties in 2028."

--

Noteworthy: As noted previously, the big news, to the extent it is big, is that South Carolina has formally shifted in the Republican National Committee rules from the third contest in the order to the fourth of four carve-out states in the early window of the 2028 Republican presidential primary calendar before Super Tuesday. The change appears permanent in 2028 where it was voluntary on the part of Palmetto state Republicans for 2024.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Is calendar chaos in the offing for 2028? 

The notion is neither farfetched nor on anyone’s radar as the focus shifts to the Republicans’ calendar

Iowa Republican caucuses remain at the head of the 2028 presidential primary queue

Tom Barton at The Gazette in Cedar Rapids, IA with the latest on the Republican National Committee locking in Iowa as the first-in-the-nation contest for 2028:

"Iowa will retain its first-in-the-nation position in the Republican presidential nominating process in 2028, preserving the state’s influential role in GOP presidential politics even as national Democrats again move forward without Iowa in their early-state lineup.

"The Republican National Committee approved its presidential nominating calendar Thursday during the party’s gathering in Dallas, maintaining the traditional “carve-out” states with Iowa first, followed by New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, according to the Republican Party of Iowa.

"The vote followed approval Wednesday by the RNC Rules Committee and comes after months of work by a committee led by Republican Party of Iowa Chairman Jeff Kaufmann.

“'I’m pleased to announce that Iowa’s First in the Nation status is officially preserved through 2028,' Kaufmann said in a statement. 'As Chair of the RNC’s Presidential Nominating Process Committee, I led the effort to keep Iowa first and protect the carve-out system. Democrats may have abandoned Iowa, but Republicans under President Trump and RNC Chairman Gruters are committed to ensuring the Iowa caucuses remain a defining part of the presidential nominating process.'"

--

Noteworthy: This has not exactly been a mystery. Republicans in the traditional early states and in and around the RNC have signaled that the status quo calendar was likely to be maintained for the 2028. And the national party has now confirmed that at its summer meeting in Dallas, TX. The caucuses in Iowa will once again lead off the 2028 Republican primary calendar followed by contests in New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. 

The order suggests that South Carolina Republicans have permanently ceded the third slot on the calendar to Nevada, something that was not in the national party rules for 2024, but Palmetto state Republicans voluntarily gave up for a spot right before Super Tuesday. That is a fairly significant change to what had been a longstanding alignment in the Republican calendar since 1980. South Carolina had not only been the first-in-the-South state in the Republican process -- it retains that position -- but also the third state. The RNC rules now imply the primary in the Palmetto state will fall fourth in the order. 

[FHQ uses terms like imply and suggests because, unlike the Democratic Party rules, the Republican rules do not give specific dates for these early contests. There is a list of carve-out states and therein an implicit order. But it is not mandated as South Carolina Republicans showed in shifting to fourth from third in the list for 2024.]

But while those questions have been addressed about the Republicans' 2028 primary calendar, other important ones remain unanswered for the time being.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Is calendar chaos in the offing for 2028? 

The notion is neither farfetched nor on anyone’s radar as the focus shifts to the Republicans’ calendar

At FHQ Plus: Republicans ease into bonus delegates for 2028

Over at FHQ Plus...

Often, when FHQ delves into delegate numbers, it is with a focus on delegate allocation, or how primary or caucus votes translate into delegate slots awarded to candidates. However, from time to time, there is some attention paid in this space to delegate apportionment, or how many delegates each state has to allocate in its presidential primary, caucus or convention.

And there is a reason for that more sporadic treatment of delegate apportionment: the formulas the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Republican National Committee (RNC) use to make those determinations are much less variable over time. But layered into both are bonus delegate schemes that raise the number of allocable delegates from the base total initially apportioned to each state and territory.

Actually, there are two types of bonus delegates built into each party’s formula. The first and most common is a party strength component. The intent is basically to account for how Democratic or Republican a state or congressional district therein has been in recent elections. As a result, states with similarly sized populations end up with vastly different delegate totals in both parties’ formulas. Maryland, for example, has a much higher number of delegates on the Democratic side than do Democrats in, say, Missouri. But the opposite is true in the Republican process: Show-Me state Republicans are apportioned more delegates than Republicans from very blue Maryland. And again, that is despite similar population sizes across both states.

Importantly, the Democratic formula parcels out those party strength bonuses over all jurisdictions, statewide and in each of the several congressional districts. That is why the number of delegates in any given congressional district varies within states. Let’s use Maryland again. Across the eight districts in the Old Line state, there was a range of delegates in 2024 from six delegates in the least Democratic districts to ten in the most Democratic one. And in more Republican states, especially those with majority-minority districts, that gap can be a bit wider, ranging from as few as three delegates to as many as around 10 (plus or minus a delegate or two).

In contrast, there is no variation on the congressional district level in the Republican process. They all have a baseline three delegates. Where there is variation on the party strength vector is in the at-large pool of delegates that are allocated based on the statewide results. Now, go back to Missouri. The Republican Party there got at-large bonuses in 2024 for electing a Republican governor (one delegate), electing a majority of Republicans in the congressional delegation (one), electing a majority of any state legislative chamber (one), having any state legislative chamber presided over by a Republican (one) and electing two US senators (one delegate for each). Each state also receives 4.5 delegates plus 60 percent of that state’s total number of electoral votes if the state in question voted Republican in the previous presidential election. In Missouri’s case that is 4.5 delegates plus six (10 electoral votes * 0.6) or 11 additional at-large delegates. That equals 17 bonus delegates in a delegation of 54, a little less than a third of the delegation.

All told, those party strength bonuses are pretty standard. After all, it is rational that the parties would prefer to give voice to their supporters in states and congressional districts throughout the country. That Democrats would weight areas where there are actual Democrats and Republicans would do likewise with those affiliated with the GOP is understandable.

But there is another type of delegate bonuses where the parties prioritize other elements of the process outside of party strength. It is on this front where Democrats have been active for a few cycles now, but Republicans have only now ventured toward for 2028. Over at FHQ Plus, I will shift the focus to this other type of bonuses and what addition the RNC has layered into their process for this next cycle.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Republican rule changes for the 2028 cycle

The RNC's work on delegate rules isn't done, but the baseline is different on several fronts from the regulations that guided the 2024 process

--

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

--

"SC Democrats set their presidential primary date. When will GOP contest happen?"

Joseph Bustos at The State in Columbia, SC checks in on when Palmetto state Republicans might schedule their presidential primary now that South Carolina Democrats have their date:

"With South Carolina Democrats planning to hold their presidential primary Jan. 22, 2028, now Republicans have to decide when they want to have their primary.

The Palmetto State will be the first in the nation primary for Democrats. South Carolina Republicans will hold the GOP’s first in the South contest.

Both primaries have proven pivotal in whom each party nominates to be president.

SC GOP Chairman Drew McKissick told reporters that he and leaders of the Republican parties in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada will meet at the Republican National Committee’s meeting in September in Dallas to discuss the calendar, including when the early window closes.

--

Noteworthy: Perhaps things have changed for the 2028 cycle, but it might be a while before South Carolina Republicans weigh in on where exactly their presidential primary may be on the primary calendar for 2028. It was mid-June 2023 when the state party set the date for the 2024 cycle. And that came after much of the dust had settled on the calendar for that cycle. That has tended to be the protocol for early states, especially on the Republican side where specific dates are not spelled out in RNC rules for the early carve-outs.

--

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: Defiant or disappointed? Iowa and New Hampshire find themselves on the outside looking in as the Democrats enter their super penalty era

Over at FHQ Plus...

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) formally adopted its rules for the 2028 presidential nomination process last weekend. That included the calendar rules that set the lineup of states granted waivers to conduct primaries in the early window prior to Super Tuesday. And while much of the Saturday general session of the DNC in Austin was devoted to speakers from each of the six states selected to fill out the early calendar, it was a day that was ultimately not full of surprises when it came to the rules. Outside of one tweak unrelated to the calendar, the full party adopted exactly what the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) passed last month in Washington, DC.

In other words, before and after the DNC vote in Austin, Iowa and New Hampshire were both on the outside looking in. Well, Iowa was entirely outside the early window anyway. New Hampshire, on the other hand, was, for the second cycle running, reserved a seat at the early calendar table, but outside of its preferred position at the head.

Understandably, that drew some reactions back home in the Hawkeye and Granite states. And they ran the gamut from disappointment with the decision to outright defiance. But the pattern in the backlash was noteworthy even in these early days of the 2028 cycle. After all, the calendar rules are but one step of this process. Now that the DNC rules are in place, the states and state parties have their chance to react to and within (or outside!?!) those rules and will over the course of the coming year or so. And early though it may be to think about those possibilities and their ramifications, as Yogi Berra once famously said, “It gets late early out there.”

Over at FHQ Plus, I will analyze the reactions, contextualize them and discuss Iowa and New Hampshire in the Democrats’ new super penalty era.

--

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?

--

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

--

"DNC Votes to Officially Select Early States for 2028 Democratic Presidential Nominating Calendar"

DNC press release:

Today, at the DNC’s summer meeting in Austin, Texas, the full DNC voted to officially approve the proposed slate of six early states to lead the 2028 presidential nominating calendar, as well as the accompanying rules package. The vote follows an outpouring of support for the Rules and Bylaws Committee’s proposal after their July meeting. Leaders, advocates, and Democrats from all across the country have praised the calendar’s historic diversity and its ability to battle-test candidates while maintaining an open, affordable field.

The early window passed today, as proposed by RBC, includes six states in the following order.

• 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

DNC Chair Ken Martin released the following statement:

“The DNC has delivered a 2028 nominating calendar that truly represents our party and our values, and will help us retake the White House in 2028. I applaud the Rules and Bylaws Committee for their commitment to a transparent and fair selection process, which led to this rigorous, fair, and efficient early window.”

Background on Selected States:

• Battle-testing Our Candidates: The early window delivers on RBC’s goal of a battle-tested nominee both with key battleground states and tests with a comprehensive range of voters key to winning back the White House.
• Key battleground states are prominently featured in the early window with both Nevada and Michigan.
• Other early window states feature competitive downballot races and swing voter populations with New Hampshire, New Mexico, South Carolina, and Virginia.
• Comprehensive Test with Diverse Voters: The early window provides a comprehensive test with diverse groups of voters that are key to winning a general election. In fact, it is the most diverse open field early window in Democratic Party history, massively increasing diverse representation from 2020 early window states.
• Black Voters: 4.6 million Black people live in the early window states, an increase of 2.8 million.
• Latino Voters: 4.2 million Latinos live in the early window states, an increase of 2.4 million.
• AANHPI Voters: 1.4 million Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islander Americans live in the early window states, an increase of 900k.
• Native American Voters: 370k Native Americans live in the early window states, an increase of 280k.
• Non-college Voters: 14 million Americans in the early window states do not have a college degree, an increase of 7.7 million.
• Young Voters: More than 2.8 million young (18-24) people live in the early window states, an increase of more than 1.6 million.
• Union Voters: More than 1.1 million union workers live in the early window states, an increase of more than 700k.
• Veterans/Military Voters: More than 2.1 million veteran and military voters live in the early window states, an increase of more than 1.2 million.
• Keeping the Contest Open, Affordable: The early window is open and affordable for candidates — ensuring voters choose our 2028 nominee, not money.
• The earliest portion of the window creates an open field, and does not box out any candidates based solely on warchest and name ID.
• South Carolina has a very affordable media market, with estimated weekly ad cost that is among the lowest of any of the early states.
• The relatively inexpensive Reno media market serves the vast majority of Nevadans outside of the Las Vegas media market.
• Both South Carolina and New Hampshire are geographically compact states, making travel more affordable and accessible.

Additional Context on the Rules and Bylaws Committee’s Process:

• This week’s DNC vote comes after many months of careful planning and deliberation by the RBC, including:
• Deliberately chosen criteria for selection and an open application process
• Thoughtful consideration of applications and presentations by states
• Thorough review of the rules for the process
• The full DNC vote took place during the General Session meeting, which was livestreamed and can be found on the DNC’s YouTube page here.

--

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?

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?

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

"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

"Democrats move Va. up to 6th state for presidential primary"

Michael Martz at the Richmond Times-Dispatch with the reaction in the commonwealth to Virginia's inclusion in the Democrats' early window for 2028:

"Virginia voters won't have to wait until Super Tuesday to pick a Democratic presidential candidate in 2028.

"The Democratic National Committee's Rules and Bylaws Committee proposed Virginia as the sixth state on the early presidential primary calendar in 2028, with the election scheduled on Feb. 29 — leap day. It will follow Democratic presidential primaries in South Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Michigan under the calendar that the committee adopted on Friday.

"The decision means that Virginia won't have to compete with other states for the attention of presidential candidates, as it did on Super Tuesday in early March."

--

The reaction from Democratic Party of Virginia Chair Lamont Bagby: 

"We are appreciative of the Rules and Bylaws Committee's decision to recommend that Virginia receive a waiver to become an early primary state in the upcoming Presidential primary calendar. Virginia reflects the diversity. priorities, and experiences of voters across the country.

"Virginia voters have a long history of testing and then electing exceptional leaders. We will now have the opportunity to do that in an early and influential Democratic Presidential primary and that will help set the stage to elect a Democratic President."

--

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

"Michigan Selected for Early Window of DNC’s 2028 Primary Calendar"

Michigan Democratic Party press release:

"Today, the Democratic National Committee announced that Michigan was selected by the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee to hold its primary election in the early window of the 2028 presidential primary calendar. In response, Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel shared the following statement:

“'The road to the White House runs through Michigan, and we are proud to be in the early window of the 2028 presidential primary calendar. Michigan is the most diverse battleground state in the nation, and a candidate who can win here can win nationwide. We thank the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee for recognizing Michigan’s importance, and we look forward to ensuring Michigan voters make their voices heard. So goes Michigan, so goes the nation.'”

--

Noteworthy: Currently, the Michigan presidential primary is scheduled by state law for the fourth Tuesday in February. That falls on February 22, 2028, the date the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee slotted the state into on the party's 2028 presidential primary calendar.

--

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

"National Democratic committee recommends New Mexico move up on the calendar for presidential primary"

Joshua Bowling at Source NM has the latest on one of the new states added to the Democrats' 2028 presidential primary calendar:

"The Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee on Friday voted to catapult New Mexico’s 2028 presidential primary election to fourth in the country.

...

"In a statement Friday, Lujan Grisham said she appreciated the DNC committee members taking her pitch seriously.

“'For years, I’ve said the same thing: you cannot show up for Hispanic voters in November after Democrats have already picked a nominee. You have to engage with them from the start. Today, national Democrats agreed,' she wrote. 'New Mexico is the most Hispanic state in America, and we’re the only border state in this early window. Now, candidates who want to be taken seriously on immigration and the border are going to have to come to New Mexico and earn it.'

“'Making New Mexico an early primary state will help put our state on the national stage, increase investment in our communities, expand our tourism economy and give New Mexicans a stronger voice in shaping the policies of our nation,' Lujan Grisham said."

--

Noteworthy: The New Mexico presidential primary, consolidated with those for other offices, is currently scheduled for June 6, 2028. State government is under unified Democratic control and will have to change state law to accommodate the shift to February. Recent efforts -- in 2015 and 2020 -- to move the primary have failed, the former to move the entire consolidated primary from June to March and the latter to create a separate presidential primary election in January. It remains to be seen which route of the two decision makers in the Land of Enchantment will pursue in their efforts to meet the criteria of the rules handed down by the Rules and Bylaws Committee (and ultimately the DNC).

--

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