"KS GOP, Democratic leaders agree on state-run [presidential] primary"

Melissa Brunner at WIBW (Topeka) on a bill before the Kansas House Committee on Elections:

"The chairs of the state’s Democratic and Republican parties say they agree that the state’s presidential preference primaries should be state-run.

"The House Elections Committee held a hearing Tuesday afternoon on a bill that would make a test-run in March 2024 a permanent policy.

"Before that, the parities each held their own statewide caucuses or primaries to decide the preferred candidate for their delegates.

"GOP chair Danedri Herbert and Democratic chair Jeanna Repass both say state-run primaries will ensure Kansans have their voices heard."

--

Noteworthy: HB 2447 would reinstate a state-run presidential primary in the Sunflower state and permanently schedule the election for the first Tuesday in March every four years. 

Kansas legislators passed legislation in 2023 to reestablish a state-run presidential primary in the state, but it was a one-off, applying only to the 2024 cycle. As I wrote over at FHQ Plus around the time a number of bills were making the rounds in the statehouse...

Kansas has an interesting history with the presidential primary. Actually, Kansas has very little history with a presidential primary as the means of allocating delegates to the national conventions. Only twice in the post-reform era has the state officially held a primary: in 1980 and again in 1992. And from 1996 until 2012, the dance that the Kansas legislature would perform would be to not appropriate funds for a presidential primary election and change the date in the statute referencing the election to the next cycle. That routine ended for the 2016 cycle when the presidential primary was struck from the Kansas statutes altogether, eliminating the contest and the need to (not) fund it.

The current bill was brought forth on the request of the Kansas Republican Party Chair Danedri Herbert, is sponsored by the House Committee on Elections and has the support of both major parties in the state.

"SC Republicans likely to keep coveted first-in-the-South presidential primary spot in 2028"

Anna Wilder of the Charleston Post & Courier updates the 2028 presidential primary calendar maneuvering on the Republican side:

"South Carolina Republicans likely will keep the coveted role of first-in-the-South on the 2028 presidential primary calendar after a Republican National Convention committee moved to secure that early slot last week.

"South Carolina has been the first Southern state to vote in the presidential primary since 1980, championing the significance of the position. For years, the state has consistently backed the person who would become the Republican presidential nominee. Only one candidate, Newt Gingrich in 2012, did not become the nominee after South Carolina voted for him.

"Tyson Grinstead, the South Carolina GOP committeeman, said the Jan. 22 committee meeting in Santa Barbara, Calif., was significant for the state. Members, including Grinstead, voted on a plan to keep the same calendar as before."

--

Noteworthy: While it almost always seemed like the Presidential Nominating Process Committee, empowered by the RNC to reexamine the delegate selection rules, would vote to carry over the same early calendar lineup the national party has employed in recent cycles, it was perhaps not a mere formality. As Wilder highlighted:

"Those familiar with the decision said the spot has been competitive in the past and was again this year, as Florida had been eyeing the leadoff Southern spot. In 2012, Florida attempted to take it, but South Carolina moved its date up.

"Ultimately, the chair of the Florida Republican Party, Evan Power, made the motion for South Carolina to keep the spot at the Jan. 22 meeting, despite Florida’s effort to grab it."

Again, all signs consistently pointed toward Republicans once again carving out space before Super Tuesday on the 2028 presidential primary calendar for Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina (the latter two in some yet-to-be-determined order), but it appears that there was at least some room for other states to make a case. And just as Michigan had a history of trying to break through into the early window of the Democratic nomination process (before finding success), Florida has a history on the Republican side. 

Only, Republicans in the Sunshine state were not successful this time around. 

--

The seeming absence of Georgia in these discussions is noteworthy as well. The Peach state secured a waiver (ultimately rescinded) from the DNC to conduct an early primary in 2024, but were unable to bring any move of the primary into the early window to fruition. In that process in 2023, there was some acknowledgment from the Republican secretary of state in Georgia of the value of an early presidential primary. But he punted any action on that idea to 2028. 

Thus far, the notion of placing general election battlegrounds into the early window of the presidential primary calendar is one more firmly held on the Democratic side than among Republicans. ...for this cycle anyway.

--

The report from the Presidential Nominating Process Committee now moves on to a vote by the RNC Rules Committee. A majority vote there would send it to the full RNC for consideration, where a three-quarters vote is required for final passage. 

--

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

"New Mexico Democrats seek to move up 2028 presidential primary, citing state's diverse electorate"

Dan Boyd at the Albuquerque Journal describes the efforts of New Mexico Democrats to nab an early calendar spot for 2028:

"New Mexico’s Democratic Party has launched a long shot bid to become one of the early primary states for the 2028 presidential election cycle.

"In their recent application to the Democratic National Committee, state party leaders touted New Mexico’s diverse electorate and relatively inexpensive media market as factors that set the state apart.

"'We submitted a bid to hold an early presidential primary because the Democratic Party is facing real national challenges — and New Mexico shows the path forward,' state party chairwoman Sara Attleson said in a statement.

"The state Democratic Party chairwoman, who was elected to the post last year, also cited the national Democratic Party's struggles to win support from rural, working-class voters."

--

Noteworthy: "Long shot" is likely an apt way to describe the New Mexico Democratic Party's push to be included among the early states on the 2028 presidential primary calendar. That is not a statement about the merits of the bid from Democrats in the Land of Enchantment. Rather, it is an acknowledgment of the institutional barriers that make successful inclusion in the early window difficult for the state party there. Under the rules of the process the Democratic National Committee (DNC) has instituted for the 2028 cycle, at least one state from each of four regions across the country will be represented in the pre-Super Tuesday portion of the primary calendar. New Mexico is one of two states from the west region opposite an early state stalwart, Nevada. And Democrats in the Silver state already have an early primary -- first Tuesday in February -- codified in state law. At best, then, New Mexico Democrats are likely fighting for any fifth spot that may be at stake. And there may be better options among the pool of applicants than New Mexico for that position.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Now we know which states they are looking at 

Some thoughts on the 2028 Democratic primary calendar process now that the deadline for state parties to apply with the DNC has come and gone

"These Are the 12 States Vying to Kick Off Democrats’ 2028 Contest"

Reid Epstein, Lisa Lerer and Shane Goldmacher at The New York Times shed light on the 12 states that are vying for four or five early slots on the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar:

"Democrats in 12 states have applied to kick off the party’s 2028 presidential primary contest, pushing arguments about race, geography, size, diversity, the rural-urban divide and their relative status as battlegrounds, according to copies of hundreds of pages of application materials reviewed by The New York Times.

"The Democratic National Committee, which will decide the order, has said that one state from each of four regions will hold nominating contests in the so-called early window, the month before Super Tuesday. A bonus fifth state could also be selected. State parties in these places applied:

"West: Nevada and New Mexico

"South: Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia

"Midwest: Illinois, Iowa and Michigan

"East: New Hampshire and Delaware."

--

Noteworthy: Fewer state parties submitted applications in 2026 as compared to 2022. Then, there were 20 state and territorial parties that threw their hats in the ring to be considered for early spots on the 2024 Democratic presidential primary calendar. Of those 20 from 2022, eight (8) state parties submitted applications again for the 2028 process (in alphabetical order): Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.

Four states submitted applications for early window consideration for the first time this time around: New Mexico, North Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia. 

But why were there fewer applicants in 2026 relative to the process in 2022? 

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Now we know which states they are looking at 

Some thoughts on the 2028 Democratic primary calendar process now that the deadline for state parties to apply with the DNC has come and gone

"What's in Iowa Democrats' bid to regain first-in-the-nation status?"

Brianne Pfannenstiel at the Des Moines Register weighs in on Iowa Democrats push to return to the early window for 2028:

"In its bid to regain a toehold in early days of the presidential nominating calendar, Iowa Democrats are arguing that the national party cannot build sustainable national majorities without reconnecting to rural America.

"To help the party accomplish that, Iowa Democrats are touting the flexibility they can provide with their caucuses. Faced with several years of upheaval and experimentation, state Democratic Party leaders say they can create a system that is more inclusive and transparent and eliminates many of the pitfalls that bedeviled it in 2020.

“'No other state has the knowledge, infrastructure and history of giving long-shot presidential candidates a fair chance,' party leaders wrote in an application to a panel of the Democratic National Committee that sets the presidential nominating calendar. 'When Iowa is included among the early states, we complement and represent an intentionally well-designed balance of our party’s values and priorities.'"

--

Noteworthy: Iowa Democrats are treading a very fine line. The party obviously wants the caucuses back in the early window (if not to be first again) and are clearly bending over backwards to appear flexible in their application to the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC). However, that flexibility in method -- in-person caucusing, voting electronically, voting via telephone, vote-by-mail, etc. -- runs the risk of coming across as less flexible than a muddled a la carte menu of options from which the state party cannot choose (or appears unable to choose).

Why does that distinction matter? It matters because the members of the RBC were adamant in their discussions of what they were after in these applications at their October 2025 meeting. They wanted not only clarity of method, but a demonstration of what worked in the past, what did not and how a state party would mitigate any lingering issues from the past implementation in 2028. 

All is not lost for Iowa Democrats. FHQ finds it hard to imagine the state party not being invited to make a presentation to the RBC for inclusion of its caucuses in the 2028 early window. [More on why soon at FHQ Plus.] So they will have a chance clean up any perception that this is a muddled mess by focusing on what the party could do to enhance what went right with the vote-by-mail party-run primary from 2024.

--

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

"As the DNC chooses the 2028 primary order, NH makes its case for first"

Margie Cullen, New England political reporter for USA Today, has the story on New Hampshire Democrats' push to return to a sanctioned early position on the 2028 presidential primary calendar:

"New Hampshire is planning on holding the first-in-the-nation presidential primary once again in 2028 — whether the rest of the country likes it or not.

"The Democratic National Committee will likely decide the order of its 2028 presidential calendar by the end of the year, and states that wish to hold a presidential primary or caucus before Super Tuesday must submit their plans to the Rules and Bylaws Committee by Jan. 16, 2026.

"New Hampshire has held the first primary since 1920 — even in 2024, when the DNC wanted South Carolina to go first instead. The state is applying to go first again in 2028, but officials have said it doesn’t really matter what the DNC decides: New Hampshire will be going first no matter what, as mandated by a state law passed in 1975.

"'Whether or not it is sanctioned or not, is really the conversation,' New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley said."

--

Noteworthy: Chair Buckley pretty much hits the nail on the head with his statement above. New Hampshire will have the first contest. The only catch is if the DNC sanctions that scheduling. 

The only caveat that FHQ would add is that that notion is true under current conditions, where New Hampshire is under unified Republican control (or even divided in some configuration of state government in 2027). But if Democrats sweep back control of state government in the 2026 midterms and install a Democratic secretary of state, then it is worth questioning just how much pressure the DNC might exert on Democrats in elected office in the Granite state to alter the oft-discussed presidential primary law. That is likely the only way in which the above scenario does not play out in some way, shape or form.

--

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

"[Illinois] State Democrats looking to push forward 2028 primary"

Benjamin Cox with WLDS in Jacksonville, IL discusses the Democratic Party of Illinois' efforts to win an early slot on the 2028 presidential primary calendar:

"The Democratic Party of Illinois has formally submitted a proposal to the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee seeking to move Illinois into the party’s early, or “pre-window,” presidential primary calendar.

"Democratic Party of Illinois Chair Lisa Hernandez said Illinois offers a uniquely representative testing ground for Democratic presidential candidates, citing its mix of urban, suburban, and rural communities, as well as its racial, economic, and geographic diversity.

"Hernandez also framed the proposal in national political terms, arguing that Illinois voters have been directly affected by policies of the Trump administration and would scrutinize candidates on issues including healthcare costs, reproductive rights, civil rights, and protections for marginalized communities."

--

Noteworthy: The Illinois bid for an early calendar position in 2028 is not unlike the effort in Virginia. It is a blue state -- even bluer than the Old Dominion -- with unified Democratic control of state government. Thus, a calendar change can easily be facilitated. That is one big factor in the state party's favor. But the question is, does Illinois have the profile of a state that the DNC wants in the early window? 

Blue state applicants, like those state parties in Delaware, Illinois, New Mexico and Virginia, can be thought of as contrasting the virtues of their own attempts with their regional neighbors in the pool that have some history in the early window -- New Hampshire, Michigan, Nevada and South Carolina, respectively. And by extension, those efforts may best be viewed as moves for any fifth spot in the DNC's early window on the 2028 presidential primary calendar (should the party opt to squeeze in another early contest).

--

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

"Virginia Democrats push for earlier spot on 2028 presidential primary calendar"

Brandon Jarvis at Virginia Scope has the story on Old Dominion Democrats' bid to become an early state on the DNC's 2028 presidential primary calendar:

"Most of Virginia’s Democratic congressional delegation is making the case for Virginia to be one of the early primary states in the 2028 presidential race.

...

"In making the case for an earlier primary, party leaders pointed to the state’s election infrastructure and track record.

"'Virginia seeks inclusion in the early nominating process based on its demonstrated capacity to administer a rigorous, fair, and transparent presidential nominating contest and its consistent record of national leadership within the Democratic Party,' the letter continues. 'The Commonwealth conducts elections through a professional, statewide system that is continuously active, uniform across jurisdictions, and capable of supporting a high-profile early contest in compliance with national party rules.'

"The letter also referenced the Virginia Democratic Party’s diversity and how it is more reflective of the national party than competitors like South Carolina, which typically holds an early primary but is a conservative state."

--

Noteworthy: The bid by Virginia Democrats for an early slot on the 2028 presidential primary calendar has something that most of those other state parties vying for the honor from the South do not: newly-minted, unified Democratic control of state government. Democrats in the commonwealth, then, can facilitate a date change today that their counterparts in Georgia, North Carolina and Tennessee cannot (and may ultimately not be able to). 

Maybe that will change after the 2026 midterm elections. Perhaps Democrats in neighboring North Carolina and Tennessee will overcome significant (gerrymandered) barriers and win control of state legislatures in one or both states. It is possible, though not probable depending on the extent of any blue wave that could materialize. And Georgia could elect a Democratic secretary of state (the actor that sets the date of the presidential primary in the Peach state). Maybe. 

But Virginia Democrats can make that happen now and that is seemingly why party leaders turned their focus toward contrasting an early primary in the Old Dominion with one from early state stalwart, South Carolina:

"Virginia’s electorate reflects the breadth of the modern Democratic coalition and provides a meaningful test of presidential candidates’ ability to build durable support across diverse constituencies and regions,” the letter states. “Candidates competing in Virginia must demonstrate organizing capacity, coalition-building skill, and governing readiness across urban, suburban, and rural communities that closely resemble the national electorate Democrats must assemble to prevail in a general election." 

Of course, South Carolina Democrats might counter -- in fact, they already have -- that the Palmetto state is a smaller and less expensive state and is the better option in the early window. 

Regardless, it seems worth pointing out that the southern region by far had the most applicants (five [5]) for early slots on the calendar. That does not guarantee that any additional (fifth) slot would go to a state from the region, but it does not hurt. Virginia might -- might -- not be competing with South Carolina.

--

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

"South Carolina Democrats file formal bid to keep first-in-nation presidential primary spot in 2028"

The Post and Courier's Caitlin Byrd takes a look at South Carolina Democrats' application to retain an early window slot in 2028:

"The national Democratic Party’s deadline to submit proposals to be part of the so-called “early window” of states in the 2028 presidential primary field expired Friday with South Carolina Democrats filing a bid they hope keeps it first.

"The competition is expected to be fierce. Other states are submitting their own packages, among them battlegrounds like Michigan and Nevada, and historic leadoffs like Iowa and New Hampshire.

"State Democrats say the Palmetto State has a strong case to remain at the front of the nominating process: It’s a smaller state that makes campaigning here cheaper, meeting voters easier and reaching a turnout bloc long seen as crucial for the party’s future success."

--

Noteworthy: It is interesting. All of the usual arguments are here for South Carolina being first. As state Democratic Party Chair Christale Spain told Byrd:

"We will again make the case that Black, rural, urban and Southern voters must lead the way in the First in the Nation primary."

It is a familiar diversity argument. But one other consistent theme in some of the arguments for a first-in-the-nation 2028 South Carolina primary from folks in and associated with the state party is that they do not see the 2024 primary in the Palmetto state as having been first. No, that is not a reflection of New Hampshire Democrats opting into the noncompliant state-run presidential primary and holding an unsanctioned primary before South Carolina's. Rather, it is a function of 2024 not being a competitive nomination race. 

This argument basically boils down to, "we have not really seen what the nomination system looks like with South Carolina as the lead." In other words, some in and around the state party see 2024 as something of a dry run, but a practice run and not a true test. 

South Carolina DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee member Carol Fowler made that argument:

"We haven't seen how it works with South Carolina first, because I truly did not count the last time,” Fowler said of the 2024 contest where Biden faced no serious primary challenger and months later suspended his bid. “We deserve a chance to see if Joe Biden was right."

And so did state party Executive Director Jay Parmley:

"We're making the case that the primary in 2024 was not an open primary,” said state Executive Director Jay Parmley. “There was an incumbent president on the ballot, and the current calendar has not been tested in a true competitive open primary system."

Neither is wrong. But it also is not clear how successful the party will be in advancing that particular part of the case to be first with the national party. 

What South Carolina Democrats continue to have on their side in all of this -- whether being first or merely among the early states -- is that it is among the easiest pieces to move around on the calendar. That may not pay dividends with respect to the competition for the first slot, but it is a feather in Palmetto state Democrats' caps that none of the other southern state party applicants can boast. 

--

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

"Nevada Democrats push to host first 2028 primary, highlighting battleground advantages"

Kenzie Margiott at KRNV News 4 (Reno) shares the news of Nevada Democrats officially applying for a spot among the early states on the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar:

"The Nevada State Democratic Party has submitted a proposal to the Democratic National Committee requesting to host the first presidential nominating contest in the 2028 election cycle."

...

"Nevada Democrats argue the state’s majority-minority population, large working-class electorate, and status as a competitive battleground make it a strong testing ground for Democratic presidential candidates. Party leaders also point to Nevada’s relatively small size, two major media markets, and expanded voting access as meeting the DNC’s criteria for rigor, fairness, and efficiency."

--

Noteworthy: Similar to the situation in Michigan, Democrats in Nevada already have an early primary for 2028. In 2021, legislation established a presidential primary in the formerly caucus state and scheduled the election for the first Tuesday in February. That election will occur then unless there is a change triggered by the state legislature. Regardless, neither the state party nor the legislature may be inclined to make a change unless it is to move the primary even further up to secure the first position on the calendar. 

If Nevada does not make the DNC's cut at all, then there may be resistance to changing the current law regardless of what happens in the midterm elections with respect to control of state government. Unlike Michigan, the incumbent governor in the Silver state is a Republican who may balk at any changes to the status quo. [NOTE: Nevada Republicans opted out of the state-run presidential primary in 2024, choosing instead to conduct caucuses.]

--

Nevada Democratic Party statement on the application:

NV DEMS SUBMITS PROPOSAL TO HOST FIRST IN THE NATION PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING CONTEST

As a majority-minority, working-class, battleground state, Nevada is best poised to nominate a candidate who can win in November

Today, the Nevada State Democratic Party submitted a proposal to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee to be included in the early presidential primary nominating calendar and earn the first spot in 2028.

Nevada State Democratic Party Chair Daniele Monroe-Moreno released the following statement:

“There’s no better proving ground for any Democratic presidential contender than a union-strong, majority-minority, competitive battleground state. Putting a state that looks like America at the front of the calendar will put our party in the strongest position to win back the White House.”

In the proposal, we outline selecting Nevada as first is a strategic decision for the future of the party:

“The Democratic Party is facing a critical moment where we must be strategic in our efforts to earn back Latino support, craft an economic message that resonates across the country, begin the work to reach working-class voters, and turn out diverse communities … As a diverse, working-class, battleground state, Nevada is best poised to nominate a candidate who can win in November.”

Additionally, we underscore that Nevada is best positioned to be first in the nation because we fully meet all metrics outlined by the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee:

Rigorousness: “Nevada is the most working-class and most diverse battleground state in the nation. We have a majority-minority population, and we have the highest concentration of non-college educated voters of all battlegrounds. We are also home to urban, suburban, and rural communities, making us geographically diverse. Nevada looks like America and best represents the coalition we need to win in 2028”

Fairness: “Nevada is a small and accessible state of just over three million people with two media markets where presidential contenders can still meet voters face to face, and retail politics with a strong grassroots organization can make a real difference.”

Efficiency: “Nevada has some of the most progressive voting laws in the country, making both registration and voting widely available.”

This proposal has garnered support from prominent leaders and organizations including Nevada’s federal delegation, Culinary Union 226, Nevada State AFL-CIO, and Somos Votantes.

--

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

"Michigan Democrats apply to vote early in 2028 presidential primary"

Craig Mauger and Melissa Nann Burke at The Detroit News have the latest on Michigan Democrats officially applying with the DNC to be among the early states in 2028:

"Michigan Democrats submitted an application Friday in hopes that the battleground state will be chosen to be among the first to vote in the 2028 presidential nominating contest.

"In 2024, the rulemaking arm of the Democratic National Committee picked Michigan to be the fifth state to hold its presidential primary. Michigan's primary took place on Feb. 27 in 2024. State law currently says Michigan's presidential primary will be on the fourth Tuesday in February going forward.

"In an interview Friday, Curtis Hertel, chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party, said the new application would allow Michigan to potentially keep its late February date, which would be Feb. 22 in 2028, and make Michigan a place for early investment in 2028. Hertel said he's not expecting Michigan to move to the front of the line, where South Carolina was in 2024.

"'I have said several times that we are not pushing for first,' Hertel said of the order."

--

Noteworthy: It is worth noting that the Michigan presidential primary is already in the early window of the 2028 Democratic presidential primary calendar. Further action on the part of legislators in the Great Lakes state, then, would not be necessary so long as the state party secures a slot among the early states. Additional action would only be required if either 1) Michigan is granted the first (or an earlier) position or 2) the state is left out of the early state lineup. 

The DNC would, depending on control of Michigan state government following the 2026 midterms, likely encounter a far more motivated state party/state government in the event that Michigan is bumped up the order rather than left out of the early window entirely. Odds are not in favor of the latter happening at this point, but should Michigan be left off the list, then legislators may not find incentive to change the date to comply with the changes. That would raise the specter of a potential rogue primary and/or a battleground state party having to opt out of the state-run contest in favor of a compliant (later) state party-run contest (party-run primary or caucus).

I am not a betting man, but I would not bet on that scenario. It would not be in the interest of any of the parties concerned.

--

Michigan Democratic Party statement on the application:

STATEMENT: MDP Submits Application for Michigan To Be in 2028 Early Primary Window

Today, the Michigan Democratic Party formally submitted its application to the Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) for Michigan to hold an “early window” primary for the 2028 Democratic presidential nominating convention. Applications to the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee are due today.

Last year, the RBC established the process through which Democratic State Parties may apply to be in the early window for 2028. The resolution established that the RBC must select between four and five states for the early window and must include one state from each of the DNC’s four geographic regions (Midwest, East, South, and West). The RBC requires State Parties to hold their nominating contests after the first Tuesday in March unless specifically exempted. In 2023, Michigan passed legislation moving our presidential primary to the fourth Tuesday in February.

“For Democrats to have the strongest presidential candidate, the early nominating states should closely mirror Democratic voters nationwide and be representative of America. Michigan is the most diverse battleground state in the country and investments made on the ground early are beneficial to electing a Democratic president in the general election,” said Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel. “Michigan is a perfect candidate to be in the lineup of early nominating contests, and it’s crucial that our new national calendar for selecting the next president includes Michigan in an early position.”

“We like to say that ‘the road to the White House goes through Michigan.’ As the most diverse battleground state, Michigan embodies all the constituencies that will be key to winning the presidency. The middle class was built right here in Michigan, and our two biggest industries – manufacturing and agriculture — employ millions of hardworking people across our state,” said Governor Gretchen Whitmer. “Michigan is an ideal state to be included in the early window for the 2028 presidential primary process, and I wholly support the application submitted by the Michigan Democratic Party.”

“All roads to the White House go through Michigan. Key groups that Democrats need to persuade and turn out to win national elections are the backbone of our state. In addition to racial and cultural diversity, we have both industrial urban centers with manufacturing and more rural agricultural areas than many other states,” said Congresswoman Debbie Dingell. “A Michigan presidential primary is a down payment on the general election, giving us a head start on critical organizing efforts that pay huge dividends in November. I don’t think that any one state should have a lock on going first, but Michigan will always fight for a battleground state to be a part of the early primary process.”

“Teeing off our nation’s elections in Michigan will show the strength and relevance of the Democratic party and will remind people of every political persuasion across the country that, even in challenging times, progress is possible when we have the courage to show up and use our voice,” said Senate Majority Leader Winnie Brinks.

“Michigan is a decisive battleground state. In the last five presidential elections, Michigan voters have cast their ballots for the winning candidate-demonstrating that success here requires building the same coalition needed to win in November,” said House Democratic Leader Ranjeev Puri. “An early primary in Michigan ensures Democratic nominees are tested with the voters who will ultimately decide the presidential election.”

--

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

And Michigan Democrats may not be pushing for the first-in-the-nation slot, but...

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?

"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?

"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?

"Michigan lawmakers weigh moving primary date ahead of 2026 campaign"

Craig Mauger, Beth LeBlanc and Melissa Nann Burke at The Detroit News detail a bipartisan legislative push in the Great Lakes state to move the date of the primaries for state and federal offices:

"Michigan lawmakers, from both sides of the aisle, are weighing a new push to move the state's August primary to May, a change that could shake up next year's fight for control of state government.

"While there's been little bipartisan cooperation in the divided Legislature so far this year, members of the Democratic-led Senate and representatives within the Republican-led House have both been considering yet-to-be-unveiled proposals to alter the traditional August primary date."

--

Noteworthy: Could any change on this front in Michigan affect the scheduling of the 2028 presidential primary in the state as well? I'm glad you asked. Let's walk through some of the possibilities at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

Would Michigan primary consolidation stop at state/federal and municipal offices?

Puerto Rico bill would create new avenue to canceling presidential primary

Legislation has been introduced in Puerto Rico to allow for the conditional cancelation of future state-run and funded presidential primary elections. 

Rep. José Varela Fernández (PPD-32nd) introduced PC 76 in January 2025. The measure would grant the government in the US territory the ability to cancel a presidential primary in the event that a presidential candidate has received the minimum number of delegates necessary clinch a nomination at least 30 days before the preference vote is scheduled on the island. 

The intent is twofold. First, the objective is to save money, not funding a choice-less primary vote. But also Varela Fernández's legislation would give the government the flexibility to call off a presidential primary vote should a repeat of the circumstances of 2024 arise again in future cycles. President Joe Biden faced only token opposition for the Democratic nomination and former President Trump wrapped up the Republican nomination well in advance of the late April vote. Both coasted to nominations that were decided well in advance of the two Puerto Rico primaries in 2024.

In the absence of the state-funded option, territorial parties would left to devise a method for conducting a presidential preference vote and electing delegates -- they are elected on the state-run primary ballot in Puerto Rico -- on their own. Both parties did as much in 2024 after the primary was canceled by the government in the territory.

Companion bill introduced in Ohio House to move presidential primary to May

Rep. Daniel Troy (D-23rd, Willowick) has for a second consecutive legislative session introduced a bill to move the presidential year primaries in the Buckeye state to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in May. Currently, Ohio statute calls for the consolidated primary, including the presidential preference vote, to be conducted on the third Tuesday after the first Monday in March.

HB 197 is similar to legislation that Rep. Troy proposed and failed to move during the 2023 legislative session. The aim is to eliminate the presidential year exception to the timing of primaries in the Buckeye state, making the scheduling uniform across all years. 

The measure is identical to legislation introduced on the Senate side earlier in the 2025 session.

Missouri House passes Super Tuesday primary bill

The Missouri House on Monday, April 14 passed HB 126, a measure that would reestablish a state-run presidential primary in the Show-Me state and schedule the election for Super Tuesday. 43 Republicans from the majority, including four of five from leadership, joined all but one Democrat present (42 of 43) in voting in favor of the bill. The majority of Republicans -- 64 in total -- voted against HB 126.

Moving forward there is both a short term prognosis for the legislation but some longer term implications involved. For starters, HB 126 was merged with HB 367 at the committee stage. Together the combined bill not only restored the presidential primary but it also expanded the window for early voting from two to six weeks. That expansion remains in the final bill passed on Monday by the Missouri House. In discussions with the lead sponsor of similar legislation in the state Senate, however, the expanded early voting window will ultimately be scratched, squaring the two visions of the legislation across chambers and, perhaps, easing the path of HB 126 in the upper chamber. Yet, that would likely require a similar coalition of some majority Republicans banding together with all or most of the Senate Democrats. 

Over a longer time horizon, however, there are some additional roadblocks to Missouri becoming a presidential primary state (rather than a caucus and/or party-run primary state) again in 2028. HB 126 does not include any appropriation for the presidential primary election. That was left to future legislatures that may or may not be as open to the election itself and/or the fiscal tag required to implement it. Even if HB 126 passes the state Senate and is subsequently signed into law, there still may not be a presidential primary in Missouri for 2028 and beyond. 

The set up would be similar to that which existed in neighboring Kansas for years. The Sunflower state had a presidential primary on the books for two decades before it was eliminated for 2016. But Kansas legislatures during that period routinely refused to fund the election and had to go through the process of "canceling" it every four years

--

Final vote on HB 126: 85 in favor, 64 opposed, 2 present (one from each party)

--

Related: 

4/1/25: Missouri House tees up final passage on Super Tuesday presidential primary bill

2/26/25: Missouri House presidential primary bills merged, deemed "do pass" in committee

2/14/25: From Missouri, a competing bill to restore the Show-Me state presidential primary