Democratic Party officials approved a new schedule for the 2028 presidential primaries

A panel of the Democratic National Committee has voted to revamp the schedule for presidential primaries in the 2028 election.

South Carolina will now hold the first primary, followed a week later by Nevada. New Hampshire will follow a week after that, and then Democrats in New Mexico, Michigan and Virginia will vote in successive weeks.

Nevada Democrats had lobbied hard to have the first nominating contest in their state and some have expressed disappointment at finishing with the second primary.

Mini Racker, D.C. correspondent with The Nevada Independent, talk to The Show about this.

Full conversation

MARK BRODIE: Mini, good morning.

MINI RACKER: Good morning. Thanks for having me on.

MARK BRODIE: Thanks for being here. So what was Nevada’s pitch? Why were they suggesting that they should be first?

MINI RACKER: So I’ve been following this for a long time, and I think Nevada’s been making this pitch for years now. Number 1, Nevada is one of the only traditionally early states that’s actually a battleground in the general election. So for a long time, Nevada Democrats have kind of made the case that they should see this early investment because that’ll really pay off when they face Republicans in November 2028.

And then on top of that, it’s a very diverse state that represents the country. And I think that Democrats have been talking for a long time about how do we make sure to motivate all of these different kinds of voters. And so Nevadans were saying, look, we can be a test case for that. And so I would say those were two of the strongest arguments for Nevada.

MARK BRODIE: Well, as I mentioned, and as you reported, a number of Nevada Democrats were not necessarily thrilled with finishing second. I wonder if there’s that big of a difference between going first or going second.

MINI RACKER: Yes, I wondered that, too. And I think you saw a lot of Democrats say everyone who’s in the early states, they matter. But I think clearly by the degree of aggressiveness that the fight for first saw, it does matter. And I think talking to some of the members of the panel who made this decision and looking at traditionally the kinds of financial investments and the number of candidate visits we saw to the very first state versus even the second state, that’s where you really saw that big difference.

I think with South Carolina being first, it is going to see more money spent on hotels and events and advertising, and it is going to see, likely, more candidate visits than Nevada.

MARK BRODIE: I guess it’s fair that candidates can basically start going to South Carolina from now until when their primary is, but between South Carolina and Nevada, it’s just a week, and then a week — one week between that and each of the next states. So I guess maybe that does to some extent limit the visits and the amount of attention a state gets and the amount of money that’s spent as a result of all that?

MINI RACKER: Yeah, I mean, I don’t want to say Nevada is still going to get plenty of candidate visits. It is still going to get some money. It is the first battleground that’s going to vote. That said, someone made the point to me, look, if you perform badly in the very first state in South Carolina, you’re not going to make it to Nevada. So that’s where a lot of the focus has to go. I think it’s going to be a matter of triaging your resources to see how much you can invest in Nevada before February 2028.

MARK BRODIE: Are folks talking about the significance of two Western states being among the first several here, which has not necessarily been the case in the past?

MINI RACKER: For sure. This was a huge dynamic in my reporting. I think Nevada being in the West in a growing area of the country that I think is a little more representative than some of the traditional early states was a huge argument throughout the process.

And then New Mexico made a presentation that I know Democratic insiders were very impressed with. It was the only border state, I believe, that applied to be an early state. And I think that you’re seeing in having these two Western states be in those first four weeks, you’re seeing the Democratic Party kind of start to narrow where it wants to put its focus ahead of the next presidential election, particularly around issues on immigration, the border, and a focus on Latino voters, and a focus just on the area where the country is going, on the future.

MARK BRODIE: Well, so I also want to ask you, because there’s been a lot of speculation about this, you reported a little bit about this, about maybe the DNC having a thought of what type of candidate it is interested in having as its nominee for president in 2028, and maybe the order playing some kind of role in that?

MINI RACKER: Yes, I think a lot of this is a little bit speculative, but when you look at South Carolina, this is a state that has not voted for a Democrat for president in 50 years. It’s a little more conservative. A lot of the primary voters are going to prefer a candidate who’s a little more tested, someone like Joe Biden. This is why he preferred South Carolina as the first state. Versus I think Nevada’s a little more unpredictable and a little more susceptible to a populist candidate who’s kind of shaking up the established order.

And I think when you look at the panel members who voted to have South Carolina early, first, ahead of Nevada, these tended to be some of the people who were more involved in Democratic Party politics for decades — some of kind of the old guard leadership who wanted something more traditional. Versus a lot of the newer members of the panel I talked to, younger members who hadn’t been involved in party politics for decades, they were kind of looking at putting these Western states earlier a little more seriously.

MARK BRODIE: One other demographic that I want to ask you about, Mini, is unions, because those are obviously a big component of the electorate, the population in Nevada. What do folks say that Nevada becoming the second state now says about the party’s stance on unions and maybe how it is hoping to use them and have them help?

MINI RACKER: Yeah, I think throughout the discussions about which state was going to be first, the union presence in Nevada again was one of the state’s strongest arguments. The Culinary Union is the political powerhouse of Nevada Democrats. And throughout the conversations, you saw members of this panel that made the decision talk about how important it is to win back the working class. I think we’ve kind of seen working class voters be attracted by Trump and Republicans in offering something different at times.

And so I think the Democratic Party really is starting to take seriously, hey, we need to appeal to service workers. We need to appeal to the people who are actually doing a lot of the difficult jobs in this country. And Nevada is one of those states full of exactly those kinds of voters that Democrats will be targeting.

MARK BRODIE: Interesting. All right, that is Mini Racker, D.C. correspondent with the Nevada Independent. Mini, thanks so much.

MINI RACKER: Thank you.

KJZZ's The Show transcripts are created for audience accessibility. Transcripts are created on deadline with the assistance of AI tools and then edited, and may not be in their final form. The authoritative record of KJZZ's programming is the audio segment.