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.

--

At FHQ Plus: DNC reverses course on ranked choice voting rule

Over at FHQ Plus...

The DNC adopted the rules that will govern the party’s 2028 presidential nomination process at its summer meeting in Austin, TX on Saturday, August 15. Within the report from the Rules and Bylaws Committee (RBC) were the delegate selection rules, the call for the convention and the six Rule 12 waivers that set the lineup of primaries in the Democrats’ early window on the 2028 presidential primary calendar.

But the report was not adopted as it passed the RBC at its meeting on July 24. One amendment was offered and adopted before the amended rules package was put before the full DNC membership for consideration. And that change was in regard to the language affecting ranked choice voting (RCV) in Rule 14.A that was adopted by the panel back in the spring.

So what was the change and what does it mean for RCV and the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028? Over at FHQ Plus, I will have a brief look at things in reaction to the decisions made in Austin.

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

What's up with Democrats and ranked choice voting for 2028?

A proposed rules change the DNC is poised to adopt in Austin this week has triggered worries in some states and stirred backlash among RCV proponents. But is it in danger of not passing?

--

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?

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

Over at FHQ Plus...

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

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

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

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

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

--

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

--

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

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

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

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

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

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

--

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

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

The Annotated 2028 Presidential Primary Calendar 

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

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

Over at FHQ Plus...

So, the Democrats have a calendar for 2028.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

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

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

--

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

--

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

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

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

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

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

...

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

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

--

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

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

Hull added this to KOB 4 in Albuquerque last week:

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

...

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

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

--

Related at FHQ Plus (subscription)...

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

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