Las Vegas Sun90%
Democrats need to move beyond the zero-sum fight over first-in-the-nation primary states 74%
7/24/2026, 9:00:00 AM
BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Optimism Bias, and Appeal to Emotion, with Confirmation Bias as the most egregious example at 11.7% saturation with 141 hits. Analysis detected 1,112 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,206 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 65.4% and a BS Rank of 74% (5,898 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 73.10% of the article peer group.
The Democratic National Committee’s Rules and Bylaws Committee met today to discuss the 2028 presidential primary calendar, tentatively selecting South Carolina to be the first in the nation to cast ballots in the Democratic primary.
Unfortunately, in trying to identify a single state most representative of Democrats, left-leaning voters or Americans writ large, the committee is asking the wrong questions.
The committee should stop trying to determine which state best represents America or the DNC because the honest answer is simple: None of them does.
If Democrats are serious about building the strongest possible coalition to defeat Trumpism and the Republican Party in 2028, they should abandon the outdated notion that a single state should enjoy exclusive first-in-the-nation status.
Instead, they should embrace a more holistic and unified approach that allows multiple states to vote together at the beginning of the process, reflecting the extraordinary diversity of the nation.
The current fight over the calendar has already exposed why the old model no longer works.
South Carolina Democratic Chair Christale Spain recently lamented to The New York Times that the process has become so adversarial “it’s almost like we’re running against Nevada.”
Even more concerning, she warned that arguments over which state should go first are increasingly being framed around competing racial and ethnic identities.
Other party leaders have echoed concerns that a process designed to celebrate diversity is instead encouraging different parts of the Democratic coalition to compete for symbolic supremacy.
That is exactly the opposite message Democrats should be sending.
At a moment when the nation faces deep political polarization and Donald Trump continues to exploit division wherever he finds it, Democrats should not force loyal constituencies into a zero-sum competition over who matters most.
Black voters matter.
Latino voters matter.
Organized labor matters.
Asian American and Pacific Islander communities matter.
Native American communities matter.
Independent voters matter.
Every part of the coalition matters because none can win the White House alone.
The presidential calendar should reflect that reality.
Former DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe recently observed that “if you have the right calendar, you can have the right nominee to prepare you for the general election.”
We couldn’t agree more.
But why does the “right calendar” require a single first-in-the-nation state?
The better calendar is the one that best reflects the potential Democratic coalition.
Nevada, for example, is one of the nation’s most diverse battleground states, home to substantial Latino, Asian American, Native American and white working-class populations.
Organized labor remains a defining force in its politics, and candidates cannot succeed here simply by flooding television airwaves with advertising.
They have to organize, persuade and build genuine relationships with voters.
Yet, Nevada is not perfect.
Our Black population is lower than the national average and our closed presidential primary excludes independent and unaffiliated voters from participating in the Democratic primary even though their votes are often decisive in the general election.
South Carolina is equally indispensable.
Its politically engaged Black electorate has repeatedly demonstrated its importance within the Democratic Party and revitalized Joe Biden’s successful 2020 campaign.
But South Carolina is also a deeply Republican state in presidential elections, making it less reflective of the battleground terrain Democrats must ultimately navigate.
Michigan offers another critical perspective.
Its union traditions and older, more industrial blue-collar communities are a bellwether for Midwest battlegrounds like Wisconsin, Minnesota and western Pennsylvania.
Once solidly blue, these states have been critical to the GOP’s success in recent elections.
Moreover, Michigan does not register voters by party affiliation, making it an excellent testing ground for evaluating the preferences of the movable middle.
Every one of these states brings something valuable.
None brings everything.
That is why the committee should stop trying to crown a single winner and embrace a more unifying and inclusive vision of the primary process.
Imagine an opening day of primaries that includes diverse battleground states in the West, the South, the Midwest and the Northeast.
Candidates would have to demonstrate an ability to connect with multiple communities simultaneously rather than tailoring their message to the unique demographics and issues of one state.
Voters would gain a far more representative picture of which candidates can unite a broad Democratic coalition before Super Tuesday begins reshaping the race.
More importantly, the party would send a message that every community belongs.
Success would depend less on securing an early victory by mastering one state’s unique political culture and more on demonstrating the skills necessary to assemble the coalition required to win the White House in November.
That seems like a far better litmus test.
Moreover, by forcing candidates to perform well in multiple states around the country on the first day of primary voting — before any results have been tallied or announced — a multistate approach could help counteract the ability for wealthy donors to control the primary narrative.
Early primaries can have massive financial implications because donors may decide to abandon candidates who perform poorly or to commit fully to candidates who perform well.
Given the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Citizens United case, which allows corporations, unions and outside groups to make effectively unlimited independent expenditures in elections, there are potentially billions of dollars at stake.
When primaries are scheduled to occur one-by-one, candidates who perform well in a single state that’s early on the calendar can use the positive financial feedback cycle of increased campaign donations to dominate advertising and outreach in future primaries.
Conversely, a viable and broadly appealing candidate can be shut out of advertising and outreach in the next primary due to the negative financial feedback cycle of a single bad performance in just one state.
In other words, when primaries are scheduled to occur one at a time, the order in which they are contested can have as much effect on an election as a candidate’s policies or personality.
Just one or two early primaries can doom otherwise viable candidates or elevate unworthy ones based on little more than inertia.
That’s not good for democracy or for the Democratic Party.
It’s time for the DNC to accept that a perfect state to begin the nominating process does not exist.
America is too large, too diverse, too dynamic.
And Donald Trump’s MAGA-fied GOP is too great a threat to continue the status quo — a status quo that saw the GOP gain unified control of the federal government in 2024.
The Rules and Bylaws Committee has an opportunity to modernize the nominating process in a way that reflects both political reality and the party’s highest ideals.
Rather than forcing Democrats to choose whether Black voters, Latino voters, union members, independents or battleground-state voters deserve pride of place, the committee should recognize that every one of those voices deserves to be heard early and at the same time.
The strongest Democratic nominee will not emerge from appealing to just one state.
The nominee will emerge from appealing to every American who believes in a prosperous economy, a functioning democracy and a long arc of history that bends toward justice from every corner of our great nation.
The DNC should build a calendar that reflects that simple truth — starting on Day 1.
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.