民主党于周六敲定 2028 年总统大选全新初选时间表，这将极大改变该党总统候选人提名的竞争格局。
在民主党全国委员会夏季年会的最后一天，委员会正式通过新初选日程。沿用近 50 年、由艾奥瓦州与新罕布什尔州率先开启初选的惯例被打破，这两个以白人为主的小州，将由南卡罗来纳州、内华达州这两个族裔多元的摇摆州取而代之。
按照新日程，2028 年 1 月末南卡罗来纳州、2 月初内华达州将打响民主党总统提名争夺战。2028 年 2 月，新罕布什尔州、新墨西哥州、密歇根州、弗吉尼亚州依次完成剩余早期初选，其余各州则在 3 月陆续投票。
今年，民主党进步派与中间派正激烈争夺党内主导权，党内初选角逐激烈程度创下现代历史新高。左右两派的激烈博弈已经释放明确信号：2028 年民主党总统提名，将会上演一场规模浩大的党内竞争。
修订后的初选日程，为这场党内角力增添了不可预测的变数。党内各派策略师均认为，这套新日程，既给进步派候选人、也给中间派候选人提供了可行的取胜路径。但就如同全新的高尔夫球场或是棒球场，唯有等到 2028 年候选人正式登台角逐，这套竞选版图的实际效果才会揭晓。
“初选与党团会议的投票顺序，是提名流程最重要的战略要素之一。” 曾为杜卡基斯、伯尼・桑德斯等民主党总统候选人担任高级策略师的泰德・迪瓦恩表示，“你必须搞懂各州之间的先后逻辑，懂得如何借助投票顺序积累竞选势头。” 此次日程改革为何意义重大
修改总统提名规则，对民主党而言几乎是一种常态。1968、1980、1984、2004 以及 2016 年，该党都曾大幅改写提名相关规则。
但即便规则几经改动，各州投票的先后顺序却长期保持稳定。
1972 年，民主党将提名权从党内大佬手中转移到普通选民，通过党团会议与初选选出候选人。自此直至 2020 年，提名流程始终以艾奥瓦党团会议打头阵，紧接着是新罕布什尔州初选，该州法律规定本州必须举办全美第一场初选。在这近半个世纪里，只有 1972 年的麦戈文、1992 年的克林顿、2020 年的拜登，在没有拿下这两州任意一州的情况下获得提名；而拜登更是唯一一位两州连第二名都没有拿到，却最终胜出的提名人。
2004 年大选之后，越来越多人不满：在一个族裔日趋多元的政党中，艾奥瓦与新罕布什尔依旧手握巨大话语权。于是民主党安排内华达、南卡罗来纳在 “超级星期二” 之前提前投票。这一改动一定程度改变了提名竞争格局。作为超级星期二前最后一个投票的州，黑人人口占比很高的南卡罗来纳影响力格外突出：2008 年奥巴马、2016 年希拉里、2020 年拜登，拿下该州就赢得了党内提名。
但很多民主党人依旧反感艾奥瓦、新罕布什尔在筛选候选人阶段权重过大。2020 年拜登在两州表现糟糕，再加上当年艾奥瓦计票工作一团糟，拜登对两州没有多少好感。于是他为 2024 年设定一套初选日程，开启初选时代以来最大规模调整：南卡罗来纳率先投票，之后依次是内华达、新罕布什尔、密歇根。不过 2024 年拜登没有遭遇有力党内对手，这套新日程没有得到真正检验。（新罕布什尔州依照本州法律，执意抢在南卡罗来纳之前举办初选，民主党只能宣布该州初选结果无效，2028 年同样的问题有可能再次上演。）
民主党全国委员会规则章程委员会上月拟定、全国委员会周六在奥斯汀年会上正式批准的这份日程，大体沿用 2024 年框架，新增安排：新罕布什尔之后举行新墨西哥州初选，密歇根之后举行弗吉尼亚州初选。
当下民主党全国委员会及其主席肯・马丁正面临多方面批评，不过这份新日程在党内收获广泛好评。这套日程兼顾大小州，包含黑人人口众多的南卡罗来纳、密歇根、弗吉尼亚；拉丁裔占比高的内华达、新墨西哥；工会力量强大的内华达、密歇根，同时覆盖民主党四大全国区域。
“我不是来赢得初选，我们的总统候选人也不是。” 马丁在采访中表示，“最重要的是，无论最终胜出者来自党内哪一派，都要做好迎接大选的准备。让候选人接受来自全国不同地区、不同党内阵营的考验，才能打磨出真正能够赢得大选的人选。” 新日程会如何影响民主党内斗
民主党策略师纷纷推演新日程带来的影响，最大的疑问是：当下党内左派与中间派厮杀激烈，这套日程是否会天然偏袒其中某一方？绝大多数策略师认为并不会。
“无论进步派、温和派还是建制派候选人，都能规划出一条自己觉得可行的竞选道路。”2024 年拜登与哈里斯竞选团队的摇摆州主管丹・坎宁南说道。
杰西・莱里奇是民主党顾问，运营聚焦 2028 民主党总统竞选的新闻通讯与播客，他同样认为新日程对两派都留有机会。“这套日程对左派和中间派相对公平，既有立场偏保守、也有进步倾向的州，选民构成有多元也有单一。”
长期服务进步派的民主党民调专家亚当・卡尔森也表示，这套日程对潜在左翼候选人 “相当友好”，“说实话，左派的处境本可能比现在糟糕得多。”
对于立场偏向中间派的白人潜在候选人，包括州长乔希・夏皮罗、加文・纽森、安迪・贝希尔，参议员马克・凯利、乔恩・奥索夫，前交通部长皮特・布蒂吉格，前芝加哥市长拉姆・伊曼纽尔，南卡罗来纳与弗吉尼亚是最关键的早期战场。
2020 年初选出口民调显示，这两个州约半数民主党选民自认温和或者保守，比例远高于另外四个早期初选州。尤其黑人选民与受过高等教育的白人选民，相比其余四州，在这两州更倾向温和、保守立场。
2020 年初选，拜登前期接连受挫，正是依靠南卡罗来纳黑人选民才挽救竞选。出口民调显示，2016、2020 两届，该州黑人选民当中，仅有大约 15％ 支持伯尼・桑德斯；而 2028 年左翼候选人，很大概率会沿用桑德斯的民粹竞选路线。南卡罗来纳民主党活动人士、CNN 政治评论员巴卡里・塞勒斯称：“我们不会被极左立场当作硬性考核标准。”
但中间派白人候选人也面临难题：2020 年南卡罗来纳黑人选民占该州初选选民五分之三，他们很可能会被有竞争力的黑人候选人吸引，无论对方立场偏中间还是偏左翼。
分析人士普遍认为，前副总统哈里斯在此地拥有雄厚基础。该州移到初选第一顺位，会助推她参选。莱里奇在通讯里的推演，代表了不少策略师的看法：“投票顺序调整对哈里斯是重大利好，足以促使她参选。” 如果哈里斯不参选，南卡率先投票，也会激励其他黑人候选人，例如马里兰州州长韦斯・穆尔、佐治亚州参议员拉斐尔・沃诺克。
弗吉尼亚接替过去南卡罗来纳的角色，成为超级星期二之前最后一个投票的早期州。
弗吉尼亚民主党历来偏爱温和派。总统初选层面，该州选民坚决拒绝桑德斯，支持克林顿、拜登；州一级选举，阿比盖尔・斯潘伯格州长、马克・沃纳、蒂姆・凯恩参议员也都是温和派代表。弗吉尼亚大学政治研究中心主任拉里・萨巴托说：“这几位重量级人物，很可能会合力推动民主党选出能够拿下大选的提名者。”
很多民主党人认为，南卡罗来纳到弗吉尼亚之间的几个州，整体更有利于左翼潜在候选人，例如众议员奥卡西奥‑科尔特斯、罗・卡纳，参议员克里斯・范霍伦、克里斯・墨菲。卡尔森表示，内华达、新罕布什尔、新墨西哥排在早期初选中段，“完全可以想象” 一名左翼候选人在南卡结束之后，横扫这三州当中两到全部三州，“带着十足势头进入密歇根与弗吉尼亚。”
深耕新墨西哥的民主党顾问戴夫・雅各布森认同，该州社会氛围不算极度自由，但容易接纳桑德斯式经济主张的候选人。“新墨西哥属于美国较贫困的州，主打民生负担、医保、教育的进步民粹经济主张，很容易打动本州民主党初选选民。”
但也有人认为，就此断定内华达、新罕布什尔会倒向左派还为时过早（前提是新罕布什尔不强行抢跑而被作废资格）。2020 年桑德斯赢下内华达党团会议，该州自认 “非常自由” 的选民占比 31％，高于其余五个早期州。但那是党团会议模式。2028 年内华达改为普通初选，参与投票的选民规模更大。该州势力最强的工会 —— 餐饮工会的财务主管泰德・帕帕乔治表示，期待广大选民全面倒向极左，只是部分人的一厢情愿。
餐饮工会代表赌场服务业劳工，长期反对 “全民单一支付医保”，而这恰恰是 2028 年左翼候选人大概率重点鼓吹的政策。
帕帕乔治称，内华达排到第二的投票顺位，会倒逼候选人拿出务实方案，回应经济处境艰难工薪阶层的现实诉求，这部分群体过去在艾奥瓦、新罕布什尔并未得到足够重视。“成为全美第二场初选，内华达可以把全美劳工的现实困境推到聚光灯下。”
桑德斯确实拿下过新罕布什尔 2016、2020 两届初选，但 2020 年布蒂吉格、拜登、艾米・克洛布查尔等一众温和派候选人合计得票过半。该州大量受过高等教育的白人选民，今年多场民主党初选里已经展现出左转倾向；但历史上，他们也多次青睐理智睿智的中间派，例如加里・哈特、比尔・布拉德利、布蒂吉格。
在全部 2028 早期初选州当中，密歇根的左派、中间派力量最为均衡。上周该州参议院初选便印证这一点：进步派埃尔‑赛义德仅以约 1．5 万票的微弱优势击败中间派众议员海莉・史蒂文斯。2016 年桑德斯也曾在这里以极小优势战胜希拉里；而 2020 年拜登在密歇根大胜桑德斯。密歇根拥有大量黑人选民、不同教育背景的白人选民，是早期各州里最好的试金石，检验谁能够搭建党内最广泛的联盟，也关乎 11 月大选的前景。
坎宁南指出，密歇根、弗吉尼亚相比过去所有早期初选州，人口规模大得多，会从新维度考验候选人。小州选举，候选人只要牢牢抓住一两个选民群体就可以取胜；但这两个规模更大、结构更复杂的州，对候选人要求更高。“到了密歇根、弗吉尼亚，想要真正具备竞争力，候选人必须能力全面。” 他借用棒球术语比喻。只有足够有包容力，能够团结民主党阵营各个群体的候选人，才有望在两州取得好成绩。
这套新日程的关键密码，或许在于：能够同时争取黑人选民（半数早期初选州黑人选民占比很高）与受过高等教育白人选民（除新墨西哥，或许密歇根之外，该群体在其余早期州数量超过工薪白人）的候选人，会占得先机。历史上同时团结两大群体并不容易：黑人选民往往看重务实民生型候选人，例如克林顿夫妇、拜登；高学历白人更容易被理念色彩浓厚的理想主义者吸引，例如桑德斯、加里・哈特。近代同时在两类群体当中都表现亮眼的，当属 2008 年的奥巴马。当年奥巴马击败希拉里的关键战场，或许就是这套新日程下通往胜利的最佳参考。
不过萨巴托也提到，民主党历年来修改规则、调整初选日程，实际结果很少完全按照预想上演。“当你试图设计一套遴选机制，想要得到某个特定结果，尤其在民主党内部，最后大概率事与愿违。”
无论 2028 年实际走向如何，这套全新投票顺序，是半个多世纪以来民主党提名日程最大的一次重构，也标志着该党一个新时代的开启。
Democrats reshape their 2028 presidential race with new primary schedule
The new calendar for the 2028 primaries that Democrats finalized on Saturday will dramatically shake up the race for the party’s next presidential nomination．
On the last day of its annual summer meeting， the Democratic National Committeeapproved a primary schedulethat replaces Iowa and New Hampshire， the small and preponderantly white states that held the first contests for nearly 50 years， with two racially diverse battlegrounds： South Carolina and Nevada．
Under the new calendar， South Carolina， in late January 2028， and Nevada， in early February， will kick off the race for the party’s next presidential nomination． New Hampshire， New Mexico， and then Michigan and Virginia will hold the other early contests through February 2028 before the remaining states start voting in March．
Democrats are adopting this new calendar at a time when their progressive and centrist wings are wrestling for control of the party’s direction this yearthrough the greatest concentration of hard－fought primaries in the party’s modern history．All these battles between left and center offer a clear signal that Democrats will face a monumental internal competition for the biggest prize：the party’s 2028 presidential nod．
The revised calendar adds an unpredictable new dimension to that struggle． Strategists from all factions in the party believe the new schedule provides plausible pathways to the nomination both for progressive and centrist candidates． But， like a brand new golf course or baseball stadium， no one can predict exactly how this map will play until the candidates begin to compete on it in the 2028 race．
“The sequence of primaries and caucuses is one of the most important strategic elements of the nominating process，” says Tad Devine， who has served as a senior strategist for Democratic presidential candidates from Michael Dukakis to Bernie Sanders． “You have to understand the sequence of how these states relate to each other and how you can build momentum by it．”
Why this calendar change is different
Fiddling with the rules for their presidential nominating processis something between a hobby and a compulsion for Democrats． The party substantially rewrote its nomination rules after the primary contests in 1968， 1980， 1984， 2004 and 2016．
But amid all that tinkering with therulesof the primaries， theirorderremained remarkably stable．
Democrats decisively shifted the power to pick their nominees away from party bosses toward voters through caucuses and primaries in 1972． From then through 2020， the party’s nominating process always began with the Iowa caucuses， followed by the New Hampshire primary， whose state law requires it to hold the first primary． Over that nearly half－century， George McGovern in 1972， Bill Clinton in 1992 and Joe Biden in 2020 were the only nominees who did not win either of them — and Biden was the sole victor who did not finish at least second in one．
After the 2004 election， amid widespread frustration that Iowa and New Hampshire still wielded so much power in a diversifying party， Democrats chose Nevada and South Carolina to also vote before Super Tuesday． That shift somewhat changed the dynamic of the nominating fights． As the final state to vote before Super Tuesday， South Carolina and its large Black population proved especially influential： The winner there won the nominations in 2008 （Barack Obama）， 2016 （Hillary Clinton） and 2020 （Joe Biden）．
But many Democrats still chafed at the outsized influence of Iowa and New Hampshire in winnowing the field． Not feeling much loyalty to either after his poor showings in 2020 （and Iowa’sbotched handlingof the vote－counting that year），Biden imposed a calendar for 2024that created the party’s biggest reshuffle since the primary era began： South Carolina first， followed by Nevada， New Hampshire and Michigan． But the new calendar didn’t get a real test that year as Biden didn’t face a competitive primary．（Democrats were forced to invalidate New Hampshire in 2024 after state officials， following state law， scheduled its primary before South Carolina — a problem that may recur in 2028．）
The calendar approved last monthby the DNC’s Rules and Bylaws Committee — which the full DNC affirmed Saturday at its meeting in Austin — generally followed the 2024 blueprint， but inserted New Mexico after New Hampshire and Virginia after Michigan．
At a time when the DNC and its chair， Ken Martin，have been under fire on several fronts， the new calendar has drawn high marks across the party． The calendar blends large and small states； states with a large Black population （South Carolina， Michigan and Virginia）； a large Latino cohort （Nevada and New Mexico）； and a strong union presence （Nevada and Michigan）， and it includes contests in the DNC’s four national regions．
“I’m not here to win a primary election， and neither are our candidates running for president，” Martin said in an interview． “What’s most important is whoever comes out from （the process）， from whatever wing of the party they represent， they have to be ready for the general election． And battle－testing them with all parts of our coalition and all parts of the country … prepares whoever comes out to actually win．”
What does this mean for Democrats’ internal battle？
As Democratic strategists game out the implications of the new calendar， one question looms largest： At a time when left and center are dueling in so many fierce primaries， does this calendar provide an inherent advantage to either side？ Most strategists believe it does not．
“I think every candidate from the progressive end of the spectrum， to a moderate， to an establishment person can probably chart a path that they feel OK about，” says Dan Kanninen， the battleground state director for both the Biden and Kamala Harris campaigns in 2024．
Jesse Lehrich， a Democratic consultant who publishesan online newsletterand podcast about the 2028 Democratic presidential race， also believes the new schedule offers a pathway for either wing． “I think it’s fair for the left and the center，” he says． “You have more conservative and more progressive states， you have the more diverse and less diverse electorates．”
Likewise， Adam Carlson， a Democratic pollster who often works for the progressive wing， says the calendar “is pretty good” for potential leftist candidates． “Honestly， it could have been a lot worse for the left than it ended up being，” Carlson said．
For the relatively centrist White candidates — a group that potentially includes Govs． Josh Shapiro， Gavin Newsom and Andy Beshear， Sens． Mark Kelly and Jon Ossoff， former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel — South Carolina and Virginia loom as the most important early opportunities．
In the 2020 primaries，according to the exit polls， about half of Democratic voters in both states identified as moderate or conservative， far more than in the other four early contests． Black and college－educated White voters， in particular， were more likely to identify as moderate or conservative in those two states than the other four．
South Carolina’s Black voters in 2020 famously resurrected Biden’s flatlining candidacy after his early stumbles， andaccording to the exit polls， only about 15％ of them in both 2016 and 2020 backed Sen． Bernie Sanders — whose populist campaign will likely provide the prototype for any of the left－wing candidates in 2028． “We’re not going to be … held to a litmus test” of far－left positions， says Bakari Sellers， a South Carolina－based Democratic activist and CNN political commentator．
The complication for the White centrists is that South Carolina’s Black voters — who made up about three－fifths of the electorate there in 2020 — may be drawn to a viable Black contender， whether they are identified with the center or not．
Analysts agree that former Vice President Kamala Harris would start with a significant base there， and the state’s movement to the front of the line could encourage her to run． Lehrich reflected many strategists’ war－gaming of the 2028 racewhen he recently wrote in his newsletter， “The new order is a coup for Harris — the kind that might persuade her to run．” South Carolina’s move to leadoff could also encourage another Black candidate — particularly Maryland Gov． Wes Moore and／or Georgia Sen． Raphael Warnock — to run， especially if Harris does not．
As the final state to vote before Super Tuesday， Virginia is stepping into the role that had elevated South Carolina．
Virginia Democrats have usually favored moderates， not only in presidential primaries （soundly rejecting Sanders for Clinton and Biden）， but also in state elections， with candidates such as Gov． Abigail Spanberger and Sens． Mark Warner and Tim Kaine． “That’s quite a triumvirate，” says Larry Sabato， director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia． “They may all work together to try to help Democrats to get a nominee who can win in November．”
Many Democrats believe the states between South Carolina and Virginia will generally favor potential candidates on the left， such as Reps． Alexandria Ocasio－Cortez and Ro Khanna or Sens． Chris Van Hollen and Chris Murphy． Carlson says that with Nevada， New Hampshire and New Mexico lined up in the middle stage of the early window， “It’s pretty easy to imagine” a left candidate “sweeping all three， or two of the three races， after South Carolina．” That， he adds， would allow a left champion to go into Michigan and Virginia “with some real momentum．”
Dave Jacobson， a Democratic consultant who has worked extensively in New Mexico， agrees the state， while not culturally liberal， will likely prove receptive to candidates offering a Sanders－style economic message． “New Mexico is one of the poorest states，” Jacobson says． “Democrats who are campaigning on a progressive economic populist message of affordability， health care， education are resonating with Democratic primary voters．”
But others say it’s premature to assume Nevada and New Hampshire （if it doesn’t invalidate itself by trying to go first） will also bend left． Sanders won Nevada in 2020， and more voters there （31％） identified as “very liberal” than in the other five early states． But that was for a caucus． In 2028， Nevada will hold a primary， and the expectation that larger electorate will favor the far left “is wishful thinking by some folks，” says Ted Pappageorge， the secretary－treasurer of the Culinary Workers Union， the state’s most powerful political force．
For instance， the culinary union， which represents service workers in the casinos， has long opposedthe Medicare for All single－payer healthcare proposal that any left－leaning candidate is likely to stress in 2028．
Instead， Pappageorge says， moving Nevada forward to the second contest will pressure candidates to provide practical answers to the daily needs of economically precarious working－class voters who were never as central in Iowa or New Hampshire． “To be No． 2 in the nation，” he says， will allow Nevada to elevate the concerns and experiences of “all workers in this country．”
Sanders did win New Hampshire in 2016 and 2020， but in that latter race the most moderate alternatives （Buttigieg， Biden and Sen． Amy Klobuchar） combined for just over half of the vote． New Hampshire’s large constituency of college－educated White voters could break left （as they have in multiple Democratic primaries this year），but in the past many of them have also flocked to cool， brainy centristssuch as Gary Hart， Bill Bradley and Buttigieg．
Of all the states on the early 2028 calendar， Michigan looks most closely balanced between left and center — as it demonstrated again last week in the acrimoniousSenate primary won by about 15，000 votes by progressive Abdul El－Sayed over centrist Rep． Haley Stevens． That echoed Sanders’ razor－thin victory there over Clinton in 2016； on the other hand， Biden decisively beat Sanders in Michigan in 2020． With large populations of Black voters and Whites with and without a college education， Michigan could provide the best test among the early states about which contender can build the broadest coalition within the party —and potentially in November．
Kanninen points out that Michigan and Virginia will test the candidates in another new way， because they are much more populous than any of the previous early states． While a candidate can win smaller early states by dominating just one or two voting blocs， he says， these larger and more complex states will demand more． “Once you get to Michigan and Virginia， I think you’ve got to be a five－tool player to be serious，” he said， using a baseball analogy about a player with many skills． Only candidates with “a frame durable enough” to attract “all the disparate parts of the Democratic coalition” are likely to do well in those two states， he says．
If there is a master key to this new calendar， it may be that it will reward a candidate who can appeal to both Black voters （a big presence in half the early states） and college－educated White voters （who are very likely to outnumber blue－collar Whites in all of them except New Mexico and maybe Michigan）． Historically it hasn’t been easy for one candidate to marry those two constituencies， since Black voters often gravitate toward grounded bread－and－butter options （like Bill and Hillary Clinton or Biden） while well－educated Whites are often drawn to more ideological or idealistic alternatives （think Sanders or Gary Hart）． The one modern candidate who did run well with both groups was Obama in 2008， and the states he relied on to beat Hillary Clinton in their epic primary duel may offer the clearest map to success on this new course．
Then again， as Sabato points out， the rules and calendar changes Democrats have instituted over the years have rarely worked out exactly as planned． “When you try to structure a selection process to produce a certain result， especially in this party，” Sabato says， “in all likelihood， you are going to be disappointed．” Still， however it unfolds in 2028， the new schedule represents the biggest reordering of the Democratic nominating calendar in over half a century — and the beginning of a new era for the party．
