Nevada Democrats won't vote for president first in 2028. Here's what it means.

Despite a hard-fought campaign to host the first presidential primary of 2028, Nevada Democrats lost out to South Carolina after a powerful Democratic National Committee panel voted on Friday. The state is instead scheduled to host the second early primary on February 1, 2028.

It's a major disappointment for Nevada proponents who looked forward to the Silver State getting intense attention from Democratic presidential candidates and an outsized role in setting the political agenda in the coming cycle. 

"Putting Nevada first best sets our party up for success," Nevada Democratic Party Chair Daniele Monroe-Moreno wrote in a statement after the decision. "Nevada is the broad coalition of diverse voices — Latino, Black, AANHPI and Native American as well as white working-class voters — our party must win back if we're serious about flipping the White House in 2028. As an early state and the first true test of a candidates' ability to win in a general election, we will play a critical role in the nomination process."

South Carolina, however, is now likely to draw more resources than Nevada.

"It is huge how many more visits and how much more attention and how much more campaign time and dollars go into first," DNC member Andre Treiber, who supported Nevada's bid, told The Nevada Independent in an interview ahead of the vote. "So the gap between someone going first and second is just extreme. The state that goes first is such a fundamental filter on the process. If you don't make it through the first state, why even bother showing up to the second state?"

Nevada lost out on the opportunity by a vote of 26 to 19, with four members of the committee voting for New Hampshire. Many of Nevada's supporters were younger, newer members of the committee and those from Western states. Opponents raised concerns about Nevada's ability to name a winner on primary night, though Nevadans on the panel argued election reforms would address those worries.

The state will likely see fewer visits from presidential hopefuls than it might have had it been first, though many likely contenders have already made pilgrimages to the state. It may also miss out on hundreds of millions on ad spending, hotel, restaurant and event bookings and office space and voter list rental that the first primary state tends to draw. 

Nevada Democrats made the case that the state's diversity, working class communities and battleground status would make it the best strategic choice to help nominate a candidate who can defeat the Republican. The push to make Nevada first in the nation earned support from numerous national groups representing Latino, Asian and unionized workers.

"We are a state that is best suited to help vet the next nominee of our party, and more importantly than that, center the voices of workers in our agenda for working people," Rep. Steven Horsford (D-NV) said in an interview with The Nevada Independent before the DNC panel made its decision this week. 

The whole DNC will vote to finalize the calendar order next month. 

Nevada became an early state — "first in the West" — in the 2008 presidential election for both major political parties. New Hampshire and Iowa have traditionally held the very first nominating contests, but fell out of favor amid concerns about their lack of racial diversity and a meltdown in the process in Iowa in 2020.

Ahead of the 2024 election, DNC members considered revamping the calendar. At the last minute, President Joe Biden weighed in to install South Carolina in the first slot. Nevada was officially second, though New Hampshire, which has a state law requiring it to hold the first primary, held an unsanctioned primary in January. 

This year, DNC members opted to strengthen sanctions against states that choose to go out of order.

The order of the states could help decide who wins the Democratic primary. Former Vice President Kamala Harris has a strong base among Black voters, who are heavily represented in South Carolina. Some DNC members reportedly worried that having Nevada go first could benefit a left-wing insurgent after Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) won the state's caucus in 2020, though one early poll found California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) leading in Nevada, followed by former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg (D) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D).

By choosing safely Republican South Carolina instead of Nevada, Democrats are likely surrendering the political advantage that could have come with selecting a swing state. First-in-the-nation status can also help the party build infrastructure early that can pay off in November. David Axelrod, top strategist for President Barack Obama's two campaigns, has said all the time the former president spent in Iowa thanks to its early status helped him win the state twice. Democrats have not won Iowa since. 

South Carolina, unlike Nevada, has not voted for a Democratic president in half a century.

"I'm hoping the decision that we make today ... will be inclusive of all the communities that we have lost," Monroe-Moreno said minutes before the panel voted against Nevada. "Nonpartisan voter registration is the largest voter registration bloc in America now. Why? Because people are mad at both sides of the aisle. … Those nonpartisan voters are people that are looking to us, and I'm just going to say it, to have some balls, to step up and be there for them." 

The calendar order will also likely shape the political narratives of the 2028 presidential election. Nevada's selection could have tipped national Democrats' focus toward the economic problems faced by working-class voters, as well as issues around immigration in a heavily Latino state closer to the border. The selection of South Carolina, on the other hand, will elevate concerns about the dilution of Black political power, especially after the Supreme Court's decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which eroded the Voting Rights Act. 

The decision comes after a yearslong push by Nevada Democrats. This cycle, they have spent months courting DNC members directly. Nevada Democrats handed out state-related gifts (including signed copies of Nevada Independent CEO Jon Ralston's biography of the late Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV)), arranged conversations with top state officials and repeatedly hammered home their arguments. 

"Nevada was one of the states that just did the most individual outreach," said the Texas-based Treiber, who added that, as a voting nerd, he really appreciated the chance to talk one-on-one with Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar (D) about the state's election modernization efforts. 

This week, Nevada Democrats hosted a reception with Horsford, Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) and Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV). The party gave personalized Nevada license plates that read "NV F1RST" to each member of the panel. 

That effort wasn't enough to push the state to the front of the line, but the decision is unlikely to be permanent. Nevada could have another chance at first four years from now.

"Whatever calendar we put in place today should not be a calendar for the next 40 years," DNC chair Ken Martin said Thursday. "This should be a decision that's revisited every four years so we reflect where our party's at." 

This story was updated on July 24, 2026 at 12:24 p.m. to note that Nevada's primary is scheduled second.