The next primary is already brewing

CHICAGO — One of the more fascinating “what ifs” that someone presented to me this week is this: What if former President Donald Trump had said no to President Joe Biden’s early debate proposal?

As someone who has gone down “what if” rabbit holes for years, I was mad at myself for not having thought of this alternative history scenario yet.

To be more specific: Will Trump’s decision to accept Biden’s terms for an early debate go down in political history as the biggest campaign blunder of the last 20 years? We won’t know the answer to that question until November. But let’s play this out a bit.

One thing is for sure — had Trump not accepted the early debate proposal and instead insisted on doing debates in a more traditional post-convention timeline, then it’s unlikely this convention would be nominating Vice President Kamala Harris. Instead, this would most likely have been a Biden convention.

And what would it have looked like with Joe Biden as the nominee? Many of the speakers might have been the same, sans one high-profile potential no-show (Michelle Obama). Her reasons would have been personal, not political, but it would have been a notable absence.

But the convention itself most likely would have felt more like a heavy lift for Democrats, as the Biden team would have gone to great pains to try to show his vigor, manufacture enthusiasm and do everything it could to find anecdotes that support the idea that he’s younger than he appears.

It might have been a painful watch if it came across as too ham-handed. More likely, that convention would have been even more about the threat of Trump than what we’ve already heard. Certainly, the tone would have been a lot different, with Trump most likely being painted as a dark and menacing threat compared to the Harris team’s decision to paint him as an aging Vegas act who, if left to his own devices, could cause a lot of damage.

The issue of democracy most likely would have shared the stage with the issue of reproductive rights as dual dominant message tracks. There wouldn’t have been a lot of hope or joy chatter. And the only “future” talk would have come from others.

But there would have been two other aspects to this convention that would have gotten a lot more attention — and perhaps would have undermined Biden’s ability to lead his party. First: A lot more Democratic candidates in tough re-election fights would have been skipping Chicago. A handful did that anyway, including Sens. Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Jon Tester of Montana, who are trying to show some independence from the Democratic Party line to survive red-state campaigns. But with Biden leading the ticket, I suspect just about every swing-state Democrat would have found ways to either show up for half a day at the most or skip altogether.

The second aspect that would have changed would have been the focus on the “next primary.” A Biden re-election convention would also have served as the unofficial start of the 2028 Democratic primaries. I’ve spent many a convention featuring an incumbent reporting more on what the next presidential race could look like. For a political reporter, it’s fishing in a barrel — a perfect place to get some one-on-one time with candidates who may be hard to pin down before too much more time.

I can easily imagine a lot more stories by (potentially bored) political reporters about how Govs. Josh Shapiro, Gretchen Whitmer, Roy Cooper or Tim Walz (yes, he would have been making the rounds, too) played at the South Carolina delegate breakfast. Or how New Hampshire delegates pined for the return of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. Or how a Rep. Ro Khanna was starting to test a message that could fuse the progressive and mainstream wings of the party.

Now, don’t get me wrong — plenty of quiet 2028 politicking is still happening at this convention. But it’s not getting a lot of attention for obvious reasons: The story of the convention and the current presidential nominee is far more important and interesting than any hypothetical campaign that now, with a new nominee, may not start until as late as 2032 (if Harris wins a couple of terms).

Having said that, I can’t let the convention week go by without at least acknowledging those who are doing the “just in case Kamala doesn’t win” preparation for a 2028 run.

If there is one state delegation that appears to be getting the most attention from the presidential wannabes, it’s South Carolina’s. It isn’t clear what the future of New Hampshire is on the calendar, but it seems pretty clear that South Carolina will be a future early-state power player. Leading Democrats seem to think so — check out the lineup the South Carolina Democrats had at their breakfast meetings this week: Whitmer. Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia. Shapiro, Buttigieg, Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Khanna and Maryland Gov Wes Moore.

Again, that was just these last three days. Perhaps more will come uninvited.

That list alone would make for a crowded debate stage. But there are others who are trying to raise their profiles for likely runs … someday. Illinois Gov JB Pritzker has been very aggressive about upping his profile. Being the host governor has given him an opportunity to schmooze every major donor any Democrat would need to run, and, of course, Pritzker has his own wealth.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear is another one who I’ve noticed has really decided to up his national profile here. If he was hoping for a future in red-leaning Kentucky (say, as a U.S. senator someday), I doubt he would be trying to raise his profile as a national Democrat. Even after he was passed over for the running mate slot, he has been a good party soldier this week. That’s what someone who wants to eventually lead this party would be doing.

All in all, while the 2028 wannabes aren’t getting the attention they would have gotten had this been Biden’s convention, they are certainly following an old scouting motto: “Be prepared.”

Expanding the battleground

During both conventions, the excitement has created chatter about expanding the battleground map. At Republicans’ convention, the euphoria of the moment led a lot of GOP strategists, including Trump officials, to claim they could add Virginia, Minnesota and New Mexico to the list of winnable states. With Biden still at the top of the ticket, there was growing evidence that some of the lighter “blue” states were becoming competitive. Even New Jersey and New York were starting to look like single-digit states during that period.

With the ticket switch on the Democratic side, talk of the GOP’s expanding the map has dissipated. In fact, the Trump campaign is already playing a bit more defense, having added North Carolina to its list of states where it needed to up its presence. For most of 2024, the Trump team didn’t take Democratic targeting of North Carolina all that seriously. All that has changed.

Fast-forward to this convention, and the happy talk has taken hold in some Democratic strategist circles. The map expansion ideas include two states that were regularly in the presidential battleground in the first two decades of this century: Florida and Ohio.

Now, all of this expansion talk among Democrats comes with some realistic caveats.

No one has suggested to me that Harris can win either state. But they would like to put Trump campaign on the defensive and see whether they could deplete what could be more limited financial resources.

The polling in Florida has gotten tighter, as the state is still more light pink than red, despite the blowout GOP midterm results there in 2022. Let’s not forget, Biden lost Florida by only just over 3 percentage points, 51%-48%. But the added benefit Democrats see in funding an effort in Florida is that, at a minimum, it might help the party be more competitive in the state’s Senate race and, more important, help the effort to amend the state constitution to guarantee access to abortion. Even in losing, these strategists indicated to me, the money wouldn’t be wasted if it helped pass that amendment.

Ohio is seen as more of a reach. But Trump has been polling at just 50% to 51% on his best day. Robust Democratic turnout could keep Harris within 5 points, rather than close to 10, and that would be a huge lift to Brown’s Senate campaign as he defends himself against a more Trump-aligned Republican in Bernie Moreno.

Whether the Harris campaign invests in either state is still an open question, but don’t be surprised if it dabbles in at least Florida and possibly Ohio. After all, it has raised a ton of money and has enough to experiment.

This article was originally published on NBCNews.com