By virtually every standard, the 2028 presidential election figures to be unlike any in modern times.
Indeed, it will be the first race since 2016 without Donald Trump on the ballot, and neither party enters it with a clear standard-bearer.
Barred from a third term, Trump will leave behind a Republican Party remade in his image but no longer able to lean on him at the top of the ticket.
Despite just 40% of all Americans approving of his job performance, 86% of Republicans approve per Emerson, underscoring his overwhelming popularity with the GOP base.
That said, while whoever receives Trump’s endorsement will most likely win the primary, eventually a President out of office becomes a diminished kingmaker.
In that same vein, the 2028 primary will be the first true referendum on whether the MAGA movement that Trump built is the permanent identity of the Republican Party or merely a 12-year phase.
Put another way, will the populist wing of the GOP endure, or will more traditional Republicans reclaim the party?
To be sure, Democrats face the mirror-image problem, and arguably an even worse one. While they do have nominal front runners, there is no true leader.
According to a recent Echelon Insights 2028 primary survey, no Democrat broke 20%. Harris (18%) led the pack, followed by former Transportation Sec. Pete Buttigieg (13%), Gov. Gavin Newsom (12%), and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (11%).
Harris has long led Democratic primary polling – almost entirely on name recognition alone and with support low enough to suggest that in reality the race is wide open – though she carries the extra weight of having lost a presidential election before.
Moreover, much like Republicans will need to determine which wing of their party will drive the agenda in a post-Trump world, Democrats have an ongoing ideological battle between the far-left and the more moderate establishment wing.
Into this significant uncertainty, the clearest early signals have come from the Republican side, where two potential candidates have so far separated themselves from everyone else: Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
To that end, a glimpse at early polling suggests Vance is likely to be crowned, but a deeper look suggests that could be premature, or a choice Republicans regret.
In the aforementioned Echelon Insights poll, Vance (39%) had a considerable lead over Rubio (22%), with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (10%) trailing well behind.
A Financial Times survey tells a similar story, with Vance leading Rubio by 25-points (45% to 20%).
Prediction markets mirror the polls, with Vance sitting at 44% odds versus Rubio’s 23%, although in June, it was effectively a tie, 31% for the VP and 29% for the Secretary.
Vance’s strength should not be surprising. Sitting Vice Presidents tend to enter the primary as the front runner, and Vance is almost certainly picking up a sizable part of Trump’s base.
However, winning the primary is not winning the presidency. And polling, while early, suggests Vance may not be the best choice.
New Emerson polling tested hypothetical 2028 matchups, finding that Rubio consistently outperformed Vance against potential Democratic opponents, especially against the two most likely – Harris and Newsom.
Against Harris, Vance trailed the former VP by 4-points (49% to 44%). But against Rubio, Harris trails by 5-points (43% to 48%), a sizable 9-point swing.
Likewise, while Newsom also led Vance by 5-points, that margin shrinks to just 2-points against Rubio.
That pattern holds whether Harris, Newsom, Ocasio-Cortez, or Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff are the Democratic nominee.
Critically, Rubio’s stronger performance underscores his much broader appeal. He does not lose Republicans versus when Vance is atop the ticket – sometimes he actually gets more Republican support – and he does better with Independents.
Versus Harris, Rubio gets 93% of Republican voters and 44% of Independents, compared to 91% and 38%, respectively, when Vance is the nominee.
Similarly, against Newsom, an identical 93% of Republicans along with 39% of Independents back Rubio, whereas Vance gets 91% and 36%, respectively.
Why is this the case? The answer says less about Rubio than the VP.
Vance can be polarizing, and though he excites the base, he does not expand it. With Trump’s overall approval rating sitting around 40%, the most Trump-aligned candidate seemingly inherits Trump’s ceiling, along with his coalition.
By contrast, Rubio’s role as Secretary of State keeps him in the public eye and largely above the partisan scrum Vance excels at but can also turn off voters.
Rubio is also somewhat shielded from an unpopular administration’s policies, with Trump often playing the role of chief diplomat. And he is unscathed by the Iran war, unlike Vance, who negotiated June’s failed ceasefire.
Taken together, Rubio is a bigger-tent candidate, more palatable to the Independents and soft Republicans who will decide the election.
There is a tinge of irony here that Democrats may recognize. In some ways, Vance is Republicans’ AOC: the choice the base wants but a general election liability.
To be clear, this is not to say Rubio is the likely nominee. He trails Vance by a wide margin in primary polling, and even as a lame duck, Trump may have enough remaining influence to sway the primary for his preferred choice.
At the same time, polling this far out tends to capture name recognition above all else. Vance could well grow into a candidate with broader appeal, and will greatly benefit if Trump can end the Iran war, lower inflation, and turn economic pessimism around, especially with the Democratic field entirely unformed.
Ultimately, both parties will head into the 2028 election robbed of the playbook that has defined American politics since 2016.
Republicans cannot lean on Trump, and it’s legitimate to ask what the GOP coalition will look like in a post-Trump world.
Democrats, for their part, will need to find a roadmap and an agenda that goes beyond making Trump the boogeyman.
No matter which two candidates emerge, 2028 will be a historic election.
Douglas Schoen is a longtime Democratic political consultant