JUST IN: Virginia may vote early in the 2028 presidential primary  on leap day 43%

By ARLnow.com31% The Associated Press63%

7/24/2026, 12:45:28 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 17 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Status Quo Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Hasty Generalization as the most egregious example at 11.7% saturation with 78 hits. Analysis detected 606 faulty-reasoning hits from 669 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 46.4% and a BS Rank of 43% (12,623 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 57.70% of the article peer group.

Virginia voters may get a say in picking the next Democratic presidential nominee before most of the country does. 
The Democratic National Committee&#8217;s Rules and Bylaws Committee <a href="https://democrats.org/dnc-rules-and-bylaws-committee-proposes-early-states-for-2028-democratic-presidential-nominating-calendar/">voted today</a> (Friday) to give the Commonwealth one of six spots in the early window of the party&#8217;s 2028 presidential nominating calendar. 
Virginia would go last of the six, on Feb. 29, 2028  leap day. 
The proposed order: 
* South Carolina, Jan. 
22, 2028 
* Nevada, Feb. 
1, 2028 
* New Hampshire, Feb. 
8, 2028 
* New Mexico, Feb. 
15, 2028 
* Michigan, Feb. 
22, 2028 
* Virginia, Feb. 
29, 2028 
All six would vote before Super Tuesday. 
The committee&#8217;s decision still needs sign-off from the full DNC, which meets Aug. 
13-15. 
It would also take action in Richmond. 
Virginia&#8217;s presidential primary is <a href="https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title24.2/chapter5/section24.2-544/">set by state law</a> for the first Tuesday in March, which in 2028 falls on March 7. 
Democrats control the House of Delegates, the state Senate and the governor&#8217;s office. 
Virginia voted on Super Tuesday in 2024 and 2020, sharing the day with more than a dozen other states. 
An early slot would give candidates a reason to campaign here in person  and local Democrats have already begun sizing up the field. 
U.S. 
Rep. 
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg <a href="https://www.arlnow.com/2026/07/13/ocasio-cortez-buttigieg-top-arlington-democrats-early-presidential-straw-poll/">topped a straw poll</a> at the Arlington County Democratic Committee&#8217;s picnic earlier this month. 
Sen. 
Mark Warner (D) called the decision a vote of confidence in Virginia and its voters. 
&#8220;We are a competitive Southern battleground where campaigns have to do the hard work of listening, organizing, and building broad coalitions in order to win,&#8221; Warner said in a statement. 
&#8220;A candidate who can compete in Virginia can compete anywhere. 
&#8221; 
Former Gov. 
Terry McAuliffe (D), a onetime DNC chairman, was part of the team that <a href="https://www.youtube.com/live/nxQ5PJaC1uA? 
t=17068">presented Virginia&#8217;s case</a> to the committee. 
&#8220;This decision recognizes that Virginia is uniquely positioned to test the candidates seeking to lead our party and our country,&#8221; McAuliffe said in a statement. 
&#8220;The road to the White House will now run through the Mother of Presidents. 
&#8221; 
State Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell (D-Fairfax) said in a statement that Virginia&#8217;s diversity, economic strength and political importance have too often been taken for granted in the presidential process. 
The DNC called the six-state lineup the most diverse early window the party has had for an open nominating contest, citing census figures for Black, Latino, Asian American, Native American, young, non-college, union and military voters across the six states. 
The committee amended its own rules to expand the window from four or five states to six, pointing to the number of strong applications it received. 
South Carolina was selected Friday to once again lead off the Democratic Party&#8217;s 2028 presidential nominating schedule, most likely cementing a dramatic break from decades of tradition by keeping Iowa off the top of the calendar and elevating more racially diverse states. 
South Carolina or Nevada had been expected to go first, with each state aggressively campaigning for the coveted spot. 
President Joe Biden successfully pushed to move South Carolina to the front of Democrats&#8217; 2024 calendar after the state revived his struggling 2020 presidential campaign. 
The decision will also shape the opening stage of what is expected to be a crowded Democratic presidential primary. 
Without an incumbent or clear front-runner, the states that vote first could once again play an outsized role in determining which candidates gain momentum, attract donors and emerge as viable contenders. 
There has not been a truly open Democratic presidential primary  without an incumbent president or a dominant front-runner  in almost two decades. 
Republicans still need to do their calendar. 
They&#8217;re expected to stick with their traditional early-state lineup led off by Iowa and New Hampshire. 
Virginia does not register voters by party. 
Any registered voter can cast a ballot in either party&#8217;s presidential primary  but not both. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.3%ARLnow: 1.5%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.3%ARLnow: 0.5%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.8%ARLnow.com: 3.2%ARLnow: 2.5%Availability Heuristic2.8%This article: 6.0%ARLnow.com: 0.7%ARLnow: 1.4%Representativeness Heuristic6.0%This article: 3.7%ARLnow.com: 0.4%ARLnow: 0.6%Hindsight Bias3.7%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 1.3%ARLnow: 1.1%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.2%ARLnow.com: 5.4%ARLnow: 3.4%Framing Effect2.2%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.3%ARLnow: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 8.7%ARLnow.com: 1.7%ARLnow: 1.5%Status Quo Bias8.7%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 3.6%ARLnow.com: 1.4%ARLnow: 4.3%Optimism Bias3.6%This article: 4.6%ARLnow.com: 1.1%ARLnow: 1.8%Pessimism Bias4.6%This article: 4.5%ARLnow.com: 5.7%ARLnow: 4.2%Negativity Bias4.5%This article: 2.2%ARLnow.com: 0.3%ARLnow: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias2.2%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 3.5%ARLnow: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 2.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 2.6%ARLnow: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.1%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.4%ARLnow.com: 3.5%ARLnow: 3.1%Appeal to Authority9.4%This article: 6.3%ARLnow.com: 0.7%ARLnow: 0.8%False Dilemma6.3%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 11.7%ARLnow.com: 2.3%ARLnow: 2.2%Hasty Generalization11.7%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 6.6%ARLnow.com: 2.2%ARLnow: 2.6%Appeal to Emotion6.6%This article: 1.5%ARLnow.com: 0.2%ARLnow: 0.1%Begging the Question1.5%This article: 8.4%ARLnow.com: 1.0%ARLnow: 1.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.4%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.6%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 3.6%ARLnow.com: 0.8%ARLnow: 1.5%Anecdotal3.6%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 4.8%ARLnow.com: 2.0%ARLnow: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)4.8%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.0%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 1.0%ARLnow: 1.4%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.4%ARLnow: 0.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 1.3%ARLnow: 1.1%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 3.3%ARLnow: 0.8%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 0.0%ARLnow: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%ARLnow.com: 1.4%ARLnow: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

669 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers29%attributed speech472writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageDemocratic National Committee • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageMark Warner • 15 words • 0.0% coverageMark Warner • 30 words • 0.0% coverageMark Warner • 10 words • 0.0% coverageMark Warner • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageTerry McAuliffe • 25 words • 0.0% coverageTerry McAuliffe • 14 words • 0.0% coverageTerry McAuliffe • 1 words • 0.0% coverageScott Surovell • 30 words • 0.0% coverageDemocratic National Committee • 40 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Scott Surovell

100%flagged-word coverage
30 attributed words15% of attributed speech55% writer coverage

No manipulation-pattern hits were found in this speaker's attributed words or the writer's voice.

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.