Talk:2028 United States presidential election

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2028 United States presidential election article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 14 days

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article relates to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a contentious topic. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

WP:SNOW keep, November 7, 2024, see discussion.
Refine, 11 August 2024, see discussion.
Delete, 17 April 2021, see discussion.

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums

United States: Presidential elections / Presidents / Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Presidents of the United States (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

RFK Jr in Republican section?

He's a registered Independent and the sources provided him don't specify that he could potentially run in the Republican primary. Putting him in the Republican section instead of the Independent section likely qualifies as original research. RickStrate2029 (talk) 17:50, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You could be right. I listed him as a Republican without putting too much thought into it, basically because he is being polled as a Republican and serving in a Republican administration, but maybe he runs independent. Twentytwenty4 (talk) 18:36, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave him in the Republican section unless he's polled as an Independent. There's definitely valid justification to include him in either section (or the Democrat section tbh), but since he's only been polled in the Republican primary so far, he can stay there I suppose. RickStrate2029 (talk) 03:45, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Kennedy certainly is a difficult fit. Despite his personal statements of being an independent, he is being treated as a quasi-Republican due to serving in the current administrations Cabinet. Since that is the case, it is reasonable to list him under the Republican section. Should he announce at a future date that he is considering, or formally declares, a bid as an independent, he should remain in the Republican section. ThisUserIsTaken (talk) 06:25, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree, primarily because he's being polled as a Republican, but if he actually expresses interest in an Independent bid (or a Democratic bid for that matter), he should be moved accordingly. For now though he's better off in the Republican section since he's not being polled as an Independent. RickStrate2029 (talk) 16:19, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

James Talarico as a potential Dem candidate?

So, Texas State Rep. James Talarico recently went on Joe Rogan's show, and Rogan said he wanted him to run for president. Several media outlets, including The Hill, Fox News, The Daily Beast, and the New York Post, have reported on this. Does this meet the criteria for Talarico to be included as a potential Dem candidate? Zeddawg02 (talk) 02:56, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

3 of the sources you showed, Fox, Daily Beast, and NY Post, are considered unreliable sources. And the Hill article, It seem to me that would me more of a source for Senate or House, the President thing in the Hill is just a throwaway comment, your going to need good sources in order to add him.

WP:RSPSOURCES For Reverence Fad8229 (talk) 18:34, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just what the hell is a presidential campaign, anyway?

There exists a featured article on the Evan Bayh 2008 presidential campaign. Evan Bayh fundraised, but he dropped out more than a year before anyone voted, even before people debated.

What makes a campaign a campaign?

Saying you're running?
Other people saying you're running?
Merch?
Fundraising?
Appearing in debates?
Getting votes?

(Might add Trump 2028 meets the first four criteria) _pbp 02:41, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

to run for president of the United States of America someone has to officially file the paperwork at the US election office once they done that they announced that they're running for president the only criteria to run for president of the United States of America is to be born here lived here basically your entire life and to be at least 35 years old once you signed the paperwork nothing else matters you should not add Trump because he can't run for president again he doesn't even want to but even if he did want to he can't because he has served two term yes those two terms are not consecutive but that does not matter he could campaign for someone else like other previous presidents have done but he himself cannot run your criteria misses the most crucial thing actually following the law of the land 149.154.10.159 (talk) 20:08, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have to born a U.S.citien by either being born here or having one parent as a U.S. citizen if you're born out of country, that's how Ted Cruz was able to run besides being born in Canada yet still being a U.S. citizen. 136.53.90.24 (talk) 21:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing Wording

In "Background"

Trump, who was elected president in 2016 but lost a re-election bid in 2020 to Joe Biden, and JD Vance, a then-senator from Ohio, defeated Vice President Kamala Harris, who began her campaign following Biden's exit from the 2024 election.

This could cause some readers to think he lost to joe Biden and JD Vance. I think it could be re-worded to be better understandable. BelowFlames (talk) 04:23, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved Vance to a separate sentence. _pbp 13:35, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! BelowFlames (talk) 04:57, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trump is not eligible at all for a 3rd term.

The 22nd amendment does not say consecutive or non consecutive.

It says:

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

It says no more than twice. He has held office twice. Twice means two, regardless if is consecutive or not, cause those words are not mention. 136.53.90.24 (talk) 21:41, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you quote the problematic text in the article as I am struggling to find it. --Super Goku V (talk) 08:38, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I might know what they might be referring to. On the article, scroll down to “Republican Party primaries”. At the end of this section, you will see Donald Trump listed under “Declined to be candidates”.

I can understand why his name is there, since he did recently claim he will “be an eight-year president” (following a series of statements and moves teasing a “TRUMP 2028” campaign). However, this is unnecessary because it implies that he’s eligible to run for the Republican nomination again in 2028, which he isn’t.

Therefore, we should remove his name from that part of the article to avoid normalizing talks of post-FDR presidents possibly serving more than two four-year terms. 2600:1700:CD30:3430:54D:FC67:265D:76A0 (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

His name should remain as there has been significant discussion of him running again. There is already a note next to his entry, however, stating he is ineligible per the 22nd amendment. We wouldn't remove it to avoid normalising these discussions, though, as it's our job simply to report on what's notable, not what's moral. — Czello ^(music) 06:56, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Shapiro Section badly written

Josh Shapiro's speculated candidacy seems badly written about and very clunky.

The full segment reads:

Josh Shapiro has served as the governor of Pennsylvania since 2023. Having won his 2022 election by a whopping 15 points in a state won by Donald Trump twice, and bolstering a 59%-27% net approval rating, Shapiro has been considered as a top potential presidential candidate.

The second sentence is very long and confusing. It also uses odd words like 'whopping' and 'bolstering' which give it an unprofessional feeling. Fia151 (talk) 00:26, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hunter Biden as potential Dem candidate?

There’s been tons of speculation of him running after that interview. Tjl1609 (talk) 21:25, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give any sources? Fad8229 (talk) 21:43, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpLBb9imTA4, https://www.wsj.com/politics/hunter-biden-democratic-party-06774589?gaa_at=eafs&gaa_n=ASWzDAjhBJpWSkhP1AScKdP513XG641aVT9ZWHMWnzfI-tm1go2Z_LBrA1Xce2Kh1fM%3D&gaa_ts=6883f98a&gaa_sig=x3FoT9SELhYw--ellQK5gQC1CN-mfyTNkwN76pRKFuWbl6MVf-Sr4elXmSXlHODa8tSI7Z9Bm9LrQMBIHm8OGA%3D%3D, https://nypost.com/2025/07/24/media/joe-rogan-gushes-over-hunter-biden-after-crack-cocaine-interview/ Tjl1609 (talk) 21:45, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The New York post article shouldn't be used because it considered un reliable, but the rest are decent source, but Youtube isn't something we use in sources, especially when it comes candidates. But let see what the other editors think. Fad8229 (talk) 21:50, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]