2028 Hopefuls Stakes in 2026 Midterm Elections
Left 50%
Center 0%
Right 50%
1 left · 0 center · 1 right
What happened
As U.S. voters prepared for Tuesday's midterm elections, a growing field of prospective 2028 presidential contenders in both parties were not necessarily on the ballot. The Honest Elections Project (HEP), which describes itself as a nonpartisan election-integrity group, released a guide to 21 ballot measures in 17 states covering voter identification and citizenship requirements, ranked-choice voting and top-two primaries, congressional redistricting, voter registration and restoration, and rules for changing election laws. Jason Snead, executive director of HEP Action, said in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation that "the rules for the 2028 presidential election are on the ballot in states across the country this week." The listed items included measures requiring voters to be U.S. citizens or present government-issued identification; a Colorado amendment requiring ballot questions to be written in plain language at or below an eighth-grade reading level and barring statutes that mandate titles not meeting that standard; and North Dakota and South Dakota proposals to require a 60 percent supermajority, rather than a simple majority, to amend those states' constitutions.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 2 articles
1 of 1 article cites a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 1 of 1
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Jason Snead and Honest Elections Project
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 1
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
- Credits another outlet 0 of 1
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 1
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Nov 2, 13:03 UTC by Daily Caller, naming its source.
- Not counted 1
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Left-leaning and right-leaning coverage attach 2028 stakes to different objects on the same midterm ballot. Left-leaning coverage treats Tuesday as a test of prospective presidential contenders who may not even be running. Right-leaning coverage never names those hopefuls and instead treats the midterms as a vote on the rules of the next presidential election. Left-leaning coverage in The Hill says those with the most at stake "won't necessarily be the ones on the ballot." Right-leaning coverage in the Daily Caller instead reports a new guide meant to show voters which election-related ballot measures can affect how future races are run.
Right-leaning coverage leads with whether a midterm ballot contains "hidden measures" that can shape future elections. Left-leaning coverage leads with 2028 hopefuls and their influence inside both parties, not with any change to how those elections are conducted.
Do any of those 2028 hopefuls have a public position on the election-rule measures also before voters on Tuesday?
Bottom line
The Hill never mentions the 21 election-rule measures the Daily Caller put at the center of Tuesday's 2028 stakes. The Daily Caller never names a 2028 hopeful.
The receipts — 4 facts one side's coverage lacks
- Honest Elections Project released a guide covering 21 election-related ballot measures across 17 states
- Jason Snead said the rules for the 2028 presidential election are on the ballot in states across the country this week
- Ten of the listed measures concern voter ID and citizenship requirements
- North Dakota and South Dakota have measures requiring a 60 percent supermajority to amend the state constitution
The Left View
The Hill framed the midterms as an off-ballot proving ground for 2028, writing that the candidates with "the most at stake" would not necessarily be those appearing on Tuesday's ballots. It said that for a "growing field of prospective 2028 presidential contenders in both parties," the results could offer "an early test of their political strength, their influence within their respective parties and their ability to shape the next presidential race."
The Right View
The Daily Caller News Foundation presented the HEP guide as showing whether ballots contain "hidden measures that can impact how future elections are conducted," quoting Snead that Americans "have two more years to argue about who should win the next presidential election" but "less than a week, however, to decide who will write many of its rules." It cast voter-ID and non-citizen voting bans, ranked-choice voting repeal, and related measures as election-integrity stakes, and cited HEP's line that it is "proud to provide this resource to help Americans identify what's at stake when it comes to election integrity this week." The coverage also noted HEP's stated priorities, including ending foreign dark money in elections, preserving the Electoral College, and ending "vote harvesting," and its claim that voting rights "hinge on an electoral system that ensures every lawful ballot is counted, and which guards against fraud."
Our Take (balanced)
The Hill's strongest argument is that 2028 hopefuls' real midterm test is political—strength, intra-party influence, and the capacity "to shape the next presidential race"—even when they are not on the ballot. The Daily Caller/HEP side's strongest argument is that Tuesday's ballots will set "the rules for the 2028 presidential election," backed by the inventory of 21 measures in 17 states and Snead's claim that voters have "less than a week" to decide "who will write many of its rules." The central unresolved tension is whether the midterms matter more for 2028 as a candidate-and-party power contest or as a vote on the legal machinery of elections themselves.
2 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.