An artificial intelligence model has generated a speculative forecast about the 2028 U.S. presidential election, even though no official candidates have declared their campaigns, sparking widespread discussion across social media platforms and YouTube. The projection, while hypothetical, has drawn attention for its detailed state-by-state breakdown and confident electoral vote totals. Political observers note that early forecasts nearly three years before Election Day are inherently uncertain, yet the use of AI tools to simulate outcomes reflects a growing intersection between technology and politics. The simulation does not represent an official prediction from any campaign or polling firm; rather, it is a scenario-building exercise based on current polling trends, demographic patterns, and recent election results. Still, the video presenting the model’s findings has accumulated significant engagement, with viewers debating whether artificial intelligence can meaningfully anticipate the complex dynamics of a modern presidential race. As AI systems become more sophisticated and more widely used, their role in shaping political narratives — even in speculative contexts — is likely to expand.

The forecast in question was produced using Grok, an AI chatbot developed by xAI, the company founded by Elon Musk. A YouTube channel host prompted the system to simulate a 2028 election matchup between a set of hypothetical Democratic and Republican nominees. According to the host, the request was straightforward: ask the AI to “predict the 2028 presidential election and give us a map forecast.” In response, the chatbot generated a full electoral map, assigned states into “solid,” “likely,” and more competitive categories, and calculated projected electoral vote totals. The exercise was framed as a thought experiment rather than a definitive forecast, but the polished graphics and numerical precision gave the presentation an air of analytical authority. Critics caution that AI-generated simulations are only as reliable as the assumptions and data inputs behind them, and that small changes in turnout, candidate selection, or economic conditions could dramatically alter the outcome. Nonetheless, the video illustrates how accessible AI tools can now create detailed political projections that once required teams of analysts.

In the simulated matchup, the Republican nominee was projected to be Vice President JD Vance, while the Democratic candidate was modeled as Vice President Kamala Harris. According to the AI’s forecast, Vance would win 312 electoral votes compared with Harris’s 212, comfortably surpassing the 270 electoral votes required to win the presidency. On the Democratic side, the video cited early primary polling that shows Harris leading with roughly 32 percent support, ahead of Gavin Newsom at 23.8 percent. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg was shown in third place with just under 10 percent, followed by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro. The host remarked that Harris’s apparent resurgence might surprise some observers, particularly after her 2024 defeat, but noted that both polling and betting markets suggest growing expectations that she could seek the nomination again. Indeed, betting odds cited in the video indicate a sharp rise in the perceived likelihood of her candidacy, reinforcing the narrative that she remains a central figure within her party.

On the Republican side, the simulation portrays Vance as the clear frontrunner for his party’s nomination. Early polling referenced in the video gives him approximately 49.2 percent support, placing him well ahead of Donald Trump Jr., who trails by nearly 29 points. Senator Marco Rubio appears with 12.5 percent support, while Florida Governor Ron DeSantis stands at 9.2 percent. Based on these figures, the AI assigns Vance a 46 percent probability of becoming the Republican nominee, compared with Rubio’s 18 percent. The host suggests that absent major political shifts, Vance would be strongly positioned to secure his party’s standard-bearer status. It is important to emphasize, however, that such probabilities are speculative and reflect current snapshots rather than fixed trajectories. Presidential primaries often evolve rapidly as debates, endorsements, fundraising totals, and unforeseen events reshape the field. Nevertheless, the simulation assumes relative stability in party dynamics and builds its general election map around that premise.

A central feature of the AI-generated forecast is its classification of “solid” states, defined as those with projected victory margins of 15 percentage points or more. In Vance’s solid column, the model places reliably Republican states such as Utah, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Alabama, along with much of the South and portions of the Midwest. Notably, Ohio — once considered a perennial battleground — is projected as solidly Republican, reflecting its rightward shift in recent election cycles. The host argues that, given Donald Trump’s double-digit victory there in 2024, it is “not difficult to see” the state remaining firmly in the GOP column. Meanwhile, Harris’s solid states largely mirror the Democratic coalition of recent cycles, including Washington, California, Hawaii, Vermont, Massachusetts, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. The model also projects that Connecticut and Delaware would return to solid Democratic margins after narrower outcomes in 2020. After tallying solid states alone, Vance leads 139 electoral votes to Harris’s 108, giving him an early advantage even before likely and competitive states are considered.

The “likely” category — defined by margins between 5 and 15 points — further expands Vance’s edge in the simulation. States such as Iowa, North Carolina, Florida, Texas, Arizona, and Alaska are placed in the Republican-leaning column, as is Maine’s second congressional district. Florida and Texas are described as firmly Republican due to recent electoral trends, while Arizona, narrowly won by Republicans in 2024, is projected to remain in GOP hands. When both solid and likely states are combined, Vance reaches 246 electoral votes, just 24 shy of the 270 needed to secure victory. The remaining competitive states ultimately push him to a projected total of 312 electoral votes, compared with Harris’s 212. While the map presents a decisive Republican win, analysts caution that forecasts this far in advance cannot account for economic fluctuations, international developments, policy shifts, or changes in voter turnout. AI simulations can synthesize data and model scenarios, but they cannot predict unforeseen events or fully capture the human dimensions of campaigns. As such, the projection should be viewed as a snapshot based on current trends rather than a definitive statement about 2028.