"No Labels" Party

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im more interested in the Forward party that the No Labels party.

I like that! Sounds progressive and inclusive.

Founded by Andrew Yang and others.

For more info on the Forward Party (which I believe is better than No Labels), see https://home.forwardparty.com/faq

As for any third party being a spoiler they say this “The system is already spoiled. Over 70% of elected positions have only one candidate competing for them, and the two major parties have shut out competition. We’ll fix that by bringing choice back to the American people, including through electoral reforms like ranked-choice voting and open primaries.”

Joel Searby, Forward's National Director, said that the party does not plan on taking positions on controversial issues such as guns and abortion; instead they will leave those issues up to candidates and state and local chapters to decide.


So they won't take position on critical controversial issues that matter greatly to the people of this country that will drive the outcome of the next election. Why waste time with such weakness and lack of courage?

They will back certain candidates from both parties. They oppose Trump. They will not have a 2024 presidential candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im more interested in the Forward party that the No Labels party.

I like that! Sounds progressive and inclusive.

Founded by Andrew Yang and others.

For more info on the Forward Party (which I believe is better than No Labels), see https://home.forwardparty.com/faq

As for any third party being a spoiler they say this “The system is already spoiled. Over 70% of elected positions have only one candidate competing for them, and the two major parties have shut out competition. We’ll fix that by bringing choice back to the American people, including through electoral reforms like ranked-choice voting and open primaries.”

Joel Searby, Forward's National Director, said that the party does not plan on taking positions on controversial issues such as guns and abortion; instead they will leave those issues up to candidates and state and local chapters to decide.


So they won't take position on critical controversial issues that matter greatly to the people of this country that will drive the outcome of the next election. Why waste time with such weakness and lack of courage?

They will back certain candidates from both parties. They oppose Trump. They will not have a 2024 presidential candidate.

They will not be involved with abortion rights? Not be involved with guns? Thanks anyway but we need action and leadership on both these issues and many others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im more interested in the Forward party that the No Labels party.

I like that! Sounds progressive and inclusive.

Founded by Andrew Yang and others.

For more info on the Forward Party (which I believe is better than No Labels), see https://home.forwardparty.com/faq

As for any third party being a spoiler they say this “The system is already spoiled. Over 70% of elected positions have only one candidate competing for them, and the two major parties have shut out competition. We’ll fix that by bringing choice back to the American people, including through electoral reforms like ranked-choice voting and open primaries.”

Joel Searby, Forward's National Director, said that the party does not plan on taking positions on controversial issues such as guns and abortion; instead they will leave those issues up to candidates and state and local chapters to decide.


So they won't take position on critical controversial issues that matter greatly to the people of this country that will drive the outcome of the next election. Why waste time with such weakness and lack of courage?

They will back certain candidates from both parties. They oppose Trump. They will not have a 2024 presidential candidate.

Maybe Joel Searby's daughters did not just get smacked back to the early 70s, but for the rest of us that are left with this battle to re-fight....this is a critical issue. If they are backing forced birther republican candidates they don't deserve a single dollar or vote.

[Anonymous]

Still shows that Americans are not satisfied with the current parties mostly led by upper (middle) class that doesn’t care about the middle class and others. It’s all smoke and mirrors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Still shows that Americans are not satisfied with the current parties mostly led by upper (middle) class that doesn’t care about the middle class and others. It’s all smoke and mirrors.

What “still shows”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vote for Forward Party puts Trump in office. May as well be the Leopards Eating Faces Party.

You clearly have not read their plan. Keep eating your face.

No one has time for some wild, crazy 3rd party plan. We have the best of the best already signed up to run against each other for a round two. Get your popcorn ready. Yee haw

[Anonymous]

I guess what they agree on is having enough rube voters to split the voting and paving the way for Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess what they agree on is having enough rube voters to split the voting and paving the way for Trump.

Ok no labels. I guess overturning roe was enough of a blow to the women of this country. Now we will try to get a rapist back in the oval office. This party gets a "we help elect rapists" label.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess what they agree on is having enough rube voters to split the voting and paving the way for Trump.

Ok no labels. I guess overturning roe was enough of a blow to the women of this country. Now we will try to get a rapist back in the oval office. This party gets a "we help elect rapists" label.

Overturning Roe was NOT* enough of a blow to the women of this country....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess what they agree on is having enough rube voters to split the voting and paving the way for Trump.

Ok no labels. I guess overturning roe was enough of a blow to the women of this country. Now we will try to get a rapist back in the oval office. This party gets a "we help elect rapists" label.

Overturning Roe was NOT* enough of a blow to the women of this country....

Apologies for ignoring all the male victims of rape. Putting Trump back in the white house is basically an insult to everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess what they agree on is having enough rube voters to split the voting and paving the way for Trump.

The butt scratching GOP electing toad party.

And I used to think Huntsman was decently intelligent. I guess some people just need a lot of attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conservative here- I would vote for Manchin Gabbard.

Of course you would. That is the point. They aren't "dems" but have been labeled as such.

I think we all need to move towards a middle we can live with….

Where is the middle on abortion? I see NO GOP willing to legislate for the Roe-V Wade standard. What we see are total bans, bans at 6 weeks or 12 weeks. What happens if something happens to the fetus at 20 weeks? Just make the woman carry it to term everything else be damned?

Where is the middle on guns? I see NO GOP legislating for a middle ground. All unfetted access with NO background checks or other restrictions.

I could go on, but there is no middle we can all live with where the current GOP is concerned.

Um, the middle isn't the "GOP" in it's current political state. The middle is irrelevant as it pertains to the 2024 election. We just need to hope for better candidates and performance from the Rs and Ds in the short term and then a demand of massive transformation of our two parties in the long term. Our political system and Federal Government have been compromised by the poor performance of our two parties in recent decades. It's an ugly but undeniable truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conservative here- I would vote for Manchin Gabbard.

Of course you would. That is the point. They aren't "dems" but have been labeled as such.

I think we all need to move towards a middle we can live with….

Where is the middle on abortion? I see NO GOP willing to legislate for the Roe-V Wade standard. What we see are total bans, bans at 6 weeks or 12 weeks. What happens if something happens to the fetus at 20 weeks? Just make the woman carry it to term everything else be damned?

Where is the middle on guns? I see NO GOP legislating for a middle ground. All unfetted access with NO background checks or other restrictions.

I could go on, but there is no middle we can all live with where the current GOP is concerned.

Well, the middle means we don’t all get what we want. I don’t mean to be disrespectful to your passion on guns and abortion.

Manchin isn’t my dream candidate either.

I’d like to think that there are a lot of Americans like me who would give up some political goals that are important to them in order to re-establish a middle in this country.

the middle also mean BOTH SIDES don't get what they want.

Where is the GOP compromise on guns?
Where it the GOP compromise on abortion?

Again, these are just two examples.

The middle is the middle, the GOP makes no effort to go there.

And every time the left moves to middle, the right goes further right. They’re unfit for governing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conservative here- I would vote for Manchin Gabbard.

Of course you would. That is the point. They aren't "dems" but have been labeled as such.

I think we all need to move towards a middle we can live with….

Where is the middle on abortion? I see NO GOP willing to legislate for the Roe-V Wade standard. What we see are total bans, bans at 6 weeks or 12 weeks. What happens if something happens to the fetus at 20 weeks? Just make the woman carry it to term everything else be damned?

Where is the middle on guns? I see NO GOP legislating for a middle ground. All unfetted access with NO background checks or other restrictions.

I could go on, but there is no middle we can all live with where the current GOP is concerned.

Um, the middle isn't the "GOP" in its current political state. The middle is irrelevant as it pertains to the 2024 election. We just need to hope for better candidates and performance from the Rs and Ds in the short term and then a demand of massive transformation of our two parties in the long term. Our political system and Federal Government have been compromised by the poor performance of our two parties in recent decades. It's an ugly but undeniable truth.

“Both sides” is the laziest and stupidest argument ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conservative here- I would vote for Manchin Gabbard.

Of course you would. That is the point. They aren't "dems" but have been labeled as such.

I think we all need to move towards a middle we can live with….

Where is the middle on abortion? I see NO GOP willing to legislate for the Roe-V Wade standard. What we see are total bans, bans at 6 weeks or 12 weeks. What happens if something happens to the fetus at 20 weeks? Just make the woman carry it to term everything else be damned?

Where is the middle on guns? I see NO GOP legislating for a middle ground. All unfetted access with NO background checks or other restrictions.

I could go on, but there is no middle we can all live with where the current GOP is concerned.

Well, the middle means we don’t all get what we want. I don’t mean to be disrespectful to your passion on guns and abortion.

Manchin isn’t my dream candidate either.

I’d like to think that there are a lot of Americans like me who would give up some political goals that are important to them in order to re-establish a middle in this country.

the middle also mean BOTH SIDES don't get what they want.

Where is the GOP compromise on guns?
Where it the GOP compromise on abortion?

Again, these are just two examples.

The middle is the middle, the GOP makes no effort to go there.

And every time the left moves to middle, the right goes further right. They’re unfit for governing.

How exactly has the left moved to the middle on abortion, or firearms?