"No Labels" Party

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

The only way Trump wins is if No Labels takes too many "independent" voters. The fact is, if Hogan is the candidate, then it will be a pro-life vote. I highly doubt many independent voters will support that.

I am an independent voter and I do not see Larry Hogan as a “pro-life” vote. Like Nikki Haley, he knows this is a losing issue and that there is no pathway to a national ban and will leave it alone. If I am in a booth and my options are Trump, Biden and Hogan I am going to have a very hard time not casting a vote for Hogan even though intellectually I understand that takes away from Biden. I just can’t believe this is what the Democratic Party had trotted out again.

Intellectualize yourself to another trump term if you most but most voters will say hell no. Hold the nose and vote for the lesser of 2 evils. That is what our elections are a lot of the time.

You keep thinking that most voters will say hell no, but you’re thinking as someone firmly in the Biden camp. The only thing I have less desire for than another 4 years of Biden is Trump part 2. The fact that your hook to independents is hold your nose and vote Biden is just really not persuasive.

The hook to independents are:

-freedom of choice for our wives and daughters
-a growing economy
-a restoration of the allies and order we have known for the past 70 years
-a sense of normalcy in our politics
-low unemployment, more opportunity, higher GDP, more job creation

This isn't hard. The vote for Trump installs him as a dictator. That is what he is saying and we should believe him.

We’ve had the same allies “and order” for 70 years? Cite please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

This — assuming trump even manages to be a candidate. There needs to be a solid Plan B Democrat candidate.

With Biden losing in the polls now to Trump, just imagine how far he'd be behind if Trump was forced out of the race due to his legal problems, and was replaced by a more fit candidate? Why is our Dem incumbent behind in the polls to someone as awful as Trump? What are we thinking?

46% of the country is locked in on Trump no matter who Dems nominate. There is no “unicorn” candidate. In fact, if he wasn’t president right now, people would be pointing to Biden as the kind of moderate candidate Democrats *should* be nominating.

From a policy standpoint sure, but are you forgetting how much of an effort it was last time to get the Democrats to not nominate Bernie Sanders, who has a zero percent chance at winning a national election? We also cannot be nominating octogenarians to be president regardless of their policies, full stop.

The Dems did not nominate Bernie and they won. They understand the compromise required to win. Can't say the same for the GOP

I don’t think they understand, they just got lucky. I have no doubt that if Biden wasn’t an incumbent we would be watching a Dem primary with some crazy-a$$ left wing candidate up against a more moderate candidate and the party would again be locked in an internal struggle over its direction.

If Biden wasn't a candidate, there would be a race between Nesome, Whitmer, Bashear and probably one of the crazy left wingers you hypothosize.

Have you looked at the slate of candidates outside of Trump? One is worse than the next, they are all prohibitively pro-life and most of them have some form of corruption in their background.

It’s terrible that the Democrats could have given people the option of Whitmer or Beshear and are trotting Biden out again. Biden was supposed to be the one-term bridge back to normalcy and yet here we are with Biden-Trump II.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

This — assuming trump even manages to be a candidate. There needs to be a solid Plan B Democrat candidate.

With Biden losing in the polls now to Trump, just imagine how far he'd be behind if Trump was forced out of the race due to his legal problems, and was replaced by a more fit candidate? Why is our Dem incumbent behind in the polls to someone as awful as Trump? What are we thinking?

This country won't elect an amazing candidate. The Dems had kick ass hillary Clinton and she lost. America will only elect men and to beat wacko insurrectionist trump it needs to be a moderate that win the few swing states that matter. You don't seem to be able to learn that hard lesson from 2016.

To be fair, it took a concerted effort by the GOP and Russians in the form of misinformation, recruiting Jill Stein and spending a lot of time and effort to hack the DNC and weaponize and create emails to barely - by the thinist of margins, squeak Trump into office.

Are you denying that Trump was legitimately elected in 2016? Yikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

The only way Trump wins is if No Labels takes too many "independent" voters. The fact is, if Hogan is the candidate, then it will be a pro-life vote. I highly doubt many independent voters will support that.

I am an independent voter and I do not see Larry Hogan as a “pro-life” vote. Like Nikki Haley, he knows this is a losing issue and that there is no pathway to a national ban and will leave it alone. If I am in a booth and my options are Trump, Biden and Hogan I am going to have a very hard time not casting a vote for Hogan even though intellectually I understand that takes away from Biden. I just can’t believe this is what the Democratic Party had trotted out again.

He is adamantly and unabashedly pro-life. He also prioritized Maryland spending to benefit hist properties and those of his cronies. Vote accordingly.

Here’s the thing, sure he is pro-life, that is his personal viewpoint on the issue. I know many people (raised Catholic) who share that viewpoint. What matters to me is what he is going to do to impose that view point on the country. I have not seen anything to indicate he intends to impose a national ban or any other radical pro-life policy, so his being personally pro-life is not something that concerns me about him as a candidate.

IOW, I will vote against my interests out of some fantasy left wing bogeyman.

Face it, Biden is a moderate. The country is in a much better place today than it was in January, 2021 when he took office. The country is also in a much better place relative to its peers around the world. And yet somehow, you want to take someone and project your abortion stance on to them out of some sort of leopards eating faces party believing your face won't be eaten.

Good luck with that.

I don’t understand anything you are trying to say here. But yes, I am aware Biden is moderate, and he is an improvement over Trump, but really you shouldn’t be lauded for merely being better than the worst. I just don’t find “Biden, he’s better than Trump” to be a compelling reason to vote for someone. Hence, my being an independent voter.

Ok. Don't underestimate the power of trump to bring out the anti trump vote. He is that repulsive to voters. I have not seen anything like it and I have been through many many elections at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

This — assuming trump even manages to be a candidate. There needs to be a solid Plan B Democrat candidate.

With Biden losing in the polls now to Trump, just imagine how far he'd be behind if Trump was forced out of the race due to his legal problems, and was replaced by a more fit candidate? Why is our Dem incumbent behind in the polls to someone as awful as Trump? What are we thinking?

When you say, "Biden losing in the polls" are you referring to the WSJ poll that was trotted out over the weekend? If so...

Not really an independent poll, now, is it?

The same polls that had Biden up by double digit points on trump a year prior to the 2020 election. You know, the reason we were all comfortable with the Biden nomination in 2020. We are in a different place now. Point fingers and cast blame to whom ever you want. All I care about is keeping Trump out of office. I can't ignore the fact that the data staring me right in the face tells me Biden has less than a 50/50 chance of beating Trump in 2024. Considering Trump's history of over performing on election day relative to the polling data leading up to the election in both 2016 and 2020, I won't feel comfortable with anything less than a 5 point average polling lead over Trump. Trump is currently ahead of Biden by a point or two in the average polling data (same polls Biden led by double digit points in 2019). Denying or ignoring these facts will surely put Trump back in office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

This — assuming trump even manages to be a candidate. There needs to be a solid Plan B Democrat candidate.

With Biden losing in the polls now to Trump, just imagine how far he'd be behind if Trump was forced out of the race due to his legal problems, and was replaced by a more fit candidate? Why is our Dem incumbent behind in the polls to someone as awful as Trump? What are we thinking?

This country won't elect an amazing candidate. The Dems had kick ass hillary Clinton and she lost. America will only elect men and to beat wacko insurrectionist trump it needs to be a moderate that win the few swing states that matter. You don't seem to be able to learn that hard lesson from 2016.

To be fair, it took a concerted effort by the GOP and Russians in the form of misinformation, recruiting Jill Stein and spending a lot of time and effort to hack the DNC and weaponize and create emails to barely - by the thinist of margins, squeak Trump into office.

Are you denying that Trump was legitimately elected in 2016? Yikes.

The end of the peaceful transfer of power belongs squarely to trump. He did that...not anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

The only way Trump wins is if No Labels takes too many "independent" voters. The fact is, if Hogan is the candidate, then it will be a pro-life vote. I highly doubt many independent voters will support that.

I am an independent voter and I do not see Larry Hogan as a “pro-life” vote. Like Nikki Haley, he knows this is a losing issue and that there is no pathway to a national ban and will leave it alone. If I am in a booth and my options are Trump, Biden and Hogan I am going to have a very hard time not casting a vote for Hogan even though intellectually I understand that takes away from Biden. I just can’t believe this is what the Democratic Party had trotted out again.

Intellectualize yourself to another trump term if you most but most voters will say hell no. Hold the nose and vote for the lesser of 2 evils. That is what our elections are a lot of the time.

You keep thinking that most voters will say hell no, but you’re thinking as someone firmly in the Biden camp. The only thing I have less desire for than another 4 years of Biden is Trump part 2. The fact that your hook to independents is hold your nose and vote Biden is just really not persuasive.

The hook to independents are:

-freedom of choice for our wives and daughters
-a growing economy
-a restoration of the allies and order we have known for the past 70 years
-a sense of normalcy in our politics
-low unemployment, more opportunity, higher GDP, more job creation

This isn't hard. The vote for Trump installs him as a dictator. That is what he is saying and we should believe him.

We’ve had the same allies “and order” for 70 years? Cite please.

NATO founded in 1949. 70 years was 2019, so OVER 70 years. Trump has said he will pull the US out of NATO. Are you good with that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

The only way Trump wins is if No Labels takes too many "independent" voters. The fact is, if Hogan is the candidate, then it will be a pro-life vote. I highly doubt many independent voters will support that.

I am an independent voter and I do not see Larry Hogan as a “pro-life” vote. Like Nikki Haley, he knows this is a losing issue and that there is no pathway to a national ban and will leave it alone. If I am in a booth and my options are Trump, Biden and Hogan I am going to have a very hard time not casting a vote for Hogan even though intellectually I understand that takes away from Biden. I just can’t believe this is what the Democratic Party had trotted out again.

He is adamantly and unabashedly pro-life. He also prioritized Maryland spending to benefit hist properties and those of his cronies. Vote accordingly.

Here’s the thing, sure he is pro-life, that is his personal viewpoint on the issue. I know many people (raised Catholic) who share that viewpoint. What matters to me is what he is going to do to impose that view point on the country. I have not seen anything to indicate he intends to impose a national ban or any other radical pro-life policy, so his being personally pro-life is not something that concerns me about him as a candidate.

IOW, I will vote against my interests out of some fantasy left wing bogeyman.

Face it, Biden is a moderate. The country is in a much better place today than it was in January, 2021 when he took office. The country is also in a much better place relative to its peers around the world. And yet somehow, you want to take someone and project your abortion stance on to them out of some sort of leopards eating faces party believing your face won't be eaten.

Good luck with that.

I don’t understand anything you are trying to say here. But yes, I am aware Biden is moderate, and he is an improvement over Trump, but really you shouldn’t be lauded for merely being better than the worst. I just don’t find “Biden, he’s better than Trump” to be a compelling reason to vote for someone. Hence, my being an independent voter.

Like I said, if you don't see the next election as a proxy on our republic, then good luck with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

This — assuming trump even manages to be a candidate. There needs to be a solid Plan B Democrat candidate.

With Biden losing in the polls now to Trump, just imagine how far he'd be behind if Trump was forced out of the race due to his legal problems, and was replaced by a more fit candidate? Why is our Dem incumbent behind in the polls to someone as awful as Trump? What are we thinking?

46% of the country is locked in on Trump no matter who Dems nominate. There is no “unicorn” candidate. In fact, if he wasn’t president right now, people would be pointing to Biden as the kind of moderate candidate Democrats *should* be nominating.

From a policy standpoint sure, but are you forgetting how much of an effort it was last time to get the Democrats to not nominate Bernie Sanders, who has a zero percent chance at winning a national election? We also cannot be nominating octogenarians to be president regardless of their policies, full stop.

The Dems did not nominate Bernie and they won. They understand the compromise required to win. Can't say the same for the GOP

I don’t think they understand, they just got lucky. I have no doubt that if Biden wasn’t an incumbent we would be watching a Dem primary with some crazy-a$$ left wing candidate up against a more moderate candidate and the party would again be locked in an internal struggle over its direction.

If Biden wasn't a candidate, there would be a race between Nesome, Whitmer, Bashear and probably one of the crazy left wingers you hypothosize.

Have you looked at the slate of candidates outside of Trump? One is worse than the next, they are all prohibitively pro-life and most of them have some form of corruption in their background.

It’s terrible that the Democrats could have given people the option of Whitmer or Beshear and are trotting Biden out again. Biden was supposed to be the one-term bridge back to normalcy and yet here we are with Biden-Trump II.

A party does not give up the power of incumbency. Hasn't happened since LBJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

This — assuming trump even manages to be a candidate. There needs to be a solid Plan B Democrat candidate.

With Biden losing in the polls now to Trump, just imagine how far he'd be behind if Trump was forced out of the race due to his legal problems, and was replaced by a more fit candidate? Why is our Dem incumbent behind in the polls to someone as awful as Trump? What are we thinking?

This country won't elect an amazing candidate. The Dems had kick ass hillary Clinton and she lost. America will only elect men and to beat wacko insurrectionist trump it needs to be a moderate that win the few swing states that matter. You don't seem to be able to learn that hard lesson from 2016.

To be fair, it took a concerted effort by the GOP and Russians in the form of misinformation, recruiting Jill Stein and spending a lot of time and effort to hack the DNC and weaponize and create emails to barely - by the thinist of margins, squeak Trump into office.

Are you denying that Trump was legitimately elected in 2016? Yikes.

DP but no, that’s no what PP said. If you don’t understand the influence of misinformation on voting though, you’re years behind on current events.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

This — assuming trump even manages to be a candidate. There needs to be a solid Plan B Democrat candidate.

With Biden losing in the polls now to Trump, just imagine how far he'd be behind if Trump was forced out of the race due to his legal problems, and was replaced by a more fit candidate? Why is our Dem incumbent behind in the polls to someone as awful as Trump? What are we thinking?

46% of the country is locked in on Trump no matter who Dems nominate. There is no “unicorn” candidate. In fact, if he wasn’t president right now, people would be pointing to Biden as the kind of moderate candidate Democrats *should* be nominating.

From a policy standpoint sure, but are you forgetting how much of an effort it was last time to get the Democrats to not nominate Bernie Sanders, who has a zero percent chance at winning a national election? We also cannot be nominating octogenarians to be president regardless of their policies, full stop.

The Dems did not nominate Bernie and they won. They understand the compromise required to win. Can't say the same for the GOP

I don’t think they understand, they just got lucky. I have no doubt that if Biden wasn’t an incumbent we would be watching a Dem primary with some crazy-a$$ left wing candidate up against a more moderate candidate and the party would again be locked in an internal struggle over its direction.

If Biden wasn't a candidate, there would be a race between Nesome, Whitmer, Bashear and probably one of the crazy left wingers you hypothosize.

Have you looked at the slate of candidates outside of Trump? One is worse than the next, they are all prohibitively pro-life and most of them have some form of corruption in their background.

It’s terrible that the Democrats could have given people the option of Whitmer or Beshear and are trotting Biden out again. Biden was supposed to be the one-term bridge back to normalcy and yet here we are with Biden-Trump II.

A party does not give up the power of incumbency. Hasn't happened since LBJ.

I don’t know how much power Dems are getting from Biden’s incumbency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

This — assuming trump even manages to be a candidate. There needs to be a solid Plan B Democrat candidate.

With Biden losing in the polls now to Trump, just imagine how far he'd be behind if Trump was forced out of the race due to his legal problems, and was replaced by a more fit candidate? Why is our Dem incumbent behind in the polls to someone as awful as Trump? What are we thinking?

46% of the country is locked in on Trump no matter who Dems nominate. There is no “unicorn” candidate. In fact, if he wasn’t president right now, people would be pointing to Biden as the kind of moderate candidate Democrats *should* be nominating.

From a policy standpoint sure, but are you forgetting how much of an effort it was last time to get the Democrats to not nominate Bernie Sanders, who has a zero percent chance at winning a national election? We also cannot be nominating octogenarians to be president regardless of their policies, full stop.

The Dems did not nominate Bernie and they won. They understand the compromise required to win. Can't say the same for the GOP

I don’t think they understand, they just got lucky. I have no doubt that if Biden wasn’t an incumbent we would be watching a Dem primary with some crazy-a$$ left wing candidate up against a more moderate candidate and the party would again be locked in an internal struggle over its direction.

If Biden wasn't a candidate, there would be a race between Nesome, Whitmer, Bashear and probably one of the crazy left wingers you hypothosize.

Have you looked at the slate of candidates outside of Trump? One is worse than the next, they are all prohibitively pro-life and most of them have some form of corruption in their background.

It’s terrible that the Democrats could have given people the option of Whitmer or Beshear and are trotting Biden out again. Biden was supposed to be the one-term bridge back to normalcy and yet here we are with Biden-Trump II.

A party does not give up the power of incumbency. Hasn't happened since LBJ.

I don’t know how much power Dems are getting from Biden’s incumbency.

There are a small handful of states that matter. Do they choose a moderate, experienced, albeit elderly incumbent or a forced-birther, insurrectionist loser to be the president of the USA? Geee...I wonder what they will choose?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

The only way Trump wins is if No Labels takes too many "independent" voters. The fact is, if Hogan is the candidate, then it will be a pro-life vote. I highly doubt many independent voters will support that.

I am an independent voter and I do not see Larry Hogan as a “pro-life” vote. Like Nikki Haley, he knows this is a losing issue and that there is no pathway to a national ban and will leave it alone. If I am in a booth and my options are Trump, Biden and Hogan I am going to have a very hard time not casting a vote for Hogan even though intellectually I understand that takes away from Biden. I just can’t believe this is what the Democratic Party had trotted out again.

Intellectualize yourself to another trump term if you most but most voters will say hell no. Hold the nose and vote for the lesser of 2 evils. That is what our elections are a lot of the time.

You keep thinking that most voters will say hell no, but you’re thinking as someone firmly in the Biden camp. The only thing I have less desire for than another 4 years of Biden is Trump part 2. The fact that your hook to independents is hold your nose and vote Biden is just really not persuasive.

IMO it is very persuasive. I am not young and I would absolutely say the majority of elections involve voting against a candidate rather than being thrilled with the democratic choice. That is just the way it is.

There are exceptions like Obama. Boy do we all miss him. And for me Clinton because I am raising some girls and I was excited to have them witness our first woman leader. Ugggg. Imagine is she would have won, where this country could be now.

But on we go. Trump is a such a huge repellent to many millions and rightly so. He is so bad he drives voter turnout to come out and defeat him which is unusual.

Imagine if Clinton had been nominated in 2008 when she was in her political prime and had no Benghazi or email server baggage? Obama left to gain the more experience he needed and then in place to crush Trumpism before it could get off the ground. Oh wait, that would all make too much sense for voters to be able to figure out.

FWIW Hillary would have easily won the Democratic nomination in 2008 if she had voted against the Iraq War. But she voted for it and the rest is history. It was the Iraq War vote, not misogyny, that cost her the nomination.

Narrator: It was mysogyny.

Say whatever you want, but I remember it all very clearly. Even with the idiotic Iraq War vote dragging her down like a heavy anchor, Hillary damn near pulled it off. Obama wouldn’t have even run in 2008 if Hillary had voted against the war. Pretty sure he has even said something to this effect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

The only way Trump wins is if No Labels takes too many "independent" voters. The fact is, if Hogan is the candidate, then it will be a pro-life vote. I highly doubt many independent voters will support that.

I am an independent voter and I do not see Larry Hogan as a “pro-life” vote. Like Nikki Haley, he knows this is a losing issue and that there is no pathway to a national ban and will leave it alone. If I am in a booth and my options are Trump, Biden and Hogan I am going to have a very hard time not casting a vote for Hogan even though intellectually I understand that takes away from Biden. I just can’t believe this is what the Democratic Party had trotted out again.

Intellectualize yourself to another trump term if you most but most voters will say hell no. Hold the nose and vote for the lesser of 2 evils. That is what our elections are a lot of the time.

You keep thinking that most voters will say hell no, but you’re thinking as someone firmly in the Biden camp. The only thing I have less desire for than another 4 years of Biden is Trump part 2. The fact that your hook to independents is hold your nose and vote Biden is just really not persuasive.

IMO it is very persuasive. I am not young and I would absolutely say the majority of elections involve voting against a candidate rather than being thrilled with the democratic choice. That is just the way it is.

There are exceptions like Obama. Boy do we all miss him. And for me Clinton because I am raising some girls and I was excited to have them witness our first woman leader. Ugggg. Imagine is she would have won, where this country could be now.

But on we go. Trump is a such a huge repellent to many millions and rightly so. He is so bad he drives voter turnout to come out and defeat him which is unusual.

Imagine if Clinton had been nominated in 2008 when she was in her political prime and had no Benghazi or email server baggage? Obama left to gain the more experience he needed and then in place to crush Trumpism before it could get off the ground. Oh wait, that would all make too much sense for voters to be able to figure out.

FWIW Hillary would have easily won the Democratic nomination in 2008 if she had voted against the Iraq War. But she voted for it and the rest is history. It was the Iraq War vote, not misogyny, that cost her the nomination.

Narrator: It was mysogyny.

Say whatever you want, but I remember it all very clearly. Even with the idiotic Iraq War vote dragging her down like a heavy anchor, Hillary damn near pulled it off. Obama wouldn’t have even run in 2008 if Hillary had voted against the war. Pretty sure he has even said something to this effect.

And then the woman loses in the general election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It isn’t a third party if they have only a candidate for President and no other candidates or state organizations. That’s just a spoiler campaign. There is no third party movement at all.

The one or two GOP/No Labels boosters were hoping you didn’t notice that.

Umkay. Let's see what the sentiment is a year from now when the fact that Biden isn't going to win finally becomes apparent to those living in la la land. It will be too late in the game to do anything about it and you folks who refused to see the obvious writing on the wall will be the ones to blame for a Trump victory. It's just ridiculous. Ignorance is what got Trump elected in 2016. Repeat.

The only way Trump wins is if No Labels takes too many "independent" voters. The fact is, if Hogan is the candidate, then it will be a pro-life vote. I highly doubt many independent voters will support that.

I am an independent voter and I do not see Larry Hogan as a “pro-life” vote. Like Nikki Haley, he knows this is a losing issue and that there is no pathway to a national ban and will leave it alone. If I am in a booth and my options are Trump, Biden and Hogan I am going to have a very hard time not casting a vote for Hogan even though intellectually I understand that takes away from Biden. I just can’t believe this is what the Democratic Party had trotted out again.

Intellectualize yourself to another trump term if you most but most voters will say hell no. Hold the nose and vote for the lesser of 2 evils. That is what our elections are a lot of the time.

You keep thinking that most voters will say hell no, but you’re thinking as someone firmly in the Biden camp. The only thing I have less desire for than another 4 years of Biden is Trump part 2. The fact that your hook to independents is hold your nose and vote Biden is just really not persuasive.

IMO it is very persuasive. I am not young and I would absolutely say the majority of elections involve voting against a candidate rather than being thrilled with the democratic choice. That is just the way it is.

There are exceptions like Obama. Boy do we all miss him. And for me Clinton because I am raising some girls and I was excited to have them witness our first woman leader. Ugggg. Imagine is she would have won, where this country could be now.

But on we go. Trump is a such a huge repellent to many millions and rightly so. He is so bad he drives voter turnout to come out and defeat him which is unusual.

Imagine if Clinton had been nominated in 2008 when she was in her political prime and had no Benghazi or email server baggage? Obama left to gain the more experience he needed and then in place to crush Trumpism before it could get off the ground. Oh wait, that would all make too much sense for voters to be able to figure out.

FWIW Hillary would have easily won the Democratic nomination in 2008 if she had voted against the Iraq War. But she voted for it and the rest is history. It was the Iraq War vote, not misogyny, that cost her the nomination.

Narrator: It was mysogyny.

Say whatever you want, but I remember it all very clearly. Even with the idiotic Iraq War vote dragging her down like a heavy anchor, Hillary damn near pulled it off. Obama wouldn’t have even run in 2008 if Hillary had voted against the war. Pretty sure he has even said something to this effect.

Axelrod said it a few days ago in 2008 that they had a clear contrast point with hrc in 2008 that was fundemental for them and it was Iraq

People forget how much that primary was a single issue primary for so long