"No Labels" Party

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be all for getting us out of this two party rut… but not this year. Too much at risk for another Trump presidency.

Agree but let's hope Biden decides to back out of the race for a second term so that we don't actually have another Trump presidency.

So follow this through....if Biden backs out, who would replace him?

Good question. Whitmer maybe? Any normal candidate under the age of 70 would crush Trump.

By what process? It will be a back room deal, and what do you think happens with, you know, the sitting Vice President?

By what process? Biden simply announcing that he is no longer seeking a second presidential term and then a normal primary process proceeds with hopefully normal candidates jumping into the race for the nomination. Not likely to happen and basically unprecedented but if there ever was a time when the incumbent would be doing their party and the country a favor by not running, that time is now. There is too much on the line for the Dems to run someone that may or may not beat the most beatable candidate in American history. Trump can and should be crushed.

When you have an incumbent, you don;t subject the party to a primary process. You use the time and money on the general election. this is entirely unrealistic.

Yes, what you describe is the process in normal times but these aren't normal times.

[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.

We had a middle with RvW and now we’re told that returning to RvW is MAGA. This is why people are hoping a new party eventually emerges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I prefer no abortion ban, but I'd be okay with maybe a 15 week restriction with generous exceptions for health of the fetus/pregnant woman.

I am okay with stringent background checks and a waiting period before gun purchases.

But that isn't what the GOP wants and they are not willing to compromise, so what is your solution?

You clearly don’t want compromise either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So for those of you "both siding" the parties and suggesting some unicorn "middle" candidate...

Trump has told us he will use the instruments of state to go after his enemies.

He has told us he will ban abortions without exceptions.

He has told us he will withdraw from NATO.

He has told us he will cede Ukraine to Russia.

He has told us China and North Korea are not enemies.

He has told us the EPA will no longer exist.

What world do you envision this leaves for us and our grandchildren?

People aren't as dumb as you think they are and most people do not want to make the mistake of electing Trump or Biden on 2024. No excuses, nothing else to be said

People that think it won't be trump or Biden are the dumb ones. One will win.

[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.

We had a middle with RvW and now we’re told that returning to RvW is MAGA. This is why people are hoping a new party eventually emerges.

No one is told that returning to roe is maga. A pro choice candidate will win the presidency. Period. Deal with it.

[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.

We had a middle with RvW and now we’re told that returning to RvW is MAGA. This is why people are hoping a new party eventually emerges.

No one is told that returning to roe is maga. A pro choice candidate will win the presidency. Period. Deal with it.

+1 When you Republicans have to tell lies to make points, you don’t have a point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The No Labels organization keeps crying that Democrats who oppose them, "Why are you against democracy?" Yet the leaders will choose their presidential ticket in the equivalent of the old smoke-filled room. The Democratic and Republican primaries and caucuses elect delegates who choose their parties' nominees. (When there's an incumbent president, the party rarely has a contest, as in 1996, 2004, 2012, 2020 and now, but there have been such contests in 1968, 1980 and 1992.)

Now they've gone to court to stop their own 15,000 Arizona No Labels Party voters from electing candidates for state and federal offices in a primary despite the law in Arizona. Why? That would force them to follow Arizona election laws and disclose their top-secret donors!

https://apnews.com/article/no-labels-arizona-lawsuit-third-party-2024-d2761fdeb3f7ef5ef923c433c686d2d7

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.azd.1349354/gov.uscourts.azd.1349354.1.0.pdf

https://ballot-access.org/2023/10/19/no-labels-party-sues-arizona-secretary-of-state-to-block-the-state-from-holding-a-primary-for-no-labels/#comments

If you actually read the first article, it is apparent that the lawsuit is to stop a political dirty trick, an attempt by a partisan to work around state law to get the names of the No Labels donor list. Such a list would of course be useful for Democrats to directly pressure independents and moderates not to support anyone other than the annointed Joe Biden.

How Democratic was the nomination process of Joe Biden in 2020? Some might argue that the Democratic Party establishment stepped in to save the Biden candidacy in South Carolina after he had been rejected by voters in Iowa and New Hampshire. And now, according to you, voters should not get a choice in 2024 either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I prefer no abortion ban, but I'd be okay with maybe a 15 week restriction with generous exceptions for health of the fetus/pregnant woman.

I am okay with stringent background checks and a waiting period before gun purchases.

But that isn't what the GOP wants and they are not willing to compromise, so what is your solution?

You clearly don’t want compromise either.

Roe was the compromise. The right took that away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The No Labels organization keeps crying that Democrats who oppose them, "Why are you against democracy?" Yet the leaders will choose their presidential ticket in the equivalent of the old smoke-filled room. The Democratic and Republican primaries and caucuses elect delegates who choose their parties' nominees. (When there's an incumbent president, the party rarely has a contest, as in 1996, 2004, 2012, 2020 and now, but there have been such contests in 1968, 1980 and 1992.)

Now they've gone to court to stop their own 15,000 Arizona No Labels Party voters from electing candidates for state and federal offices in a primary despite the law in Arizona. Why? That would force them to follow Arizona election laws and disclose their top-secret donors!

https://apnews.com/article/no-labels-arizona-lawsuit-third-party-2024-d2761fdeb3f7ef5ef923c433c686d2d7

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.azd.1349354/gov.uscourts.azd.1349354.1.0.pdf

https://ballot-access.org/2023/10/19/no-labels-party-sues-arizona-secretary-of-state-to-block-the-state-from-holding-a-primary-for-no-labels/#comments

If you actually read the first article, it is apparent that the lawsuit is to stop a political dirty trick, an attempt by a partisan to work around state law to get the names of the No Labels donor list. Such a list would of course be useful for Democrats to directly pressure independents and moderates not to support anyone other than the annointed Joe Biden.

How Democratic was the nomination process of Joe Biden in 2020? Some might argue that the Democratic Party establishment stepped in to save the Biden candidacy in South Carolina after he had been rejected by voters in Iowa and New Hampshire. And now, according to you, voters should not get a choice in 2024 either.

You mean a different group of voters in a different state made a different decision? How is that the “establishment” stepping in? Do you just hate Black women or what?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Haha! Political ads directed towards some entity with no candidate in the race. The lengths the RNC and DNC will go to in order to stay in power show no bounds. They will never get another dime of my money to spend in this manner.

[Anonymous]

Neither the DNC nor RNC paid for those ads. The Liberty Project is its own entity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neither the DNC nor RNC paid for those ads. The Liberty Project is its own entity.

Interesting. Another angle on this

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/10/joe-bidens-2024-no-labels

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neither the DNC nor RNC paid for those ads. The Liberty Project is its own entity.

I have never heard of the Lincoln Democracy Institute but its main purpose seems to be to work against democracy by denying voters another choice on the ballot. This "ad" was targeted against a clearly bi-partisan event involving speakers with a diverse range of views:

The ad is running “heavily” Monday on WMUR, a Manchester station that broadcasts ABC programming to most of New Hampshire.

It’s also being geofenced to Saint Anselm College, where No Labels is hosting a town hall event featuring Democratic U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin III and former U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman, and the popular Puritan Backroom restaurant where the group will hold a pre-event launch lunch.

Mobile billboard trucks will circle both venues while playing the ad.

The town hall, the first of a series under the title “Common Sense,” will also include former Democratic-turned-independent former U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, the group’s Co-Chair, as well as former North Carolina Republican Gov. Pat McCrory, former U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair, former Democratic U.S. Rep. Joe Cunningham, former Republican U.S. Rep. Fred Upton and civil rights leader Ben Chavis.

https://floridapolitics.com/archives/623652-lincoln-democracy-institute-ad-warns-no-labels-3rd-party-ticket-will-help-donald-trump-win/

[Anonymous]

No Labels doesn't need to exist to split the anti Trump vote. RFK Jr is polling over 20%.