Democrats Go to War Against Third Party Candidates
“The Democratic National Committee is building its first-ever team to counter third-party and independent presidential candidates, people involved told NBC News, as the party and its allies prepare for a potential all-out war on candidates they view as spoilers,” NBC News reports.
“The DNC has hired veteran Democratic operative Lis Smith, best known for her work guiding the 2020 presidential campaign of Pete Buttigieg, to help oversee an aggressive communications component of the anti-third party strategy, which also includes opposition research and legal challenges.”
The Dangerous Confusion of No Labels
John Hendrickson: “I’ve spent the past several weeks talking with No Labels’ leaders, staffers, consultants, and opponents, trying to understand the organization’s endgame. I came away confused, and convinced that the people behind No Labels are confused, too.”
“They’ve correctly diagnosed serious problems in the American political system, but their proposed solution could help lead to its undoing.”
No Labels Has Suddenly Entered Full Meltdown Mode
Greg Sargent: “No Labels faces a problem that runs deeper than the lack of high-profile candidates willing to take the third-party plunge: The group’s core argument has proven impossible to sustain, and everyone paying even cursory attention to its activities knows it.”
“For months, as No Labels has sought to secure a line on ballots in as many states as possible—the group claims 16 as of now—its officials have sworn vehemently that they have no intention of mounting a candidacy that only functions as a spoiler or helps Trump. Joe Lieberman, the group’s founding chairman, often says as much. The true intention, it says, is to answer the public’s alleged call for an alternative to the two parties with a ‘unity ticket’ that will birth a new coalition of public-spirited voters who value bipartisan compromise over petty partisanship and dysfunction.”
“But no matter how hard No Labels strains to project such pious intentions, the all-but-certain impact of such a plan has proven impossible to disguise. It is borderline impossible for such a bid to win outright in enough states to assemble a majority of 270 Electoral College votes—Ross Perot and Ralph Nader won none; the last third-party candidate to win any electoral votes was George Wallace, 56 years ago.”
Court Battle Shows Effort to Undermine No Labels
“Political operatives opposed to No Labels’ potential 2024 presidential ticket took over the NoLabels.com domain last year and purchased Google search ads aimed at spreading the misleading claim that the group supported former president Donald Trump and other right-wing causes,” the Washington Post reports.
“Arizona political operative Charles Siler, who led the effort, described in a recorded deposition how he created a website that echoed the design, color scheme and language of No Labels’ actual website, NoLabels.org. But the mirror website was filled with pictures of politicians not embraced by No Labels, including Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA).”
Spoiler Candidates Do Not Protect ‘Democracy’
Jonathan Chait: “At the risk of insulting the reader’s intelligence, apparently, it is necessary to point out that the choice construction of a presidential election is nothing like a restaurant menu. When you order from a restaurant, every diner gets to eat whichever dish they want. For that reason, it’s in the restaurant’s interest to provide them with as many options as the restaurant can competently supply. When I go to a restaurant, I want the menu to offer me something that caters to my individual tastes.”
“To continue with the restaurant analogy, a presidential election is like a restaurant where, even though we have different choices on the menu, every diner gets the dish that gets ordered the most. That changes the incentive completely. In that kind of restaurant, I would neither expect nor even want a menu with lots of choices. I would want a menu designed to give me the choice closest to my preference.”
Support for Third U.S. Political Party Up to 63%
Gallup: “Sixty-three percent of U.S. adults currently agree with the statement that the Republican and Democratic parties do ‘such a poor job’ of representing the American people that ‘a third major party is needed.'”
“This represents a seven-percentage-point increase from a year ago and is the highest since Gallup first asked the question in 2003.”
The Mythology of Third Party Bids
Nate Silver: “Having looked at data on dozens of third-party candidates in other races — mostly for offices like Congress and governor when building election models — I’m skeptical that they serve as spoilers as often as their critics claim. Third-party support tends to collapse down the stretch if the candidates aren’t seen as viable…”
“Third-party candidates typically also get less support in swing states, where voters know a protest vote could be more costly.”
No Labels on the Ballot in 10 States
“A national political movement that could offer an independent presidential ticket in 2024 as an alternative to major-party nominees said Monday it has now won ballot access in 10 states, after North Carolina election officials formally granted official status to a ‘No Labels’ affiliate,” the AP reports.
“The other states are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Nevada, Oregon, South Dakota and Utah.”
No Labels on the Ballot in Arizona
The Arizona Superior Court ruled that No Labels Party is a qualified party in Arizona, Ballot Access News reports.
Extra Bonus Quote of the Day
“If you go through with this profoundly misguided vanity project you will go down as one of history’s most venal rubes, but hey man you do you.”
— Sen. John Fetterman’s (D-Pa.) chief of staff Adam Jentleson, quoted by Politico, to No Labels national director Joe Cunningham.
Voters Split on Idea of Third Party
A new Quinnipiac poll finds voters are evenly split about voting for a third-party candidate, with 47% saying they would consider voting for a third-party candidate in the 2024 presidential election and 47% say they would not.
No Labels Skirts Disclosure Laws
Mother Jones: “No Labels, the self-professed centrist group that is preparing to possibly run its own presidential candidate in 2024, says it is not a political party. That means it does not have to reveal the donors that have pumped tens of millions of dollars in recent years into its coffers. Parties must disclose their funders; nonprofit outfits, as No Labels claims to be, do not.”
“But in several states, No Labels has established an affiliate that explicitly declares it is a political party, and some of these groups, particularly the party it set up in Florida, have deep Republican roots.”
No Labels Is Chasing a Fantasy
Geoffrey Skelley: “It’s too early to evaluate whether No Labels’s candidate could be a spoiler for the Democratic nominee, but the group’s belief that it could mount a victorious campaign rests on several misconceptions about contemporary politics. First and foremost, the share of the electorate made up by independent moderates isn’t large enough to win a presidential election. Secondly, despite distaste for Biden and Trump, each remains well-liked by his party, reducing the potential draw of a No Labels candidate. Meanwhile, the group’s aim of markedly increasing turnout over 2020’s record-high mark will require the difficult task of getting even more low-propensity voters to turn out.”
“Lastly, finding a candidate who could maximize No Labels’s appeal won’t be easy because there’s nobody named ‘moderate independent’ who embodies the varied preferences held by voters disenchanted by the idea of another Biden-Trump matchup.”
Politico: Dems’ mission to stop a third-party presidential bid hits the Hill.
We Need a Third Party but Not a Third Candidate
Lee Drutman and Beau Tremitiere: “A centrist party embracing fusion voting could have extraordinary leverage in the 2024 election. All signs point to another close race, where modest numbers of swing voters in a few purple states could again prove decisive. In exchange for their nomination, the centrist party could secure a commitment from the better candidate to support its key policy objectives, appoint moderate or cross-ideological officials in senior roles, or otherwise prioritize what matters to its supporters.”
“Is this possible? Absolutely. This strategy is viable now in several states that allow some form of fusion voting in presidential elections. And efforts are underway to re-legalize fusion voting in New Jersey and other states. If No Labels were to invest even a fraction of its $70 million war chest in this direction, they could actually advance their goals of reducing extremism and making our politics more representative. On their current course, No Labels will instead spend a fortune with little to show for it—except putting American democracy in even greater peril.”
More Democrats Than Republicans Open to Third Party
A new NBC News poll finds 44% of registered voters say they are willing to consider supporting a third-party or independent presidential candidate if President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump are the two major party nominees in 2024 — and the group includes more Democrats than Republicans.
However, a majority of all registered voters, 53%, say they wouldn’t consider voting for another candidate in a matchup between Biden and Trump next year.
No Labels Won’t Reveal Its Donors
Politico: “No Labels’ bid to run a third party presidential candidate in 2024 has sparked a number of questions about political motivations. Chief among them: Who, exactly, is paying for this thing?”
“The centrist group consists of a constellation of entities, some of which disclose donor names. But the main one is a nonprofit which, unlike political parties, does not have to reveal the names of its funders. And in an interview with Politico, its CEO, Nancy Jacobson, declined to do so, saying simply that it was a ‘mixed’ pool of individual contributors including “people that want to help our country.”
No Labels Ramps Up Push for ‘Unity Ticket’
“The bipartisan political group No Labels is stepping up a well-funded effort to field a ‘unity ticket’ for the 2024 presidential race, prompting fierce resistance from even some of its closest allies who fear handing the White House back to Donald Trump,” the New York Times reports.
“At the top of the list of potential candidates is Senator Joe Manchin III, the conservative West Virginia Democrat who has been a headache to his party and could bleed support from President Biden in areas crucial to his re-election.”
“The centrist group’s leadership was in New York this week raising part of the money — around $70 million — that it says it needs to help with nationwide ballot access efforts.”
- 1
- 2
- 3
- …
- 5
- Next Page »