It\u2019s the week after \u201cSuper Tuesday\u201d; supposed to be the \u201cpivotal moment\u201d of the 2024 Primary campaigns. But there were no surprises on \u201cSuper Tuesday\u201d, in fact, it really wasn\u2019t quite so \u201csuper\u201d at all. The results, with maybe an exception in Vermont, were entirely predictable. In fact, the Democrats made up their mind a long time before \u201cSuper-Day\u201d, so it\u2019s no surprise that Joe Biden is the Democratic candidate. And so did the MAGA-Republican Party (not your father\u2019s Republicans, or mine). They are committed to following a whole dark ideology, represented best by the Republican retort to the State of the Union address last Thursday night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Thirty-eight year old Alabama Senator Katie Britt delivered the speech, ostensibly from her kitchen table (though my kitchen didn\u2019t look that good the day after they built it in 2013). She projected \u201cAmerica\u201d as a dark world, where families huddle around the table, holding hands in prayer, unable to pay their bills and waiting for undocumented migrants (not \u201cillegals\u201d for God\u2019s sake) to break down the doors and do unspeakable things. Well, not unspeakable, Senator Britt was certainly willing to describe in detail the human trafficking and raping of a migrant woman. Too bad that was all in Mexico, not in the United States, and during the Bush Administration. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
And while Britt didn\u2019t straight-out say it, she certainly made the point:\u00a0\u00a0only Donald Trump can fix this problem.\u00a0As Saturday Night Live<\/em> put it: Britt’s America is Hell. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u00a0So here we are, like a seventh \u201cRocky\u201d movie:\u00a0\u00a0Biden versus Trump, the sequel.\u00a0It\u2019s certainly not a \u201cdream race\u201d of American politics, not a Kennedy versus Nixon, or even an Obama versus McCain.\u00a0\u00a0Call it what it is:\u00a0\u00a0two old men, running again.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n After Super Tuesday’s results, the leadership of the \u201cNo Labels Party\u201d met to decide whether to place a third party Presidential ticket on the ballot in November.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0After more than a year of claiming that they were open to stepping back, it shouldn\u2019t be a surprise that the answer is, \u201cwe\u2019re running\u201d.\u00a0\u00a0Millions of dollars, and a running fight, mostly with Democrats, already set that answer into stone.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Here’s the \u201ccalculus\u201d for November. The MAGA-Republican Party, as Nikki Haley was quick to discover, is singularly the property of Donald Trump. Sure, Haley won a decent percentage of vote in some states, but those were usually states with \u201copen\u201d primaries, where independents and Democrats could \u201ccross-over\u201d to vote against Trump. But when it came down to just MAGA-Republicans, it was \u201call Trump, all of the time\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n If they didn\u2019t go for Haley (or any of the other candidates), those MAGA-loyalists aren\u2019t going to vote for a \u201cNo Labels\u201d candidate. So don\u2019t expect a third party to make in-roads into the Trump vote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s why Democrats are concerned about \u201cNo Labels\u201d. Regardless of all the propaganda about Biden being in the thrall of left-wing Progressives, the President is actually a moderate committed to legislative compromise. Need proof: look at the bipartisan border bill that was poised to pass the Senate and even the House. Biden committed to signing it. It took the direct intervention of Trump to force Republican legislators to turn against the bill that their own conservative member, Senator Langford of Oklahoma, authored.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Democrats are factional: that\u2019s always been the nature of the modern party. True progressives aren\u2019t comfortable with Biden, a \u201ccompromiser\u201d (that\u2019s a bad word, I guess, right after being a politician). But here\u2019s the point \u2013 those progressives aren\u2019t going to vote for a corporate No Labels candidate. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So where will No Labels get their votes? About thirty percent of Americans are \u201cindependent\u201d, not aligned with either party. Typically that\u2019s where Presidential elections are won, or lost. If 30% of the vote is monolithically MAGA-Republican, and 40% is Democratic; No Labels sees \u201cfertile ground\u201d in the remaining voters. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u00a0A percentage of those voters are ex-Republican \u201cNever Trumpers\u201d, like Ohio\u2019s former Governor John Kasich or Utah\u2019s Senator Mitt Romney.\u00a0\u00a0They won\u2019t vote for Trump, but they can\u2019t stomach Joe Biden either.\u00a0\u00a0They are likely No Labels voters, and probably didn\u2019t vote for Joe Biden in 2020 either.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n And a percentage are far-left progressives.\u00a0\u00a0They might vote for a Bernie Sanders’ Democrat, but are likely to choose a Jill Stein-type Green Party selection.\u00a0\u00a0They certainly aren\u2019t going to vote for an even more moderate No Labels candidate, though some may choose Biden in order to stop Trump.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So that leaves a \u201ctarget\u201d group of about 15% –\u00a0<\/strong>far from the number needed to win. So what is the No Labels party goal?\u00a0\u00a0If they can\u2019t win, and if they can\u2019t even make a dent, why are they running?\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Before we answer that question, there\u2019s an even more important one. Who is the No Labels candidate? Here, eight months before the election, we know who isn\u2019t a No Labels candidate: Joe Manchin (retiring), Larry Hogan (running for Senate), Chris Sununu (endorsed Trump), Chris Christie (committed to stopping Trump); all turned it down. In fact, this week No Labels publicized that former Republican Georgia Lieutenant Governor Geoff Duncan is seriously considering accepting the nomination. Geoff Duncan for President: that\u2019s going to drive folks to the polls, right? (As a former campaign operative, he\u2019s already got one problem \u2013 folks are going to look at \u201cGeoff\u201d and think that\u2019s a silly way to say \u201cJeff\u201d). <\/p>\n\n\n\n Is No Labels going to impact the 2024 campaign? Are they going to pull votes away from Biden, the \u201cdark conspiracy theory\u201d reason that will get Trump elected? Are millions of votes going to run out and vote for Geoff so that don\u2019t have to vote for Donald or Joe? <\/p>\n\n\n\n To run for President, like running in the Kentucky Derby, you\u2019ve got to have a race horse. Manchin, Hogan, Christie, even Haley would at least by a thoroughbred coming out of the gate. But all of them see No Labels as a losing effort, not just for the Presidency, but for the nation. And, whether you like the spelling of Geoff or not, former Lieutenant Governor Duncan \u201cain\u2019t no thoroughbred\u201d. In fact, he\u2019s not ever been on a real track. <\/p>\n\n\n\n No Labels can\u2019t find a horse to run in the race, in spite of all the \u201cdark\u201d money flowing into their coffers. And, just like the Derby, no horse means no odds, and no race. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Sorry Geoff, and No Labels.\u00a0\u00a0You won\u2019t even be a sideshow in 2024:\u00a0\u00a0the year America determines the future of Democracy.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"No Labels<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Compromiser<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Never Trumpers<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Who\u2019s the Horse<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Thoroughbreds<\/h3>\n\n\n\n