Anti-Trump Democrats and Republicans aim to dismantle emerging No Labels party
A Bipartisan Battle: No Labels Party Faces Opposition in 2024
A group of Democratic and Republican operatives, determined to prevent a second Trump administration, has set its sights on the No Labels party. This adds another layer of chaos to the already tumultuous 2024 political landscape.
No Labels has left the door open to nominating a centrist candidate in 2024, especially if former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden emerge as the major party nominees, which seems increasingly likely. The bipartisan group of opponents has vowed to use their extensive networks and connections to make any candidate running under the No Labels banner unappealing to voters.
Undermining No Labels
During a confidential call led by Democratic organizations Third Way and MoveOn, plans to undermine No Labels were discussed. The call, which lasted over an hour, involved various organizations such as End Citizens United, the Lincoln Project, American Bridge, Public Citizen, and Reproductive Freedom for All. Notable attendees included strategist Sarah Longwell, Bill Kristol, former Alabama Sen. Doug Jones, and a representative for Democratic billionaire Reid Hoffman, Dmitri Mehlhorn.
The groups outlined several strategies to attack No Labels, including legal action to force the disclosure of donors, conducting opposition research on potential candidates, and warning donors about the consequences of supporting the party’s efforts.
Targeting Potential Candidates
The groups expressed concerns about several potential No Labels candidates, including Govs. Chris Sununu (R-NH) and Doug Burgum (R-ND), former Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan and Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, and former Reps. Liz Cheney and Will Hurd. Representatives for these individuals did not provide comments.
Regarding Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), Third Way co-founder Matt Bennett claimed that credible sources indicated he would not be running for president. However, a source close to Manchin dismissed this claim.
Intimidating Donors and Collecting Damaging Information
One tactic employed by the groups is to send notices to donors, warning them about the risks of involvement with No Labels. The aim is to tarnish the party’s reputation and legacy. Additionally, the groups are actively collecting damaging information about individuals who may become associated with a No Labels bid.
End Citizens United plans to attack the party through the courts, seeking to force the disclosure of its donors. Public Citizen accused No Labels of misrepresenting itself as a political party while enjoying the tax benefits of a (c)(4) organization.
No Labels chief strategist Ryan Clancy responded to the leaked phone call, stating, “This group that claims to be protecting democracy is actively undermining it. They just admitted they intend to intimidate candidates into not running for office and to threaten supporters of No Labels.”
The battle between these operatives and the No Labels party highlights the intense political maneuvering and power struggles leading up to the 2024 election.
What is the main strategy discussed by opponents of No Labels during the call, and how do they plan to tarnish the party’s reputation?
D Hoffman, who has expressed his willingness to fund effort ¡s opposing No Labels.
The main strategy discussed during the call was to tarnish No Labels’ reputation by highlighting their affiliation with certain divisive policies and politicians. The participants in the call emphasized the need to expose the party as a mere front for those who seek to maintain the status quo and prevent meaningful change.
One of the key points of contention was No Labels’ willingness to consider a centrist candidate, even if it means aligning with politicians like Donald Trump or Joe Biden. Many of the opponents argued that this compromises the party’s supposed commitment to bipartisanship and centrism. They assert that by endorsing candidates from the major parties, No Labels is effectively endorsing their policies and actions, regardless of how divisive or damaging they may be.
Furthermore, the opponents argued that No Labels’ lack of a clear policy agenda and reliance on vague slogans only further highlight their ineffectiveness as a political force. They claim that without a definitive platform and concrete policy proposals, No Labels is simply a vessel for politicians to capitalize on anti-establishment sentiment without having to take a stance on controversial issues.
The call participants also expressed concerns about No Labels’ potential to draw votes away from viable independent candidates who truly represent a centrist agenda. They argued that by presenting themselves as a centrist alternative, No Labels runs the risk of splitting the centrist vote and ultimately benefiting the major party candidates.
In response to these concerns, No Labels supporters argue that the party provides a much-needed alternative to the current polarized political landscape. They assert that by working across party lines, No Labels can bring about effective governance and break down the gridlock that has plagued Washington for years.
Supporters also argue that No Labels’ approach of endorsing candidates from the major parties is a pragmatic one, aimed at maximizing their chances of winning elections and enacting their centrist agenda. They contend that by refusing to become just another fringe party with limited influence, No Labels can truly make a difference in shaping American politics.
As the 2024 election draws nearer, the battle between No Labels and its opponents is likely to escalate. No Labels faces the challenge of proving its credibility and effectiveness as a political force, while its opponents fight to expose what they perceive as a facade of centrism.
Only time will tell who will emerge victorious in this bipartisan battle. In the meantime, the fluctuating dynamics of American politics continue to shape the future of the No Labels party and the broader political landscape.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...