The Democratic Party’s Undemocratic Opposition to No Labels
The Democratic Party’s Undemocratic Opposition to No Labels
Margaret White
By opposing No Labels ’ effort to secure nationwide ballot access for the 2024 presidential election, the Democratic Party is failing to live up to the central premise of the word “democratic” in its name. It is suppressing democracy.
The Democratic Party is doing this in two ways. The first is by attempting to literally keep No Labels off the ballot. We saw this when the Arizona Democratic Party took No Labels to court to try to invalidate the ballot access that had been granted by Arizona’s Democratic secretary of state. Fortunately, a judge rejected its claim on Aug. 9 and No Labels will be on the ballot in Arizona in 2024.
The party's second method is more insidious. It has created a political culture in which anyone who refuses to back President Joe Biden is automatically accused of supporting the presumptive Republican nominee, former President Donald Trump — and, by extension, the rise of a “dictator.”
No Labels agrees our democracy is broken, but we don’t accept the premise that the only way to fix it is to pledge blind fealty to one party.
One can reasonably disagree with this strategy. One cannot, without engaging in the most profoundly dishonest intellectual contortions, characterize a movement based on such a strategy as “radical,” “insincere” or “undemocratic.” Doing so is disrespectful to America’s vast commonsense majority, which craves problem-solving and is profoundly dissatisfied with both Biden and Trump.
It is also flat-out undemocratic. There is no way of spinning this that doesn't make it undemocratic, by the literal definition of the word. If denying a political movement access to the ballot after it has met the legal requirements for appearing there is not undemocratic, then the word has no practical meaning.
Yet we are told that we must ignore this hypocrisy at the core of the anti-No Labels campaign because the threat to democracy Trump poses is too great to be ignored. This reminds me of a famous dialogue scene from the play “ A Man for All Seasons .” In it, in a fictional conversation between British leader Sir Thomas More and a young lawyer, one character defends allowing the devil to benefit from protection under the law.
to read more .....
The Democratic Party’s Undemocratic Opposition to No Labels (msn.com)
They are petrified of one man.
I am sick and tired of people using any tool (legal or illegal) to defeat this one man.
I do not think that Trump should be president again, nor do I desire four more years of Biden but that is not the point. No one should be against an additional choice for the people to consider - that is the point of democracy, letting the people decide.
Until we collectively pull our heads out of our asses, we will be faced with the choice of a dementia suffering fool who never had enough brain power to light an LED, and a narcissistic jackass with so many character flaws it's hard to keep track.
The truly said part is the partisan idiots are so stupid and entrenched en party dogma will tell you a vote for a third-party candidate is a vote for the other guy and not MY guy.
I largely agree with the points you made and I think more people would agree if those points were presented with less vitriol and personal attacks, just my opinion
You want something moderate, kind of a throwback to when the country was more united and civil. I have a relative who feels the same way. He was the first person to tell me about "the no labels party."
So, Robert, where is your candidate?
[Deleted]
Telling that a moderate scares them so much.
I think democracy itself frightens them.
And I would offer that there are those on the right that have balked at and opposed democratic process in recent years
As well as those on the left. Case in point, the Democrat Party of Florida is not even going to have a primary but award all it's votes to Biden. Not a very democratic process if it's not left to the people to decide.
According to Wikipedia, several states canceled their Republican primaries and caucuses in 2020. The states that did not hold GOP presidential primaries in 2020 are:
That doesn't disprove my post, it only supports Roberts post. As we well know (at least we should), the party in the Oval Office when the incumbent is running for re-election does all sorts of things to support it's incumbent.
Roberts post only pointed out where Republicans were opposed to the democratic process, and I countered where the Democrats are just the same.
The bigger problem IMO is the two-party system that we are currently stuck with. There's too much power and money tied up in the current system and we have the fox guarding the chicken house with the setup. I don't know what it's going to take to change the system but it has to be done by the people as the politicians will not willingly give up that power and money.
Old news, how does it relate to the question athand?
I would go a step farther and say that the problem isn't only the two party system, but rather the bigger problem is the two current parties and the zealots of both right and left
I completely agree.
If there is a democratic process, the no labels party should be able to put a candidate on the ballot. They did the leg work throughout the states.
The Iowa Caucuses are 2 weeks away. Where is the candidate?
There is absolutely no reason to believe that a No Labels candidate could win the election. Under that for sure circumstance, what is the goal of No Labels? To advance a message? That can be done without a presidential candidate. To be a spoiler ?
Ross Perot got 19% of the popular vote in 1992 , and with that relatively high 3rd party total he won exactly zero electoral votes.
A No Labels candidate would almost certainly hurt Biden, for one reason. Most Trump voters will not consider ANYBODY else because a lot of them are in the cult.
Must be why Biden fans are working to limit choices so hard. they know Biden isn't a sane alternative to anything.
You may be right that Biden would lose votes to a No Labels candidate, but so would Trump. I think there are Republicans that do not want Trump in the White House but would never vote for Biden, but very well might vote for a center right moderate. But regardless of those points, the American people should not be denied the right to at least consider a No Labels candidate when they go to the polls.
Thanks a very good perspective on the why or why not of the issue
A valid point. In a true democracy the No Labels Party should have no problem getting a candidate on the ballot.
Modern elections are won & lost by the narrowest of margins. Moving a percentage point up or down can make the difference. So both the Dems and Reps will keep working out ways to give them an edge. Be that keeping people off the ballot, gerrymandered maps, or brow beating people into submission.
No matter what they do it's on the individual voter to make up their own mind. I'm fully behind the idea of No Labels and will all come down to who they run. A No Labels mayoral candidate won last fall in a city next to where I live.
What states could No Labels win? I dont think there is a single state where someone could predict a No Labels win.
Totally agree, but the choice should be on the ballot
Not everyone is on board with choice.
Who it is or their politics is not relative to the point that the No Labels candidate should be a possible choice for voters.
I agree, and take exception to those wanting to limit choices.
Perhaps JR isn’t pro-choice at all.
That's the beauty of it, they don't have to prove they can win a state.
Going by your logic, maybe a Democratic candidate shouldn't be on the presidential ballot in Florida and Republicans should be left out in California.
Excellent point
A candidate that has no possibility of winning but can effect the result doesnt belong. We have a two party system. Like it or not we have a two party system. 2024 is not the time to try and change that.
I don't think they should be on any ballots, the job is the President of the United States. there shouldn't be any party affiliation on the ballots.
Plus the pure comedic factor of watching people not know who to vote for because they don't have a D or R after their name would be priceless.
Is the "two party" clearly delineated in the Constitution? Are third party candidates precluded or even discussed?
The history of the country shows we have a two party system. Out of all the presidential elections there have only been a couple where the third party did relatively well.
Please link to some law.
Perhaps it’s time for a change. If Trump and a Biden rematch are the best we can do, it’s past time for a change.
You continue to miss the point. It matters not at all whether they will or will not do well, a third party has the right to be on the ballot. And more importantly citizens have the right to as many options on the ballot as possible to make their choice.
I completely agree.
Sorry, it does matter. In some other year, with two sane candidates, it might not matter. This year it does.
Exactly, like 1860, 1932, 1980, and 2000.
any other rights you'd like to see taken from law abiding citizens?
Because "democracy" is at stake...or is it authoritarian rule?
To some, Democracy means permitting citizens the right to vote only for the candidates they believe should be allowed on the ballot. Sort of like Democracy in Iraq under Hussein.
I agree that neither Trump nor Biden should be president, but that is an even stronger reason to let the people have other options.
In 1860 the candidates were Lincoln, Breckenridge, bell and Douglas
Trump is insane and tried to overthrow our government, Biden is not and did not.
[deleted]
If trump wins the meltdowns will be epic, and in 4 years our republic will still be here despite the claims of all the chicken littles.
The sheer amount of chicken littling going on is staggering.
Trump did not try to overthrow the govt.
Period.
Heres a dot . Write everything you know about January 6th on it.
Nah, then I would have to waste a day and a half to get it understood.
What wrongdoing by Trump do you acknowledge?
For example, do you recognize that Trump attempted to steal the 2020 election through fraud, coercion, lying, incitement?
Do you recognize that Trump attempted to circumvent the CotUS and attempted to disenfranchise the electorate — violating the foundation of democracy?
I said what I said.
Does it ever pay to be reasonable?
Or as Recep Tayyip Erdoğan once put it: democracy is the bus you use to get to dictatorship.
Flip that over to Brandon and right back at you.
Care to answer the questions? Or are you going to deflect back to Trump and pretend Democrats aren't just as bad?
Did you bother to say the same about Democrats when they tried to coerce the electoral college to change their votes from Trump over to Clinton; or another Republican in 2016?
Frankly I don't care who the Republican nominee is for POTUS I will be voting for them over Brandon.
I would love a real third party; and before 2017 would have gladly supported any moderate third party. Now however, it is more important to remove Democrats from power. Republicans are bad, but Democrats are worse.
This is a quote from the Politico article you linked
The plot in 2016 was almost non existent and not endorsed by the candidate, as shown in this quote.
Contrast that to 2020 where Trump, on election night, said the election was being stolen from him and all vote counting should stop. And that was only the beginning of a two month crusade on his part, that spanned the entire country, involved many dozens of people , fake electors, bitter rants, wild conspiracy theories, massive disinformation, and unhinged behavior by the beaten candidate. Oh, and then a violent attack on Congress on the day the votes were being counted.
Comparing all this to the trickle of opposition in 2016 is utterly dishonest or utterly naive.
This is from the USA Today article you linked
Nothing in here about subverting the Jan 6 certification process in Congress. This petition asked electors to switch when they voted within their individual states. BEFORE those states certify their electoral votes.
There is no plot described here, it is all out in the open, and of course it never got off the ground. Contrast that to Trump telling his mob on Jan 6th to go to the Capitol and fight like hell. We are talking comparing peanuts to watermelons.
The Denver Post article you linked is trivia in the context of what went on in 2020 by Trump.
Deflection (as expected).
Deflection (as expected).
Where is your psychiatric degree from?
I am sure there is some long drawn out erroneous conclusion, but I just don't have the energy for it.
you should read closer.
a claim was made, I disputed it.
nothing at all deflective about it.
There isn't one good reason for Democrats to fight so hard to keep folks off a ballot.
Are they afraid people are expressing themselves accurately in the polls, and now know Biden has an uphill battle?
Do you think they would be so afraid if their candidate wasn’t so weak? their guy is so bad he is losing to trump in the polls.
Right there is one of the best reasons for them to be perpetually pissed off.
“There isn't one good reason for Democrats to fight so hard to keep folks off a ballot.”
Sure there is. What better way to save democracy than to limit choices to only liberal approved choices? /s/ those lunatics will do anything and everything to stay in power.
It's just so damn tiring to hear how every election is a threat to democracy while Democrats actively attempt to thwart democracy.
Bunch of whining hypocrites.
The point I offered for discussion is far in the rear view mirror and this become I love/hate Trump vs I love/hate Biden which has nothing whatsoever to do with the need for a third party candidate (in this case No Labels) to be on all ballots in November 2024
I thank everyone who participated in my first discussion here on NT in a very long time