The ‘No Labels’ group does, in fact, have a label.
We’re 18 months away from the next big election, which means it’s time again for partisan groups pretending to represent a “third option” for voters to crawl back out of the sewers.
The ‘No Labels’ group has been getting a lot of press lately as it works to get a “Unity Ticket” candidate for President on the ballot in key states – including Colorado. ‘No Labels’ is pretending to be representing voters who don’t like either President Biden or former President Donald Trump. Critics charge that it is merely the latest effort to siphon votes away from President Biden and Democrats in 2024.
It’s impossible to look at the evidence and come to any other conclusion aside from the charge that ‘No Labels’ is a right-wing front group. As POLITICO reported earlier this month, ‘No Labels’ says it would back off from running a ‘Unity Ticket’ if Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis becomes the Republican nominee for President. That’s…weird, to say the least.
As Erik Maulbetsch of the Colorado Times Recorder recently reported, even State Republican Party Chair Dave Williams believes that a ‘No Labels’ candidate in Colorado is an advantage for Republicans. “I think if it does occur, that’s what would happen: It would hurt them more than us,” said Williams in an appearance on the ‘Chuck & Julie Show.’
No Labels’ won’t say where its funding comes from, but others have figured it out. Mother Jones magazine recently published a detailed look at the backers of ‘No Labels, most of whom have collectively contributed millions of dollars to Republican election efforts over the last several years. Some of the ‘No Labels’ donors have also contributed to Democratic causes, but this list is largely made up of people who clearly support Republicans when push comes to shove – including former President Donald Trump. For example:
Notable within this group is Michael Smith, the billionaire founder of natural gas behemoth Freeport LNG. He has donated more than $5.5 million to the Senate Leadership Fund, a super-PAC tied to Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell. Smith also backed Virginia GOP governor Glenn Youngkin and a slew of Republican senators. He has donated—albeit smaller amounts—to several moderate Democrats, such as Montana’s Jon Tester and West Virginia’s Joe Manchin…
…A stalwart Republican donor on the list is Tom McInerney, a private-equity investor, who has regularly donated to the Republican National Committee and GOP-linked super-PACs. This year, he has contributed nearly $100,000 to the RNC and over $200,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee. He has sent six-figure contributions to fundraising committees organized by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy ($250,000 in 2021) and by former speaker Paul Ryan ($244,000 in 2017). He has been a financial backer of McCain, Mitt Romney, and Jeb Bush. He recently donated to Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), who is running for the GOP presidential nomination.
…one of the biggest cons in 2024 presidential jockeying is the innocuously named No Labels organization. It was founded in 2010 to counter political polarization but now has started raising a boatload of money — at least $70 million so far — to field a third-party presidential candidate if the “unacceptable” President Biden and Donald Trump are their parties’ nominees.
What’s the group really after, given the utterly dismal record of third-party candidates in U.S. presidential elections?
As an analysis by the moderate Democratic think tank Third Way has shown, No Labels doesn’t get close to the necessary 270 electoral votes in any remotely rational scenario. But the group has drawn up a fantasy map showing 40 states it supposedly could win. Members of the Democratic coalition are alarmed; three of their leaders wrote in a recent Post op-ed that No Labels is “obviously targeting blue states and Democratic voters” because on the map “two-thirds of its electoral votes would come from Biden states.”
‘No Labels’ uses Anedot for online fundraising, a company that processes money for some of the most prominent right-wing organizations and political candidates in the country. ‘No Labels’ also regularly pays out large sums of money to consulting firms operated by Republican operatives.
As Erik Maulbetsch writes for the Colorado Times Recorder, that includes prominent Colorado GOP consultant Josh Penry, despite his long track record of not winning things:
More evidence of the party’s rightward lean emerged last week when Mother Jones’ David Corn reported that a No Labels-funded dark money group, Insurance Policy for America, paid the Colorado GOP’s preferred field firm, Blitz Canvassing, $107,000 to gather the signatures required to secure ballot access. Blitz, owned by former GOP state senator turned longtime GOP operative Josh Penry, has handled field operations for nearly every major Republican candidate in Colorado for the past decade. The firm is also working to elect Ron Desantis; it’s currently hiring canvassers in Iowa and South Carolina on behalf of the pro-Desantis Never Back Down PAC.
But wait, there’s more (about why this is less than they claim)…
Dueling in The Denver Post
Former Sen. Mark Udall
On June 19, The Denver Post published an OpEd from former Senator Mark Udall warning that the “No Labels” group is designed to benefit the Republican candidate in a given race:
And here’s where the true intentions behind the No Labels plan come into focus. By targeting independent and swing voters, No Labels is going after the very voters who have increasingly backed Democratic candidates. Recent history shows the consequence of shifting these votes toward a third party would be significant.
In 2020, seven states were decided by three points or less; Joe Biden won six of them. Critically, Biden won voters who disliked both candidates by 15 points. Democrats–from President Biden to Jared Polis to Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper— know unaffiliated voters are key to how our coalition wins. Diverting even a small percentage of these votes could swing the election to Trump or another MAGA Republican.
No Labels is now poised to do just that. After gaining ballot access in Colorado, it also secured it in Arizona, a state that went for Biden by just over 10,000 votes. Now it’s trying to do the same in all of the most competitive 2024 states.
That’s why so many voices are warning that No Labels may be a spoiler, with many of their one-time allies in “open revolt.” Backed by $70 million from anonymous donors, the No Labels ticket could siphon off a few thousand votes in enough battleground states to upend the 2024 election.
As Udall adds later, this isn’t just a concern about the race for President; control of the U.S. Senate could even be at stake.
Four days later, the Post published an angry (and rather silly) response from Roger Hutson, a co-chair of “No Labels Colorado”:
Question: What is the largest political party in Colorado?
Most guess Republican or Democrat, but it’s actually “unaffiliated” by a mile. Unaffiliated voters number 1.7 million, compared to 957,000 Republicans and around 1 million Democrats. And Colorado isn’t unique in this regard. Nationally, there are as many independents as there are Republicans and Democrats combined, and the number is growing as more voters reject the extremism in both parties.
It should go without saying that this commonsense majority deserves to be represented in our politics, but it hasn’t been for decades — until now. A group called No Labels is fighting to give the majority a voice in 2024 by establishing a ballot line for a potential independent Unity Ticket, which would feature a Republican and Democrat together as running mates. This is a direct response to so many Americans voicing strong concerns about another term for either Trump or Biden.
There is no “Unaffiliated” sign
You don’t even need to read beyond the first couple of sentences to dismiss this argument entirely.
You cannot profess to be politically-savvy AND argue that “Unaffiliated” voters in Colorado are basically like an independent third party. These two things do not go together.
The word “unaffiliated” does not at all imply the word “independent.” Putting these words in the same sentence is like saying people who like the color blue are probably members of the street gang known as the ‘Crips.’ It is true that the Crips are big fans of the color blue; but arguing the reverse would make you look like a crazy person.
“Unaffiliated” voters are just regular voters who choose not to claim a political affiliation on their voter registration forms. That’s it. That’s all we know about them. They’re still playing the same game as registered Democrats or Republicans – they just choose not to wear a jersey.
The reason we know that “Unaffiliated” voters in Colorado tend to vote for Democratic candidates is because Democrats in Colorado have been winning by gigantic margins in recent elections; this would be mathematically-impossible otherwise. In fact, you can probably run the numbers from election data to calculate the likely number of “Unaffiliated” voters who mark a straight-ticket Democratic or Republican ballot.
The point here is that “Unaffiliated” voters are not necessarily more or less “independent” than any other voter. Hutson knows this (if he doesn’t, ‘No Labels’ really needs to associate with smarter people), but he’s conflating the words intentionally to spin himself a rationale.
Just a One-Time Thing, Except for Those Other Times
Interestingly enough, Hutson spins so much that he unwinds the truth a little later in the OpEd:
In his op-ed, Udall also argued that No Labels may use its ballot access to run Senate candidates, thus “drawing votes away from Democrats in tight races.” Where is he getting this? No Labels is only working on the presidential ballot line, and that effort is not a “third party,” as Udall claims, but a one-time ticket at a unique moment in our nation’s history. [Pols emphasis] Udall needs to stop the fear-mongering.
What? This is not a “one-time” thing. Udall would know, better than anybody. In the 2014 Senate race, ‘No Labels’ endorsed Republican Cory Gardner and did GOTV work on Gardner’s behalf.
Holly Page
This is all easily verifiable information. It was recently verified, in fact, by ‘No Labels’ founder Holly Page, who absolutely fell apart when Kyle Clark of 9News recently asked some follow-up questions to get beyond her two-minute talking point summary. Among other discussions, Page told Clark that ‘No Labels’ backed Gardner over Udall in 2014 because Gardner filled out the ‘No Labels’ questionnaire and Udall did not.
Set aside, for a moment, the absurdity of selecting a candidate for U.S. Senate based on whether or not they scribble answers on your piece of paper (not to mention that Udall had a policy of ignoring ALL lobbyist-type questionnaires for candidates).
What ‘No Labels’ did here is not unlike the practice that other highly-partisan organizations use. Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) has done this for years: If you don’t respond to their questionnaire, then you probably hate guns and they will endorse your opponent (who they were already supporting anyway).
If you’re still on the fence about ‘No Labels,’ you should really watch the entire 9News interview. If you only have time for one clip, watch Page try to deny the results FROM THEIR OWN POLLING RESULTS showing that a ‘Unity Party’ ticket hurts President Biden more than anyone else:
>> No Labels co-founder of course can’t really defend what the scam PAC is up to and gets thoroughly taken apart here: https://t.co/baZadNykUX
Page says that ‘No Labels’ might have a Presidential ticket in 2024 depending on some unspoken qualifiers. As the interview progresses, however, it becomes clear that the group is clearly preparing to do just that; she even invites Clark to a nominating “convention” in April 2024.
As Page gets increasingly flustered by Clark’s questions, her answers get more ridiculous. Near the end of the interview, Clark asks Page about ‘No Labels’ endorsing Donald Trump in 2016 with its “problem solver” badge of bullshit. Page says that anybody who came to their event received the “problem solver” badge. This is as ridiculous as telling every child at a birthday party that they are now a unicorn because they followed the words on the invitation.
Page then summed up the vapid stupidity of her own argument with this summary of President Trump:
“He solved some problems, and he didn’t solve others, just like every other politician in Washington DC.”
But he came to our event!
We’ll wrap things up with Jennifer Rubin’s conclusion in The Washington Post:
We are left to ponder: Would No Labels be doing anything differently if it were a front group for Republicans out to sink Biden?
Just like the Greens in 2000, which threw the election to W., this version seeks to help Republicans. And just like the Greens of the 1990s to, well, now are basically tools of Russia, the "No Labels" crowd is also, effectively, a tool of Russia. Why? Because it wants to help the Russian agent Trump regain the White House.
June 27, 2023 02:24 PM UTC
2 Comments
'No Labels' is just a front group for the non-conservative, far right wing, to try and siphon votes away from you Dems.
"No Labels" is the modern Green Party.
Just like the Greens in 2000, which threw the election to W., this version seeks to help Republicans. And just like the Greens of the 1990s to, well, now are basically tools of Russia, the "No Labels" crowd is also, effectively, a tool of Russia. Why? Because it wants to help the Russian agent Trump regain the White House.
"No Labels" deserves only contempt.