No-Labels: Let's Talk 3rd Party

I am starting this thread to continue a conversation about the feasibility and attraction of a 3rd-party option for this year's Presidential election.

The No-Labels movement is planning to announce who will be running on their 3rd-party Presidential ticket in 2024 by mid-March. Until then, they are working hard to get on the ballot in all 50 states. Here's their website:

https://www.nolabels.org/about-us

They are wooing both centrist Republicans and Democrats. Who would you like to see on their ticket? What names would tempt you to vote 3rd party this year?

Names that are being bandied about include Joe Manchin, Joe Lieberman, Larry Hogan, Pat McCrory, Andrew Yang, RFK Jr, Dean Phillips, and Nikki Haley.

Anything can happen. The mood of the electorate is more fluid and volatile than anytime in recent political history.

Regardless of how large a third or no party candidate is, unless the overwhelming majority of voters vote for something other than whoever is the Democrat or Republican candidate, it just isn't going to work.

Wrong. A 3rd party doesn't need to win an "overwhelming majority" of votes. It can grab the Electoral College (EC) votes in any state where it gets a mere plurality of votes. EC votes are doled out on a "winner-take-all" basis. So if No-Labels garners 40% of the popular vote in Pennsylvania versus 30% each for the Dems and the GOP, it will pick up ALL of Pennsylvania's 19 electoral votes.

In a 3-way race back in 1992, Bill Clinton won the Presidency with only 43% of the national popular vote.


Even if the vast majority of people want to do this, they have no way of knowing who else is actually going to commit to voting for a third party, and thus, would want to play it safe and vote yet again for the lesser of two evils.

Wrong again. Pollsters will be busy in every state gauging how many voters are leaning toward No-Labels, just like they measure voter support for Trump and Biden. Every informed voter should be aware of who is leading in the polls when they cast their own ballots.


Not until something like ranked choice is pushed, a third party doesn't have a chance of winning potus. Originally Posted by onawbtngr546

Ranked choice is a terrible idea. Harder to compute results, easier to cheat and challenge. (As evidence, look at New York City.) It's also off topic. This thread is about a 3rd party Presidential ticket in 2024.

BUMP - Why did this thread go nowhere?

Is it because yinz would rather bait & attack each other as unhinged extremists than talk about finding a common-sense moderate "unity" ticket we could vote for in November? Haters gonna hate.

Polls show that 70% of voters do NOT want to see a Trump-Biden rematch.

Both of the two major parties are failing us. So fuck both of them. The political landscape is more favorable today for a successful 3rd party bid than ever before in our history. It won't be a wasted vote this time.

Here's the latest - Manchin and Hogan are out. Who will they put on the ticket?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...tive-took-hit/

Nikki haley who is on that list is already running. Would she run as a 3rd party at this point? Doubtful.
Joe lieberman? I literally had to Google to see if he's still alive.
The rest on the list snick.
Highly doubtful any candidate running as a 3rd party would fair better than perot did in these times.

Yeah that is a ragtag list of mostly irrelevant politicians but the overall question is intriguing. The current system is set up to deter and prevent disruption of the party system so it would take a candidate with connections and resources as well as the ability to get media attention without buying the majority of it so a name comes to mind...

Donald Trump.

I think if he had said FUCK THIS after leaving office and decided to form a party to challenge the status quo he could have broke the current system in place though likely what was left after would be a similar 2 party fiasco with the then former Republican powerhouse being reduced to something similar to what the Tea Party became.

Count me in on an alternative to the DNC v GOP options. I just don't know that anyone who COULD pull it off WOULD try to not right now.

I am the third party, having left both the D and R in my lifetime, finally settling on Libertarian.

Once I read their "Manifesto", I realized I has been an L all my life, I just didn't know one party agreed with my own thoughts so much.

Honestly, a 3rd Party could be nothing but a vote stealer for both candidates, but, as polarized as our nation is, I just don't see one that would actually be viable.

I'll say this, I think Trump should have dumped his uber religious VP in 2020, and picked Tulsi Gabbard instead, and I have read she is in running as a possible pick.

Would that not be a true 3rd party?

Trump is an outsider, Gabbard a Democrat, who left for very good reasons.

Join Gods party. It’s the best. Forget the rest. They’re all corrupt.

The Republican Party is far to liberal for my liking. I would certainly vote for a candidate who promised a return to a constitutional government and bulldoze at least 80% of the federal workforce. Closest thing we’ve had to that, at least in rhetoric, was Ramaswamy, but he crashed and burned before he ever got off the ground. If such a person were to run third party he/she would get my vote.

I am a left leaning Republican. I don't believe in frivolous spending but I do believe in infrastructure projects and healthcare being available for those earning less than 30k minimum. I could go into details on why on healthcare but don't want to go off topic totally. I would vote for 3rd party if it didn't mean it secured the election for one of the 2 existing parties. They have put themselves on 2 islands due to how the financial support that goes from the party HQ vs. independent funding alternatives. That's really the problem. And with that money, buys the a person who will say anything you want them to if the price is right...we've all seen it.

We need to have election funding rules reigned in and regulated MUCH differently.

I am a left leaning Republican. I don't believe in frivolous spending but I do believe in infrastructure projects and healthcare being available for those earning less than 30k minimum. I could go into details on why on healthcare but don't want to go off topic totally. I would vote for 3rd party if it didn't mean it secured the election for one of the 2 existing parties. They have put themselves on 2 islands due to how the financial support that goes from the party HQ vs. independent funding alternatives. That's really the problem. And with that money, buys the a person who will say anything you want them to if the price is right...we've all seen it.

We need to have election funding rules reigned in and regulated MUCH differently. Originally Posted by eyecu2

We spend enough taxpayer dollars towards healthcare in the effort to regulate and mandate instead of using those funds to establish some workable solutions for working people. Def agree there.

When I hear DeSantis talk about visiting every county in a state my mind starts adding up that bill. And that's pennies to his campaign. The number I saw for him was around $150 million.

You are correct money buys everyone at the right price and what it takes to run for even a house seat is too absurd to process. The first step is to make every dollar donated part of a public record. Keep the PAC process for tax purposes and to allow groups not affiliated directly with a candidate but stop these shadow money trains and put limits on how much taxpayers can be asked to pay unless they specifically agree to it.

A question I bounce around from time to time is one I will leave here for consideration:

For a 3rd party to make enough impact to bring real change what role would it need to play? If a movement caught on that established a legit contender with enough support and good representatives grew large enough would it not likely squash one of the existing parties to the point of being obsolete? If what came to be was more a thorn for both sides at some point it could get swallowed up or bought and we could be worse off depending on what ideology prevailed.

A far more authoritarian government is not at all something I want to be part of and it feels given the current divisive reality America is in would be a very real possibility if we let the wrong group get an opportunity to reboot without consent of the people.

The Republican Party is far to liberal for my liking. I would certainly vote for a candidate who promised a return to a constitutional government and bulldoze at least 80% of the federal workforce. Closest thing we’ve had to that, at least in rhetoric, was Ramaswamy, but he crashed and burned before he ever got off the ground. If such a person were to run third party he/she would get my vote. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

You sir are a Libertarian.

A primary tenet is the smallest government possible.

Build the highways, defend the countries borders, and butt the fuck out on everything else.

I see myself both far to the right on some issues, left on others, it boggles both extremes at times.

I honestly don't think a true Libertarian, could get support because we pick what's correct to do, and not because someone says its correct.

Can you imagine a pro choice and pro life supporter on stage, as one single candidate?

Or someone seriously tough on crime, but, advocating for legal prostitution?

Or someone whose willing actually to do something about illegal gun usage and crime, while being absolutely a true 2nd A supporter, like, hand grenades and rocket launchers without any goverment interference?

Both sides D and R, would go full on to oppose anyone who challenged their core tenets.

Kind of like Trump?

I am a left leaning Republican. I don't believe in frivolous spending but I do believe in infrastructure projects and healthcare being available for those earning less than 30k minimum. I could go into details on why on healthcare but don't want to go off topic totally. I would vote for 3rd party if it didn't mean it secured the election for one of the 2 existing parties. They have put themselves on 2 islands due to how the financial support that goes from the party HQ vs. independent funding alternatives. That's really the problem. And with that money, buys the a person who will say anything you want them to if the price is right...we've all seen it.

We need to have election funding rules reigned in and regulated MUCH differently. Originally Posted by eyecu2

There was a local Republican, by the name of Melissa Hart, I met her at political events, she surrounded herself with women, and it was clear she was a Lesbian, but, she didn't come out until the end of her career, because at that time, most R's wouldn't have supported a rug muncher, but, she had some very good ideas.

One, which she proposed was removing ALL party affiliations from the ballot, and, prior to that, removing the straight party lever from voting machines.

IOW, make the voter more responsible by forcing them to at least know the actual person they are voting for, and not just for any breathing D or R body on the ballot.

Of course, both ideas were hated by both parties.

And of course, a reason why I was sad to see her exit politics.

We just don't have enough people with balls to do and say the right things, like she did.

We spend enough taxpayer dollars towards healthcare in the effort to regulate and mandate instead of using those funds to establish some workable solutions for working people. Def agree there.

When I hear DeSantis talk about visiting every county in a state my mind starts adding up that bill. And that's pennies to his campaign. The number I saw for him was around $150 million.

You are correct money buys everyone at the right price and what it takes to run for even a house seat is too absurd to process. The first step is to make every dollar donated part of a public record. Keep the PAC process for tax purposes and to allow groups not affiliated directly with a candidate but stop these shadow money trains and put limits on how much taxpayers can be asked to pay unless they specifically agree to it.

A question I bounce around from time to time is one I will leave here for consideration:

For a 3rd party to make enough impact to bring real change what role would it need to play? If a movement caught on that established a legit contender with enough support and good representatives grew large enough would it not likely squash one of the existing parties to the point of being obsolete? If what came to be was more a thorn for both sides at some point it could get swallowed up or bought and we could be worse off depending on what ideology prevailed.

A far more authoritarian government is not at all something I want to be part of and it feels given the current divisive reality America is in would be a very real possibility if we let the wrong group get an opportunity to reboot without consent of the people. Originally Posted by DNinja69

As to your last paragraph, we are living under an authoritarian government, and have been for DECADES, at least since the powers that be decided to remove a sitting president in Dallas.

That fact alone, dictates the success of a third party candidate, because they are not just fighting the two parties, but also the same people who run the highest levels of power in this country.

As to your last paragraph, we are living under an authoritarian government, and have been for DECADES, at least since the powers that be decided to remove a sitting president in Dallas.

That fact alone, dictates the success of a third party candidate, because they are not just fighting the two parties, but also the same people who run the highest levels of power in this country. Originally Posted by Devo

Actually since 1871. We signed a deal with the devil because we were bankrupt after the Civil War. We signed away our sovereignty. It’s pretty obvious now. Yeah?

Well I didn't see any posts to illuminate the 3rd party so far; no names. I guess it's likely an abstract concept if we cannot as the knowledge base of hooker-dom, empirically know what would define or constitute such a party. At least having a face to associate it as such - I think would be a good step in the right direction for identification and association.

I do remember Melissa Hart. I actually even like McCain as party candidate, but she's damaged due to her stance on the Donald. Truly outstanding faces and values are demeaned by the current party affiliates, Guys like Manchin and his like are cast aways-...maybe that would be a good coalition.

Manchin / McCain- slogan "Fixing whats broke in Washington".

That would make insiders in DC lose their fucking minds.