Taking a centrist approach sounds appealing in theory. The devil is in the details though. Where do these people stand on the southern border issue? What is their take on climate change? On political censorship? On election security? On the federal debt? It will be exceedingly difficult to forge a middle ground on many of these issues
Agree with much of what you say but not all. When you say Biden is “truth challenged,” can you give me an example. I see him with faults. You stated many of them. But not telling the truth?Also, you did not list any of the things he has done well. Ward Bushnell
I have historically been a 3rd party voter as a protest vote. Ballot access problems are nothing new as the DNC and RNC will do anything to keep out competition. I looked at No Labels when they were presented at the SIC. It seemed like just more of the same corporate and big money support for big government with no fundamental change away from funding wars, congress being owned by Big Ag and Big Medicine, plus one of the worst names I have ever come across. To truly launch a sane centrist party, they would need to cut out their big donors and I don't see that happening. Our biggest destabilizing issue is the perception that we have a kleptocracy running our government led by the very wealthy.
If No Labels picked up Tulsi Gabbard as their candidate, I would consider voting for them. The other proposals are just more of the same.
They also need to adress the deep state takeover of government and look at trust busting. Too Big to Fail must end.
We have a Uniparty that pretends to be two parties and No Labels appears like just another version of the Uniparty. If that is not the case, their messaging needs to change. Our divisions are not about Trump and Biden as much as how the bottom 75% have seen their lives deteriorate while those of us at the top 25% are doing well, Trump and Biden are just the symptoms.
America is lost in the thrall of power, money and corruption of the top few %. It fails consistently to engage with the majority of the population and their grievances, giving them mere lip service. If you don’t engage with those that feel they have been left behind, you will fail. Its the same here in Europe, hence the slip toward the right. NOT far right as msm will have you believe.
As a non-American, I can only hope that domestic politics moves towards the American Centre (roughly equivalent to the European Right) and that its foreign policy is reimbued with something resembling principle. A rejuvination of sclerotic leadership on both sides would certainly help, as would the ability to discuss across the divide rather than to merely broadcast opinions held out as facts. Without aspirational principles, all empires are doomed to failure and, yes, the US is an empire although it has habitually denied the associated responsibilities that come with it. The relatively recent idea that US lives are worth infinite non-US lives is not a humane one and has led to unconscionable behaviour overseas since it took root. Any moral high ground was squandered after 9/11 with torture, GITMO and no US domestic interest in even the simple numbers of Iraqi, Afghan and Syrian civilian deaths. Even now, the wannabe greatest democratic body on Earth tying its support for Ukraine to domestic border funding will by not be viewed kindly by any version of History, nor will the inability to exercise judgement to protect the lives of Palestinian civilians simply because Israel is a "friend." If the king promotes the law of the jungle, he should not be surprised if he gets a jungle. Sadly, I foresee accelerated decline unless and until there is more enlightened US leadership from the entire body politic.
If there are 3 major candidates, it becomes likely that nobody will get 270 electoral votes. Then it goes to Congress to select the president, and the Senate to select the VP. Each state gets one vote, so you need 51 votes to win at this point. This favors the rural states, which tend to lean GOP. How the states decide who to vote for is up to each state. But I would seem that states that elect representatives of a given party may likely vote party lines.
Taking a centrist approach sounds appealing in theory. The devil is in the details though. Where do these people stand on the southern border issue? What is their take on climate change? On political censorship? On election security? On the federal debt? It will be exceedingly difficult to forge a middle ground on many of these issues
Agree with much of what you say but not all. When you say Biden is “truth challenged,” can you give me an example. I see him with faults. You stated many of them. But not telling the truth?Also, you did not list any of the things he has done well. Ward Bushnell
I have historically been a 3rd party voter as a protest vote. Ballot access problems are nothing new as the DNC and RNC will do anything to keep out competition. I looked at No Labels when they were presented at the SIC. It seemed like just more of the same corporate and big money support for big government with no fundamental change away from funding wars, congress being owned by Big Ag and Big Medicine, plus one of the worst names I have ever come across. To truly launch a sane centrist party, they would need to cut out their big donors and I don't see that happening. Our biggest destabilizing issue is the perception that we have a kleptocracy running our government led by the very wealthy.
If No Labels picked up Tulsi Gabbard as their candidate, I would consider voting for them. The other proposals are just more of the same.
They also need to adress the deep state takeover of government and look at trust busting. Too Big to Fail must end.
We have a Uniparty that pretends to be two parties and No Labels appears like just another version of the Uniparty. If that is not the case, their messaging needs to change. Our divisions are not about Trump and Biden as much as how the bottom 75% have seen their lives deteriorate while those of us at the top 25% are doing well, Trump and Biden are just the symptoms.
America is lost in the thrall of power, money and corruption of the top few %. It fails consistently to engage with the majority of the population and their grievances, giving them mere lip service. If you don’t engage with those that feel they have been left behind, you will fail. Its the same here in Europe, hence the slip toward the right. NOT far right as msm will have you believe.
As a non-American, I can only hope that domestic politics moves towards the American Centre (roughly equivalent to the European Right) and that its foreign policy is reimbued with something resembling principle. A rejuvination of sclerotic leadership on both sides would certainly help, as would the ability to discuss across the divide rather than to merely broadcast opinions held out as facts. Without aspirational principles, all empires are doomed to failure and, yes, the US is an empire although it has habitually denied the associated responsibilities that come with it. The relatively recent idea that US lives are worth infinite non-US lives is not a humane one and has led to unconscionable behaviour overseas since it took root. Any moral high ground was squandered after 9/11 with torture, GITMO and no US domestic interest in even the simple numbers of Iraqi, Afghan and Syrian civilian deaths. Even now, the wannabe greatest democratic body on Earth tying its support for Ukraine to domestic border funding will by not be viewed kindly by any version of History, nor will the inability to exercise judgement to protect the lives of Palestinian civilians simply because Israel is a "friend." If the king promotes the law of the jungle, he should not be surprised if he gets a jungle. Sadly, I foresee accelerated decline unless and until there is more enlightened US leadership from the entire body politic.
If there are 3 major candidates, it becomes likely that nobody will get 270 electoral votes. Then it goes to Congress to select the president, and the Senate to select the VP. Each state gets one vote, so you need 51 votes to win at this point. This favors the rural states, which tend to lean GOP. How the states decide who to vote for is up to each state. But I would seem that states that elect representatives of a given party may likely vote party lines.
riding with Dean at the moment, but appreciate the attention on No labels as well