no labels was always a front group for Republicans trying to get Trump elected. Nothing more.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/18/third-party-2024-no-labels-00132066
While a third-party candidate can’t win, No Labels could still throw the election to Trump, and it wouldn’t take that many votes. Let’s look at three battleground states: Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
In 2016, Trump’s margin of victory was less than 50,000 votes in these states, and third parties won significantly more votes than that in each one. Did they flip the election for Trump? It’s possible. In 2020, with no third parties to contend with, Biden beat Trump in Michigan by 154,188 votes, Pennsylvania by 80,555 votes and Wisconsin by 20,682. All of those margins are smaller than what third parties received in 2016. These Blue Wall states will be close again in 2024, and if third parties perform similarly in 2024 as they did in 2016, they will deny Biden a second term.
This alone should give any responsible person pause. A No Labels candidate in these states could easily hand the election to Trump. But maybe that’s the goal. Whatever their original intentions, the people behind No Labels — including Harlan Crow, the GOP mega-donor who gifted travel and luxury vacations to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — are using dark money on this folly. The group is working to raise $70 million and has already qualified for the ballot in 12 states, including states that could be pivotal to the outcome, such as Arizona, Nevada and North Carolina.
When Pat McCrory became the head of “No Labels” it was obvious to everyone in NC who was paying attention that it was a Trump front organization.
Dude on the left is sucking in his gut, but his suit still doesn’t fit.
Just sayin’.
Dude on the right doesn’t fit his, either.
They both need to find a tailor. Or a better one.
80% of looking good in a suit is buying off a rack and having it adjusted. Another 15% is just making sensible choices in color/pattern.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“This case seeks to hold No Labels accountable for the consequences of its misguided actions that have left its original benefactors like the Dursts feeling bewildered, betrayed and outraged,” the suit says.
Randy Mastro, a lawyer at King & Spalding who is representing the Dursts, said they had “agreed to fund No Labels because it committed to promote bipartisanship and bridge the political divide.”
He continued: “They never imagined at the time that No Labels would pivot to becoming the organization behind a quixotic third-party candidacy that could skew the most consequential presidential election of our lifetime.
The one thing that has changed, unfortunately, is that a group of partisan operatives has launched a conspiracy to subvert No Labels’ ballot access work, and the Dursts’ frivolous lawsuit now appears to be part of it.”
The suit relies on personal interactions that the Dursts, who are not registered Democrats, had with the group, such as with fund-raising solicitors, and on public reporting about No Labels’s activities.
The complaint repeatedly suggests that the point of No Labels’s efforts to have another presidential candidate option in 2024 if there is a Biden-Trump matchup is to tilt the field toward the political right.
The original article contains 920 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Bad bot. Needs tweaking.
The summary’s fourth paragraph looks like a continuation of the quote started in the third paragraph. It is actually part of a quote from another individual and is part of a rebuttal to the content of the third paragraph.
That’s why I try to use gift links; it’s important to actually be able to read the article.
deleted by creator
