Image 01 Image 03

Joe Manchin Headed to NH With Third Party Group ‘No Labels’ as Democrats Scramble to Shut Them Down

Joe Manchin Headed to NH With Third Party Group ‘No Labels’ as Democrats Scramble to Shut Them Down

“Democrats have been spooked by the effort from No Labels, an organization that promotes centrist, bi-partisan policies and politics, to give Americans another option on the 2024 presidential ballot”

As we have repeatedly pointed out, Democrats are in an absolute panic over the possibility of a third-party candidate from the supposedly centrist group No Labels, which they believe will hurt Joe Biden’s chances in 2024.

Now Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) is reportedly headed to New Hampshire with No Labels, and alarm bells are going off in Washington.

The Daily Mail reports:

EXCLUSIVE: Democratic Senator Joe Manchin to headline third party No Labels event in New Hampshire next week in push to give Americans a candidate other than Biden or Trump

Senator Joe Manchin is headed to New Hampshire next week for an event with No Labels as the group looks to run a third-party candidate in next year’s presidential election and frantic Democrats are trying to stop it out of fears it could siphon off votes from Joe Biden to hand Donald Trump a victory.

Manchin, a former honorary co-chair of the group, will be the headliner of the gathering along with former Republican Governor of Utah Jon Huntsman at the townhall meeting, which will take place Monday, July 17th, at Saint Anselm’s College in Manchester, No Labels told

Democrats have been spooked by the effort from No Labels, an organization that promotes centrist, bi-partisan policies and politics, to give Americans another option on the 2024 presidential ballot…

Some Democrats, however, are so concerned that a third-party candidate would take enough support from Biden to give a Trump a win that they have gone from behind-the-scenes lobbying to an out-and-out war with the group.

Democrats care so much about ‘our democracy’ that they have to shut down any group that challenges their hold on power, you see. Even groups like Move On are getting into the fight to stop No Labels.

Politico reports:

Dems’ mission to stop a third-party presidential bid hits the Hill

Democrats are mounting a coordinated mission to kill a third-party presidential bid — and it’s coming soon to Capitol Hill.

Officials from the progressive group MoveOn and centrist group Third Way are planning to brief Senate Democratic chiefs of staff on July 27, according to an invitation obtained by POLITICO. It’s part of an effort to educate Democrats about the risk that a third-party bid funded by the well-heeled group No Labels could pose to President Joe Biden — particularly if centrist Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) runs for president rather than reelection.

Matt Bennett, executive vice president for public affairs at Third Way, and Rahna Epting, the executive director of MoveOn, will speak to Democratic senators’ top aides, according to the invitation. The invite tells chiefs of staff dryly that the two “want to share some information that they have on No Labels.”

Third Way has put together research showing that a third-party campaign would hurt Biden, an argument that No Labels has dismissed. Bennett declined to comment specifically on this month’s Capitol Hill meeting but confirmed that Third Way is working urgently to stop a third-party candidate.

Liberals on Twitter are also freaking out:

If a third-party campaign threatened the chances of Trump or DeSantis, Democrats would be throwing money at it.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Do we know what the funding streams are?

The Dumb-o-crats are so manifestly stupid, arrogant and lacking in self-awareness, they can’t fathom how how brazenly hypocritical their idiotic statements are.

Undermining a third-party and its candidate, while simultaneously slinging invective against alleged “threats” and “enemies” of democracy. This is how obnoxious Maoists and Stalinists talk.

centrist group Third Way
They’re only centrist if you count fascists as “right-wing”.

No Labels is funded by extremists w/ ties to Trump & DeSantis world.
BWAHAHAHA! I didn’t think it was possible to have your underwear on your head AND your hair on fire until Lincoln Project came along.

Just Manchin frantically trying to BS that he’s some radical ‘independent’ instead of the Democrat dog we all know he is.

Just more kabuki theatre crap to try to con the rubes.

    CommoChief in reply to Olinser. | July 12, 2023 at 3:50 pm

    He needs a landing spot to further his political career. He looks to be getting crushed in WV. The GoP Gov Jim Justice running for US Senate has a consistent edge in support from d/prog 51/49. If Manchin can’t out compete his GoP opponent for d/prog votes he ain’t gonna win re-election.

    Getting a gig with a third party as ‘Elder Statesman’ with a salary, travel expenses, paid staff and folks to kiss his ass is heck of a lot better than going out a loser. If running as a third party Presidential candidate is the price it is a small one. If it also happens to give him some sense of payback v any d/prog who he feels deserves it that’s a bonus.

Subotai Bahadur | July 12, 2023 at 3:51 pm

Let us say that “No Labels” actually runs a candidate in any putative 2024 election. While they may not succeed in getting away with it undetected, the Democrats will just cheat harder and be protected by the media. The total vote count may well be more than the national population, but they will do it. The question will then be what will everybody else do?

Subotai Bahadur

    The_Mew_Cat in reply to Subotai Bahadur. | July 13, 2023 at 1:48 pm

    The problem arises if Manchin gets enough votes to actually win electoral votes and send the contest to the House. What matters there is the number of state delegations for each party. That is a very fickly, unpredictable metric. The Dems want to avoid having to face this issue.

It is nearly impossible to get a third party on the ballot in many states, like Texas.

    CommoChief in reply to geronl. | July 12, 2023 at 4:54 pm

    It’s damn difficult and made deliberately so by the two major political parties. Neither wants any chance of vote dilution in a particular contest or worse from their perspective a competitive alternative to exist which their current voters might shift towards more permanently.

    Both the Libertarian and the Green parties have ballot access in TX. Nationwide the Libertarian party has ballot access in 30 States + DC. Not impossible but very difficult.

      4rdm2 in reply to CommoChief. | July 13, 2023 at 6:19 am

      The libertarian party’s main ‘accomplishment’ is handing races to the far left.

        CommoChief in reply to 4rdm2. | July 13, 2023 at 8:00 am

        That sometimes happens but usually it’s a myth. When you examine the vote count of the libertarian candidate compared to the difference between the GoP and d/prog candidates adding the libertarian votes to the GoP candidate total usually doesn’t close the gap on the raw # alone.

        Then there’s the assumption that 100% of those libertarian voters would vote GoP in the absence of a libertarian candidate. Many, even most probably would, call it 75/80%. When we reduce the potential added votes to account for this factor the potential # of ‘but for the libertarian’ ‘lost’ elections drops even further.

          4rdm2 in reply to CommoChief. | July 13, 2023 at 8:14 am

          Nice spin.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | July 13, 2023 at 11:55 am

          Facts ain’t spin they are facts. If candidate X gets 100 votes, candidate Y gets 90 votes and the libertarian candidate gets 6 votes then the 6 votes the libertarian candidate received didn’t impact the outcome.

          If you can find and offer up five examples where the libertarian candidate received more votes than the margin of victory for a Statewide race in the past decade I would be very surprised. Prove me wrong.

          4rdm2 in reply to CommoChief. | July 14, 2023 at 6:02 am

          Let’s start with 2020 presidential…

          Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin. Which coincidentally had the exact number of EV to make it 269-269. In Georgia the libertarian was greater than the number of votes which would have avoided a runoff in senate. Colorado district 8 house, 2022, Michigan district ten, 2022, Montana district 1 2022, Nevada senate, 2022.

          2020: Iowa district 3.

          That isn’t counting state offices which are still important.

          CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | July 14, 2023 at 8:50 am


          Look at you doing some research to try and back up your claim that the mere presence of libertarian candidate on the ballot will automatically throw the election to the d/prog. Not sarcasm, I appreciate your willingness bring some facts and have a discussion.

          In the 2020 Presidential AZ/GA/WI are indeed examples of where the libertarian candidate vote total in a STATEWIDE contest exceeded the margin of victory.

          That’s only three. The GA Senate race/runoff is not a good example b/c
          1. A runoff is a continuation of the same election
          2. The absence of a libertarian candidate on the ballot for the runoff in which the d/prog candidates won can’t be laid at the feet of a libertarian candidate who wasn’t an option in the runoff. It actually undermines your argument.

          Remember we are limiting this universe to STATEWIDE contests so HoR, State Senate, State House, County Commission, Sheriff don’t count. I am more than happy to concede that in non Statewide contests a libertarian candidate or other 3rd party candidate is more likely to upset the balance between the two major political parties.

          Now we have to address your underlying assumption that all those who cast a ballot for the libertarian candidate would, in the absence of the libertarian candidate, be presumed to cast a ballot for the GoP.

          That’s tough order. IMO, it’s probably about a 60/20/20 split with 60% voting GoP, 20% voting d/prog and 20% not voting. Libertarians are quirky at best and weird at worst, which is why I remain the GoP despite my libertarian leanings. Many libertarians have a 100% of every issue litmus test, others are more laid back and accept that not everyone will always agree all the time.

          I don’t dispute that the general thrust of your argument is correct, that most people casting a libertarian ballot would vote GoP (60%) but IMO, automatically assigning the other 40% to the GoP candidate is simply not a sustainable claim. Until we get reliable exit polling from each of those libertarian voters (and they answer honestly) we won’t know the exact breakdown. IMO, 60% is much closer to reality than the 100% you claim.

        markm in reply to 4rdm2. | July 13, 2023 at 6:48 pm

        If the Republican candidates actually worried about Libertarians taking votes from them, they _might_ try to take some small step towards freedom, instead of just arguing with the Democrats against which freedom to take from us next.

In NC both parties are fighting ‘No Labels’. “Centrist, bipartisan policies”. No thanks.

Florida typically ha a dozen or more presidential candidates.

Obviously the Ds are not interested in democracy, only in ruling us by their tyrannical hand. The word is a combination of two Greek words, demos, the people, and kratein, to rule. Hence, rule by the people. While it sounds good and has a nice ring to it, it’s a terrible system that the founders/framers went out of their way to avoid (the Federalist Papers lays out their reasons).

For a good explanation of political systems, see Overview of America,

ThePrimordialOrderedPair | July 12, 2023 at 7:01 pm

No-Labels is a complete joke. I remember when the worm, Bloomberg, started it (or was there at the start). It was nothing but leftists trying to pretend they are centrists in order to try and grab some conservative votes. LOL. No one with a brain ever took it seriously.

No-Labels really reminds me of the left’s “Coffee Party” that they tried to promote as the left-wing version of the Tea Party. But the COffee Party was nothing but empty astroturf. Even though the MSM wrote tons of articles about it (and ignored the Tea Party as much as they were able) the only thing the Coffee Party ever did was hold one meeting in a Starbucks with about 5 twerps. From the MSM coverage they were acting as if millions were joining … A complete joke and a farce. No-Labels is no different.

And won’t Mike Huntsman just go away, already? What an annoying fool He needs to go back to China and stay there. He can take Mittens with him.

    If they had run in 2020 and peeled off less than 90K votes in just four key States AZ(10,500), NV(33,600), WI(20,700), GA(12,700) then Trump wins the election. (All rounded to nearest hundred)

    The d/prog gonna fight like hell to keep any left leaning 3rd party candidate off the ballot in ’24 to prevent that.

    There have been those on this blog who have argued (from a pseudo-conservative angle) for this kind of party, although the individual(s) concerned didn’t specify “No-Labels”. I’ve always considered them to be 5th columnists for the left.

MoeHowardwasright | July 12, 2023 at 7:04 pm

Manchin was shivved by Chuck U Schumer. Payback is a bitch ain’t it Chuck. FJB

    He wasn’t shivved. He knew exactly what was going to happen, Manchin just thought he could play dumb and go ‘aw shucks guys gee whiz I really WANTED to do something but gosh darnit Schumer didn’t keep his word!’

    People are wise to his BS.

stevewhitemd | July 12, 2023 at 7:04 pm

The Third Way group is NOT ‘centrist’ — it is a Democratic progressive political operative tool.

No Labels is funded by extremists w/ ties to Trump & DeSantis world.

Hilarious. What world would that be? The not-Democrat one?

I’m not sure what the Dems are worried about. At the end of the day, the vast majority of Democrat voters vote Democrat every time; an Independent or Libertarian candidate is more likely to siphon votes off the Republican.

(In my experience, most Republican candidates are already “centrist” or moderate, and a critical mass of Republican-registered voters vote for them as the lesser of two evils; they would support more Right-leaning candidates. By contrast, in recent years most Democrat candidates have been almost as far Left as the “Overton window” allows, while a lot of Democrat voters are more centrist, but not enough to vote cross-party. My opinion, YMMV.)

If the third party candidate were Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, or Michelle Obama (IOW, someone as far Left but with more public appeal), the DNC might have to worry about splitting the Democrat vote. But absent those three, Biden’s people don’t have to worry much about losing his base.

    The_Mew_Cat in reply to Archer. | July 13, 2023 at 1:43 pm

    He won’t lose his base. But the swing voters (suburban women) are fickle, and could go with Manchin. While that would mostly hurt Trump, it could also throw the contest to the House, and what matters there is the number of state delegations each party has – which is very unpredictable.

When it matters, Manchin always does exactly what Schumer tells him to do.

As much as I’d enjoy watching him guarantee an R victory, I don’t imagine he has the stones to buck his Party.

Biden needs to worry about Kennedy in NH. I’ve seen some reliable polling suggesting Biden will lose the state.

The_Mew_Cat | July 13, 2023 at 1:40 pm

I disagree. I think a Manchin bid could hurt Trump also and send the election to the House – particularly if Biden dies and KH is the ultimate Dem nominee. But the Dems don’t like risk. They know they can win a 2-man race against Trump or any Republican. Their playbook is well practiced in 2018, 2020, and 2022. Allowing a 3rd party bid has enormous risk – even if Manchin proves to be a new Ross Perot, ultimately helping the Democrats. A 3rd party bid has big risks to their comfortable media narratives, as giving Manchin a megaphone would be problematic.

Actually, I think their best bet will be to make Manchin VP, once Biden takes his dirt nap and Harris becomes president. But they can’t do that as long as Biden is alive.

If a third-party campaign threatened the chances of Trump or DeSantis, Democrats would be throwing money at it.