Some thoughts as a No Labels supporter, and the coverage. I've found it to be superficial and patronizing, Romney's piece in the WSJ, the WaPo, and here. This piece seems to skip over the Unity idea, that there would be one R and one D on the ticket. NL supporters believe that excessive partisanship is a threat to our country and keeps u…
Some thoughts as a No Labels supporter, and the coverage. I've found it to be superficial and patronizing, Romney's piece in the WSJ, the WaPo, and here. This piece seems to skip over the Unity idea, that there would be one R and one D on the ticket. NL supporters believe that excessive partisanship is a threat to our country and keeps us from moving forward together on important issues that most of the country agrees on. If you listen to the Honestly podcast with Batya Ungar-Sargon on her new book Second Class, you will get the same picture- that neither party now focuses on the things that working class people care about. No Labels actually developed positions first and tried to get candidates second.. the other way, you just have to accept whatever melange of policy positions the candidate (or his/her financial backers) come up with. So yes, the Unity ticket idea was very disruptive to the status quo. And for those folks worried about spoilage, for some (many) of us, both of the candidates are bad, in fact, the way the D machine has taken after No Labels makes me a never-Bidener (plus other concerns). So whatever spoilage analysis they did, it may be working opposite to the way they intended. If I were thinking what the mistake was, it was overestimating the courage of potential candidates. We can disagree, but I'm just as informed as the reporter.
Some thoughts as a No Labels supporter, and the coverage. I've found it to be superficial and patronizing, Romney's piece in the WSJ, the WaPo, and here. This piece seems to skip over the Unity idea, that there would be one R and one D on the ticket. NL supporters believe that excessive partisanship is a threat to our country and keeps us from moving forward together on important issues that most of the country agrees on. If you listen to the Honestly podcast with Batya Ungar-Sargon on her new book Second Class, you will get the same picture- that neither party now focuses on the things that working class people care about. No Labels actually developed positions first and tried to get candidates second.. the other way, you just have to accept whatever melange of policy positions the candidate (or his/her financial backers) come up with. So yes, the Unity ticket idea was very disruptive to the status quo. And for those folks worried about spoilage, for some (many) of us, both of the candidates are bad, in fact, the way the D machine has taken after No Labels makes me a never-Bidener (plus other concerns). So whatever spoilage analysis they did, it may be working opposite to the way they intended. If I were thinking what the mistake was, it was overestimating the courage of potential candidates. We can disagree, but I'm just as informed as the reporter.