Deep Dive
Shownotes Transcript
BP added more than $130 billion to the U.S. economy over the past two years by making investments from coast to coast. Investments like building EV charging hubs in Washington state and starting up new infrastructure in the Gulf of Mexico. It's and, not or. See what doing both means for energy nationwide at bp.com slash investing in America. Hey y'all, it's Astead.
Before we jump in, I want to tell you about New York Times Audio, a new iOS app for New York Times new subscribers. It's got our show, plus a bunch more, like Headlines and This American Life. Plus, as a sports fan, some of my favorites are the podcasts from The Athletic. Every day, there's a feast of sports listening in our app, hosted by some of the most notable names in sports journalism.
From Andy Staples on college football to Mark Chapman on the Premier League. Go Spurs! Most days, we drop at least four new flagship shows, broken down by sports, full of personality and world-class analysis. You don't want to miss it. New York Times Audio. Download it now at nytimes.com slash audio app. From the New York Times, I'm Astead Herndon. This is The Run-Up.
Hi, my name is Ested Herndon. I'm a reporter with The New York Times. I was looking for Gretchen Altman. This is she. Oh, thank you for picking up. Sure. Well, first, I would love to know just a couple of things about you. Where do you live? What do you do? How old are you? I'm a retired attorney. I live in Las Cruces, New Mexico, and I'm 75. What was the first election you remember voting in, if you have? Oh, my gosh.
I have no idea. I would have been 18, whatever that was. You've been a consistent since 18 voter. I have never missed an election, ever. What about a midterm? Have you missed a midterm? Nope, never. All right. We love these super voters. This is great people to talk to. I'm curious, when you look at the presidential race, what is your overall mood when you think we're going to have a presidential race in the next year or so? Disappointed, scared.
Why is that? Why do you go to disappoint and scare first? Because I think most likely our two choices, Trump and Biden, are both not good choices. Can we be more specific? Let's start with Trump. What makes you dissatisfied with Trump? His personality.
His abrasiveness, he is kind of a lightning rod for problems. He causes turmoil. Not all of it is his fault, but regardless, the media hate him and a lot of people hate him. And so no matter what he does, there's always craziness and criticism and hate and conflict. And it's just a people.
I mean, Joe Biden ran as someone who was going to try to heal that divisiveness. Yeah. Why are you also including him as someone that you're not excited to see in 2024? Oh, horrible, horrible, horrible choice. Horrible choice. Why is that? Yeah. Well, he is divisive. He's probably at least as divisive as Trump was.
He doesn't have the media that participates in the divisiveness the way that they did with Trump. But he's a hater just like Trump was. He doesn't like the other side. And he's just not physically and emotionally competent at this stage. A central reality of the 2024 presidential election is setting in.
Most Americans are really unhappy with the options in front of them. Over the past few months, I've been talking to party insiders, people for whom the only relevant question about the next election is which candidate can win. But when I talk to voters, even some people who identify as Democrat or Republican, the biggest question I get about 2024 is,
is how come both parties seem poised to nominate the same guy again? 2016, I voted for Trump. And did you vote for him again in 2020? No way. No way. Did you vote for Biden? No. Nope. I voted for the green candidate. I didn't like either one of them. And as more time passes, and Trump and Biden continue to look like the most likely matchup for a general election,
Voters are starting to understand just how inevitable those candidacies are looking. And they're not loving it. If it's Trump versus Biden again for part three, what do you think you'd do? Cry.
Honestly, that would just be the worst choice in the world. I don't know what I would do. I mean, it's the most likely one, as we both know, as of right now, right? And so what do you think it says about the country, about politics, that what you're describing as this horrible option that a lot of Americans, I would say, data tells us 65, 70 percent of the country feels like you do. So what do you think that means?
I think we're doomed. If that's the best we can do, if those are our best choices, and because of politics and gamesmanship and payback and owing and all the other things that go into selecting a candidate, if that is the best we can do, we're doomed. Mm-hmm.
What do you think about the people who have tried to stand in the middle of both parties? People like Joe Manchin. Love them. Love them. Those are people you get excited by. Absolutely. I am not a fan of Republicans who think all that Republicans do is wonderful and all that Dems do is horrible. And I'm not a fan of Dems who take the same absolute position as
Love the middle of the line, middle of the road guys. I guess you voted for the Green Party last time. I did. Would you consider voting for a third party again? Absolutely. I know the third party probably is not going to win, but to me, it's maybe a signal to the primary party of the great unhappiness of me and other people like me that even if we think it's a throwaway vote, we're going to...
It sends a message. It says, we don't like you guys. Get it together. So it turns out there's actually a group that has recognized that millions of Americans feel exactly like Gretchen and are yearning for other options. A Washington organization that's attracted some attention for their plan to run a third-party candidate and nominate a Democrat and Republican together. A unity ticket.
Typically, this isn't an idea I would give much credence to. But big names in Washington are talking about this plan. And as it turns out, I talk to people around the country, they can't take it anymore. They're just tired. The country's most powerful moderate, Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Senator, you sound like a presidential candidate, and I don't just say that here. Is openly engaging the possibility of running on that unity ticket. How serious are you about this? Well,
First of all, Chuck, if you look, the last 40 years I've been involved in public service through my great state of West Virginia. And since I've been a senator representing the state of West Virginia, it's always been about being a centrist in the middle. So given all that, it felt worth talking to this group. Because unlike the anti-Trump Republicans, at least they have a plan. That's after the break.
This podcast is supported by Progressive Insurance. Whether you love true crime or comedy, celebrity interviews or news, you call the shots on what's in your podcast queue. And guess what? Now you can call them on your auto insurance too with the Name Your Price tool from Progressive. It works just the way it sounds. You tell Progressive how much you want to pay for car insurance, and they'll show you coverage options that fit your budget. Get your quote today at Progressive.com to join the over 28 million drivers who trust Progressive.
Progressive Casualty Insurance Company & Affiliates. Price and coverage match limited by state law. Hello, this is Yuande Kamalefa from New York Times Cooking, and I'm sitting on a blanket with Melissa Clark. And we're having a picnic using recipes that feature some of our favorite summer produce. Yuande, what'd you bring? So this is a cucumber agua fresca. It's made with fresh cucumbers, ginger, and lime.
How did you get it so green? I kept the cucumber skins on and pureed the entire thing. It's really easy to put together and it's something that you can do in advance. Oh, it is so refreshing. What'd you bring, Melissa?
Well, strawberries are extra delicious this time of year, so I brought my little strawberry almond cakes. Oh, yum. I roast the strawberries before I mix them into the batter. It helps condense the berries' juices and stops them from leaking all over and getting the crumb too soft. Mmm. You get little pockets of concentrated strawberry flavor. That tastes amazing. Oh, thanks. New York Times Cooking has so many easy recipes to fit your summer plans. Find them all at NYTCooking.com. I have sticky strawberry juice all over my fingers.
Can you introduce yourselves for me? Ryan Clancy, I lead strategy for No Labels. Last week, I sat down with two leaders of this group, No Labels. One of them, you've likely already heard of. I'm Joe Lieberman. I'm here today, I believe, as they now call it, No Labels, a founding chair of
You mentioned the No Labels Foundry, but also tell us the other jobs you had. Oh, a little of that, yeah. So I was a state senator in Connecticut from New Haven, West Haven, to Hartford for 10 years, 1970 to 80. For Joe Lieberman. It's been a long road to get here. And I was really privileged to serve—
for 24 years in the U.S. Senate and had the really unexpected opportunity, thanks to Al Gore, to run for vice president with him in 2000. If you remember his story, he kind of created the idea of political homelessness years before it became a thing. He started as a Democrat. I always believed that
practically speaking, that you had to work with people in the other party if you wanted to get things done.
But I actually didn't feel uncomfortable in the Democratic Party. I felt that there had to be room for people like me in the Democratic Party. What happened, I'm going to jump forward to 2006. But in his telling, a changing party left him behind. I had refused to basically vote to end the Iraq War, even though it was going badly. I felt we would leave.
His position on the Iraq War was deeply unpopular among Democrats.
And got him primary. So I will tell you, just to be personal about it, that when I—it hurt me during that primary, personally. I mean, it wasn't just a— You felt the party left you, not you left the party. I felt like the party left me because my voting record was still overwhelmingly Democratic on one issue. I understood it mattered a lot to people. And people have said to me that that primary that I lost was a—
sort of harbinger of things to come, on the old phrase, the canary in the coal mine. Lieberman lost that race. I had the right under Connecticut state law to run as an independent. But he ran and won as a third-party candidate in the general election. So that's how I ended up becoming an independent. That was the first time that Lieberman formally broke with the Democrats. The next time happened a few years later. John McCain turned out to be one of my...
best friends in the Senate, but in life. When he got a call. And he says, for some reason, he called me Joey. Joey, I got to ask you something. And it's a tough question. So if you say no,
It's not going to affect our friendship. I said, really, John, you got me interested now. What is it? Well, my presidential campaign has come off the mat. I'm doing better. The big deciding moment is the New Hampshire primary. It's in January. Independents can vote in the primary. You are now Mr. Independent in America. And he said, I want to ask for your support. And I said, whoa, that's really...
Interesting, John. Give me a couple of days. I'm going to think about it. So in the Democratic Party then was Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama. They were very good friends of mine, but neither of them ever asked for my support because this was the Democratic Party again.
leaving me because I still had what I've called the scarlet eye for Iraq on my forehead. And I thought, you know, John. Not for independent. No, not at that point. I thought the eye should be for independent. Very well said. But I said, you know, I know John really as well as I know anybody in public life. He's capable of being president. The Democratic candidates haven't asked me.
I'm an independent. Why not? I have the freedom to do that. And that's how I did it. You know, it's partly a pride thing that Democrats weren't asking for your support. And John McCain was. And so that's where you were going to go. I don't think it was a pride. It's a good question. A fair one. But I think it was this feeling of.
that I was getting a message. I wouldn't say it was pride, but it liberated me to do what I really thought was a good thing to do. And then, of course, McCain turns around and vets me for vice president, which I thought was ludicrous. And I told him so. And I said, John, you know, I know you're getting old, but maybe you forgot you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat. Well, that's the point. He probably had an expletive in there somewhere.
The country is so torn along party lines, McCain said. What a great message it will be if we have a bipartisan ticket.
But even to use that example, he obviously ultimately ends up choosing Sarah Palin. It goes in the complete opposite direction of that message of unity. Looking back now, do you stand by that decision to endorse McCain, that campaign of McCain-Palin, which definitely I think we look back on as an early indicator of how politics was shaping up on the Republican side, too? Yeah, I think it was an early indicator. So, no, and I have no hesitation. I mean, looking back, I know I did the right thing.
I don't think he had any idea, to be honest, and I don't know, that Sarah Palin would turn out to be sort of a harbinger of the Trump wing of the Republican Party. To him then, she was a woman who was a kind of reformist governor of Alaska, and it seemed like it was fresh news.
But it didn't work. But in a way, he pointed the way to what No Labels is thinking about now, which is getting ready to exercise the option of
of fielding running a bipartisan third ticket for president in 2024. Well, that's a good segue. I mean, I want to open up this conversation and bring you in, Ryan. In 2010, what, I mean, I think you were brought in at that time. I think you both were at that time. What was the real impetus to say, okay, what was the problem here? And what is the solution that No Labels are trying to fix?
Sure. Well, I mean, of course, that was when the Tea Party wave was really starting to crest. And I think people were starting to get a sense that, look, politics in America has always been tough and people argued. But like this was different. So that was really the genesis for No Labels, that there was no organizing force on Capitol Hill trying to just build basic relationships with people. And that was early on. No Labels bringing together a lot of these members and meetings, right?
That later spurred the creation of this group today called the House Problem Solvers Caucus, which is really what No Labels is probably most known for. Most recently, the Problem Solvers Caucus was involved in the passage of the bipartisan infrastructure bill. But I was interested in the group's origin story, because from the beginning, No Labels has positioned itself as the group seeking consensus and fighting extremism on both sides with both parties.
And that feels like an important fact to understand in thinking about the role they're trying to play now, all these years later.
I saw on the website, you called quote, the labels says they've been fighting extremes since 2009. And I hear that and what you all are saying. But I guess to me, it also sounds like a flattening of extremes, too. If we think back to 2009, you know, I think about the Tea Party movement. I think about what was certainly a rhetoric coming from that side that was
uncompromising around working with Barack Obama, around birther conspiracies that was delegitimizing Barack Obama. What was the extreme on the opposite side? Because it does feel like you all are saying it was both sides that caused you all to push to create this organization. And it also sounds like you're saying you find both of those streams as kind of equal.
Is that true? So I don't see the extremism as equal, and I don't see them as existing in equal measure at equal times. I think one of the things that has undoubtedly happened is that
There was an explosion of extremism on the right about a decade ago, but that engendered a reaction that continues to exist to this day, which is I think that the right and the left feed on each other. The more extreme one side or the other is, the more that feeds into and encourages the other side.
You don't have to see an equivalency to think that extremism does exist on both sides. And that's just not our view. When you look at the polling research we've done, and one of the questions we've seen over and over is when you ask the public—
To the extent extremism is a problem, is it the Republicans are moving too far right, the Democrats moving too far left, or it's both? The majority of people will tell you it's both. And I know that's not a consensus opinion in a lot of places, but according to the survey research, that is how the public feels. But what do you all see as the extremism that currently exists within the Democratic Party?
So I'll begin to answer that. I think that there are people in the Democratic Party like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, whose philosophy could be called socialistic. And so today I would say some of those people to the further left in the Democratic Party have a disproportionate influence still by my own bias. And this is probably why I'm still a Democrat. They are less threatening to America than the extremists on
on the right of the Republican Party, that's not enough of a justification in my sense, has also gotten to be tribal issues
And right after one election, the question is, how do we beat those bums in the Republican Party? I guess I want to ask it, though, in a different way, because it just doesn't ring true to me that Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren have the same level of power in their party as what we would call extremes on the other side. It was a full Democratic primary in 2020 where the electorate largely rejected those people.
There was a full Democratic primary in 2016 where progressive ideas were rejected in favor of Hillary Clinton as a nominee. How is it accurate to say that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have the same level of power or represent the extremes with the same level of influence as a Donald Trump who's run the party, who was the president? Look, it is not, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what you're getting at is like, look, you know, Bernie Sanders saying he's for Medicare for all.
is not the same way as Donald Trump saying the 2020 election was stolen and encouraging people to riot on January 6th. We don't see that the same way. But I don't think there's any doubt, and I say this as a Democrat,
That there is an element in the Democratic Party, much like on the right side, that does believe the means justifies the ends. That, like, look, I'm only 42, but I always came up thinking that Democrats were the party that believed in free speech. I don't know that I believe that anymore.
There is an element of the party that is hostile to free speech. There is an element of the party that is pretty conditional in terms of right and wrong. So, for example, if I throw a rock through a window or I destroy property—
Is that right or wrong? Well, I guess it depends as to whether I am part of a social justice rally or whether I am wearing a MAGA hat. And I think that's if you want to look at part of the reason why the country is so divided is they see a hypocrisy in that, that they believe that there's certain kinds of rules for people who have favored opinions.
And then there's certain kinds of rules for everybody else. So I feel like if I can synthesize and just to make sure we're on the same page, there is a Republican Party that has moved in an extremist direction largely due to Donald Trump.
then there is a Democratic Party that has moved in an extreme, quote, direction, not because of necessarily the rhetoric of Joe Biden, which you all see as different than the rhetoric coming from Donald Trump, but because of, one, progressive social movements that have driven the party. Like, I would imagine we're talking Black Lives Matter. I would imagine we're talking about other social movements. Defunding the police. Right, right, right. Sunrise movement. Sunrise movement. So progressive social movements. Sure.
And a White House that has been open to hearing those out. Correct. Open to hearing and responding in some ways. I mean, I'm glad they're open to hearing. That's what I'd like to see in our politics. In this construction, right? Aren't we saying insurrection and Sunrise Movement and Black Lives Matter are insurrection?
No. Equivalent. No, it's a really good question. And I would say unequivocally, they're not equal. The reason I'm pushing on this is because I hear you're saying that you want to create a space for Americans who don't see themselves fitting in in the two-party system as it exists today. But I'm trying to make sure I understand why you think that system has become unacceptable to a lot of Americans. And then the alternative that you all are providing. I'm trying to make clear what is justifying what you're saying. There's no labels whatsoever.
plan for 2024? So about a year, over a year ago, you know, a lot of our members across the country, you know, because we've been focused on Congress for the last decade. So why would we take a look at this? They started asking us about 24 and the prospect that we could be having an election coming up that nobody really wants. So what we started investigating was really two things.
despite the fact that independent tickets, for lots of reasons historically, typically don't go far. Could this time be different? And if so, what would that look like? And then two is the administrative part. What does it take to get ballot access and can you actually do that? So we...
started doing some early investigating, and we saw enough promise there to start moving forward on both fronts. We just in December polled 26,000 registered voters, huge sample, representative samples in every state. Some of what we found is other polling that you've seen publicly available, two-thirds of people don't want Trump or Biden to run again. And that's, you've seen that in poll after poll.
But the other thing that was fascinating was the appetite and openness to an alternative, if it is those two in the end right now. An alternative of what? What did the numbers say? So the question we asked was if it were Trump versus Biden and you had the option of a moderate independent ticket, would you be open to voting for that ticket? Fifty nine percent said yes. Now, of course, somebody saying open to doesn't mean they're going to do it. And you're right.
definition of a moderate independent might be very different than mine. But the interesting thing is to win, an independent ticket really just has to get about 36, 37% of the vote. So if you do the math on that, 59% say they're open. If in the end, 37% actually voted for the ticket, that ticket could win outright in the electoral college. Again, we're a year out. There's no candidate. There's no agenda. So to say with any certainty that
yeah, an independent ticket would win. That absolutely isn't what we're saying. What we are saying is if there has ever been an opening, it's now.
I mean, the numbers that you're talking about really square with the reporting we've been doing over the last year. We hear people all the time talk about distaste between both parties, distance from the political priorities of Democrats and Republicans, fear around the prospect of Trump versus Biden in 2024. We talked to a woman today where I asked, what are you going to do if it's Trump-Biden 2024? And she said, I'd cry. You know, that's the sentiment that's overwhelming. But I guess...
How did you all land on the independent ticket as the solution? And does it only happen if there is indeed a Trump-Biden rematch? It only happens if there's an opening. One of the things we're really mindful of is, look, in the end, you'd be asking people to do something they don't typically do, which is vote for somebody other than the major two-party nominees. So as a starting point,
You need to be having an electorate that is historically cranky and pessimistic about the future. Now, right now, they are. So when you look at... That part seems, that box seems checked. That box is checked. I'm willing to concede that that box is checked. So once you clear that threshold, we will then start pulling names and...
combinations of names and seeing which ones perform best in which states. And that, of course, the path to victory will be a key part in deciding whether we'd nominate a ticket and which ticket in the end we'd nominate. We're going to have a convention in Dallas April 2024.
And the thinking is Super Tuesday, of course, is March 5th or thereabouts of that year. So in between Super Tuesday and the convention, that's when you really have to make a go-no-go decision. We choose after Super Tuesday because modern American political history says that after Super Tuesday, both parties will have their nominees. So we'll know what we're dealing with.
I read about unity tickets in op-eds. I hear about it on cable news. But give me an actual vision of what that means. Can you say possible names that could help us wrap our head around what we mean when we say unity ticket? Well, I mean, literally, we mean one Democrat, one Republican. Does it matter who's at the top? Who's at number two? That's not going to be one of our characteristics. That seems like a big difference. Requirements. Right?
Yeah, but here's – that's the point. This is not – we're not talking about an extreme Republican or a less extreme but still not representative Democrat. We're talking about two people who are centrists, who are bipartisan. But let's use names in the Senate. No, but –
There are big differences between those two people. So what I'm saying, when you're saying unity ticket in an era of Dobbs, does the person at the top of the ticket have to believe one thing about abortion? No.
Does the person at the top of the ticket have to believe one thing about whether the election was stolen or not? How do we decide what a unity ticket is comprised by? The question is a good and fair one, but you're getting ahead of where we are now. This No Labels 2024 project is really focused on right now on qualifying candidates.
for third line on all 50 state ballots plus the District of Columbia. The next thing we're going to focus on is a platform which will give people an idea of what we're talking about when we say centrist solutions to people's problems. And then we're going to create a nominating committee with a representative group of our members. So here's what to me is the most important. Are the Democrat and the Republican who will be on a bipartisan unity ticket
Do they bring to it a commitment to make the government work again? In other words, they don't have to agree on everything, but they sure have to be, in my opinion, centrist,
And that could be liberal, conservative, moderate, but just willing to come to the center to negotiate resolutions to our problems, compromise and get it done. Part of the reason I'm pushing here is because in my reporting in the recent months, it has shown that the Democratic Party has coalesced mostly around Joe Biden.
and a party where figures like AOC have largely been written out and don't hold the same amount of power they may have held right after a kind of Trump election. And we hear from voters who feel homeless from both parties, who feel disconnected from both parties sometimes, not because they feel like the parties are too extreme, but because they believe Joe Biden's too centrist, too. How does your plan account for those people?
Well, the question, like, how do we define centrism? Centrism is not the midpoint necessarily between what Republicans and Democrats in Washington think on a given issue. And there's some issues that don't lend themselves to meeting in the center. There are some issues of conscience for people, abortion, other things. You're not going to get there. The problem in Washington is that you could take a Democrat and a Republican and they could disagree on eight issues.
And all they'll do is fixate on the eight issues, even though there's two things they could probably work on. And there's so many issues like that, and we've already started doing polling on this, where when you ask the public, they are a lot more willing to come to the center to find a compromise solution than people in Washington often are. Mm-hmm.
What are those issues? I'll give you an example. We asked people just as a compromise on immigration, would you be open to a compromise deal that included permanent path to citizenship for the dreamers, significant investments in border security? 80% said yes. Okay, if 80% of the public wants that,
How come we can't have it? The filibuster. No, it's... The filibuster. The filibuster. But, well... That's why you need bipartisan support. I'm saying, it's not clear to me the answer to that is the president. The answer I'd have would be it's because we have a moment today where Republicans...
Republicans live in mortal fear of a base that if they are for anything other than deporting 10 million people, you're for amnesty. And there is now a segment of the Democratic Party that if you are for any kind of border security, well, then you're for putting kids in cages. And that is the dynamic we see on issue after issue after issue. When we think about the look ahead,
Is there any fear about playing a role of spoiler that I know that people have accused No Labels of previously in an era where you could have a Donald Trump that is promising unique levels of retribution in office, that is running rhetoric against campaign, that is unlike presidential candidates and unlike his opponent, that what you all are doing here is conflating two candidates that are not the same? Yeah, well, that's why the decision as to whether to run
no labels, bipartisan unity ticket is going to be difficult. It's not easy because we don't want to be spoilers. Now, we look with some encouragement at the exit polling on the last strong third party candidate, very different than what we're talking about, Ross Perot. And it basically showed that he drew pretty equally from both parties.
I think that if we find in polling next March, if it is Trump and Biden, that we're somehow disproportionately going to help Trump. I think there's going to be a lot of people within the no labels movement who will say it's not worth it. Don't do it. But I was speaking a while ago. I just happened to be into a group of young business people who.
And I was a little defensive. I mean, I said, we don't want to be spoilers. And a guy raised his hand and said, why are you worrying about being a spoiler? The whole system now is so rotten.
and unproductive, it needs to be spoiled. So that's a feeling out there, but it's not one that dominates within no labels. My colleague, Nate Cohn, who I talked to a couple weeks ago, who does a lot of our polling here, he was telling me how Biden's softest support comes from three groups most primarily. Young people, voters of color, low-income voters. Those would seem to be key groups that would need to be behind
or ripe to be behind any break from the Democratic Party. How are you matching the type of folks who, you know, labels as prioritizing in terms of centrist representatives with the reality that some people on the ground don't like the system, but they're very much not the type of people
the constituencies of the type of people that No Labels has prioritized. So there's two things. One is, when you said there's lots of people that we're talking about, there's an important distinction, which is we haven't been talking about any of these candidates. Lots of people have been speculating about candidates that might be on a potential No Labels ticket. But to your point about the coalition and what does it look like?
We did this exercise in 2022. We also did it in December 2021. And the universe of people that were open to this grew by about 13 million. And what was fascinating is the two biggest drivers of that growth, 13 million, it came from two categories. Number one was people who had formerly supported former President Trump. He had lost some of that support and that had come into that coalition. But the
But the other part was minority voters, East and South Asian, Hispanic and Portuguese, which is sort of stand-in for people of Brazilian descent, African-Americans. The share in each of those groups doubled in terms of their openness to it. So we absolutely think that a ticket like this
could be broadly representative of what most people in the country want. Yeah, I want to drill in on that, though, because when we talk to people, they cite things like age, right, and wanting younger candidates. But we also talk to young people who have been motivated by the same social movements you both cited as wanting to see the parties move away from. How can there be a unity ticket that steps away from quote-unquote identity politics?
when that has been some of the biggest drivers of political activism for younger voters over the last four or five years? Well, because I think more people are concerned about making our politics more unified and productive than they are devoted to identity politics. One line answer. But what's the evidence for that? Well, it's polling. It's the kind of stuff we've cited here. I mean—
I guess I'm saying like a movement of low-income young people or people of color doesn't seem to me to fit with Joe Manchin. That's what I'm trying to square. Well, here's what I think is really clear from what we looked at in terms of the issues that motivate people. And maybe this gets to the answer of how would it be that a unity ticket could motivate younger voters, people of color, to vote?
And the simple answer to that is when we look at the issues that are motivating people most,
It is overwhelmingly kitchen table. It is everything is too expensive. It is I don't think I'm going to be better off than my parents were. It is an economic. This is going to be a kitchen table election. And so those, I think, are going to be the issues that are going to motivate people to the extent they're not happy with their current choices. I think it's very much a byproduct of how they see the current economic situation.
I hear and see the problem that y'all are trying to fix. I guess I just see also that in that data and in our reporting, it is not clear that the problem is based in an ideological one, purely. And it does feel like your solution is ideologically driven. I think what you're getting at is, I don't think our premise is not, hey, this is all about the issues. And if we could just get to that 60% solution on immigration, right?
It is – it does feel more fundamental that beyond the issues itself is people do recognize there's something deeply rotten and scary. And that if we don't get out of this cycle where –
We look at the person on the other side with hatred and think, how do we destroy them? How do we crush them? Yeah. That if somebody doesn't somehow break us out of this cycle, like when does it end and where is it? That's the only reason. I mean, look, history, American history tells us that this is going to be very difficult. To find a precedent for a third party or a third ticket winning –
You probably have to go back to 1864. Lincoln chose a Democrat, Andrew Johnson, to form a bipartisan unity ticket, really to try to unite the country divided by the Civil War. And like, look what that did to Reconstruction. I mean, that's a great example. I know. Who knew? That only tells us that it's a long time since it's been tried.
And certainly the 1864 model didn't work. Sadly, Lincoln got killed. If he had lived, I think it would have been a lot different. Yeah, I mean, certainly. Thank you all. Thank you, Ryan. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate your time. Thank you. Great discussion. Yeah, I do really mean it. Like, every person we talk to.
Every person. It's out there. So, like, it's not... So, by their own admission, no labels is a long shot. They've diagnosed the central reality of this moment, that a majority of Americans are unhappy with their two most likely presidential candidates. But their ability to provide a solution is much less clear.
Just hours after we talked, it was reported that the group received a cease and desist letter from the Secretary of State's office in Maine over allegations that No Labels organizers misled voters into unknowingly registering to vote on the No Labels party line. And even if No Labels does end up on the ballot, a unity ticket would only appeal to a small percentage of the voters I talked to who are hating their options for 2024.
Because while lots of people sound really similar when they talk about what they don't like about Biden. His level of competence worries me with his age and mental clarity. He's too fucking old. Way too old. I think he has that. And they sound similar when they talk about Trump. Yeah, he still scares the hell out of me. Just the narcissism really is what worries me.
I think Trump is disgusting, and I think it's an embarrassment for America. There's very little else that unites them. A lot of them don't feel like they fit in the two-party system.
Like when people start getting sensitive about like, oh, this person doesn't want to say my pronoun, this and that. It's like, bro, like that's really too nitpicky. You think the left has gotten too nitpicky? They really have. And the same thing for the right. The right is just as nitpicky as it is as well. Like it has all these like illogical ideas that is like, bro, it does not make sense. Like abortion, like, yeah, a woman should have the definite right to choose if she wants to abort the child or not.
In fact, these voters rarely map neatly onto traditional party lines. If you're someone who's always prioritized gun rights, I'm curious why you started off as a Democrat.
But just because they're unsatisfied with the right and the left... That doesn't make them centrist. Can you explain to me why?
Do you think the election was stolen? So when it comes to alternatives, they're all over the map.
making the challenge for a third-party candidate even harder. Is there a politician or a figure you can think of that would excite you if they were on the presidential ballot? Let's act like Trump and Biden aren't there. Yeah, this guy named Jocko Willink. I don't know who that is. I think Dave Ramsey is awesome. He should run. Oh, the radio guy. Bernie Sanders. Rand Paul. Dennis Kucinich. Tulsi Gabbard. Ron DeSantis. Bring Obama back.
One of the groups we've been talking to has been trying to work on an effort to nominate what's called a unity ticket. So instead of a Biden or Trump, to nominate someone who could be a third party candidate that will put a Democrat and Republican on the same ticket. When you hear that idea, what's your first thought? That is interesting. I think that's progress, but is it really going to make a difference?
They're talking about people like Joe Manchin, this guy from West Virginia, people who have been in the center of both parties. Do you know, are those people who have registered for you? No, they don't. I'm not familiar. There's nobody that on the Democrat side that is far enough right wing for me to vote for them. Even someone like Joe Manchin? Mm hmm.
I don't know enough about him to know, but probably not. I wouldn't see myself voting for a community ticket. If they had like a small government ticket and abolished the government ticket, I might be on board with that. Do you think that would bring the country together? What do you think would bring the country together? And should that be a goal? I don't even think that should be a goal. I don't think it's necessarily a possibility. I think there's too many entrenched people on both sides for that to ever really happen.
When it comes to making plans, you are the best.
from those delicious barbecues to special birthdays and unforgettable family get-togethers. The same way you plan for those important moments, start planning to protect you and your loved ones from a natural disaster like a hurricane, flood, wildfire, or tornado. Sign up for local weather and emergency alerts, prepare an emergency kit, and make a family communications plan. Get started today at ready.gov slash plan. A public service message brought to you by FEMA and the Ad Council.
The Run-Up is reported by me, Ested Herndon, and produced by Elisa Gutierrez, Caitlin O'Keefe, and Anna Foley. It's edited by Franny Kartoff and Lisa Tobin, with original music by Dan Powell, Marion Lozano, and Alicia Baitu. It was mixed by Isaac Jones and fact-checked by Caitlin Love.
Special thanks to Paula Schumann, Sam Donick, Larissa Anderson, David Halfinger, Mahima Chablani, Desiree Ibequa, Renan Barelli, Jeffrey Miranda, Sophia Landman, and Maddie Maciela. If you like the show and want to get updates on latest episodes, follow our feed wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks for listening, y'all.
AI may be the most important new computer technology ever. But AI needs a lot of processing speed. And that gets expensive fast. Upgrade to the next generation of the cloud. Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, or OCI. OCI is the single platform for your infrastructure, database, application development, and AI needs. Do more and spend less like Uber, 8x8, and Databricks Mosaic.
Take a free test drive of OCI at oracle.com slash nyt. oracle.com slash nyt.