“I won't do anything that would help [Trump]." Liz Cheney, December 7, 2023.
Cheney knows that, if she ran as a third party candidate, she would siphon a lot of independent and Never Trump Republican votes from Biden. It would, without question, help Trump.
With respect to No Labels, they’ve lost a lot of credibility by pursuing a third party alternative in this election. Their effort would help Trump get elected, full stop. With Hogan and Manchin (and, apparently, Haley) making clear they won’t run on a third party ticket, No Labels will find it hard to put together a credible ticket. There is a zero percent chance a No Labels candidate would win; I think it’s likely they would get zero electoral votes. Nancy Jacobson claims they won’t field a candidate if it would help Trump, but there’s no doubt it would, and they’re still collecting money from donors. No Labels appears to have become a grift factory. Liz Cheney should want nothing to do with them. (I supported No Labels when they first formed, but no longer.)
I would imagine that Liz will put a lot of effort into helping Dems and/or non-MAGA Republicans win their House races. The make-up of the House will crucial if Trump does win. She may also wind up campaigning with JB. Now THAT would light Trumps hair on fire!
"wildcard in the coming election" I suspect she'd not take any chance that could take any chance of pulling votes from Biden. But down ballot candidates to create alternative to MAGA? Better.
But not better if it takes votes away from winnable non-MAGA candidates. We don’t need more MAGAs in the House, Senate, or state houses. If they want to run a candidate in a bright red, safe Republican district, they can go for it.
Agreed! And I don’t know if she knows exactly what she’s going to do other than what she’s said, anything that doesn’t help Trump and I’m kind of ok with that. Allows her to be flexible and help where needed and not tied into one thing.
In the last 12 days Chris Cilliza has discussed Joe Biden's age 9 times.
At this rate Chris would have discussed Biden's age more than the 50 times he discussed Hillary Clinton's email in 2016. Check out the definition of Obsession people. No thank you card for you this time from Trump because he's going to lose no matter how many times you Chris discussed his age
And not even close to the hundreds of times he will probably end up mentioning Trump’s lunacy and threat to democracy. Those numbers will dwarf the number of times he refers to the voters’ concerns about Biden’s age.
JimB, please do me a favor. Start keeping a log of the no of times Chris discusses Trump's criminal indictments , his( Trump) threat to Democracy, and his( Trump) senility. Then we can compare notes in December after Biden has won.
Why don’t you post on your OWN Substack and see if you get *anyone* to pay attention? Your comments here have become increasingly petty and completely irrelevant, and it seems like the ONLY point is to “increase your profile” at the expense of Chris’s readers.
Cheney has already said she would not involve herself in anything that would det4act from Biden's vote to stop Trump. Face it Chris, you're not going to get a "horse race" for 2024 no matter how many times a day you drop to your knees and pray in the direction of Hudson Yards.
What I learned from this column today is that Sadaharu Oh is mentioned in a Beastie Boys song. Which I think is very cool. (I'm a fan of baseball and spent half my childhood in Japan.)
“I won't do anything that would help [Trump]." Liz Cheney, December 7, 2023.
Cheney knows that, if she ran as a third party candidate, she would siphon a lot of independent and Never Trump Republican votes from Biden. It would, without question, help Trump.
With respect to No Labels, they’ve lost a lot of credibility by pursuing a third party alternative in this election. Their effort would help Trump get elected, full stop. With Hogan and Manchin (and, apparently, Haley) making clear they won’t run on a third party ticket, No Labels will find it hard to put together a credible ticket. There is a zero percent chance a No Labels candidate would win; I think it’s likely they would get zero electoral votes. Nancy Jacobson claims they won’t field a candidate if it would help Trump, but there’s no doubt it would, and they’re still collecting money from donors. No Labels appears to have become a grift factory. Liz Cheney should want nothing to do with them. (I supported No Labels when they first formed, but no longer.)
I agree with everything you wrote. The bottomline is, ANY third party candidate for president helps Trump get elected. Plain and simple.
Mr and Mrs Mark Penn have been a pair of turds in the DC bowl since the Clinton Administration.
I’ve been questioning for awhile, what in heck is Cheney actually doing to prevent Trump from getting back into the White House. Sigh.
She'd probably be able to do more, if you sent her group money, as I have.
Katie Britt is the new Marco Rubio. Yuck
I immediately thought "Daughter of The Stepford Wives." I had to turn her off after a few sentences.
I would imagine that Liz will put a lot of effort into helping Dems and/or non-MAGA Republicans win their House races. The make-up of the House will crucial if Trump does win. She may also wind up campaigning with JB. Now THAT would light Trumps hair on fire!
"wildcard in the coming election" I suspect she'd not take any chance that could take any chance of pulling votes from Biden. But down ballot candidates to create alternative to MAGA? Better.
But not better if it takes votes away from winnable non-MAGA candidates. We don’t need more MAGAs in the House, Senate, or state houses. If they want to run a candidate in a bright red, safe Republican district, they can go for it.
Liz Cheney is not a woman to be underestimated!
Agreed! And I don’t know if she knows exactly what she’s going to do other than what she’s said, anything that doesn’t help Trump and I’m kind of ok with that. Allows her to be flexible and help where needed and not tied into one thing.
I say 62 minutes.
"That's Paul's Boutique, and they're in Brooklyn...."
President Biden has a stutter. What’s Trump’s excuse?
CHRIS CILLIZA AND BIDEN'S AGE.
In the last 12 days Chris Cilliza has discussed Joe Biden's age 9 times.
At this rate Chris would have discussed Biden's age more than the 50 times he discussed Hillary Clinton's email in 2016. Check out the definition of Obsession people. No thank you card for you this time from Trump because he's going to lose no matter how many times you Chris discussed his age
And not even close to the hundreds of times he will probably end up mentioning Trump’s lunacy and threat to democracy. Those numbers will dwarf the number of times he refers to the voters’ concerns about Biden’s age.
JimB, please do me a favor. Start keeping a log of the no of times Chris discusses Trump's criminal indictments , his( Trump) threat to Democracy, and his( Trump) senility. Then we can compare notes in December after Biden has won.
Honestly, get a life! What’s your frickin’ point?
Why don’t you post on your OWN Substack and see if you get *anyone* to pay attention? Your comments here have become increasingly petty and completely irrelevant, and it seems like the ONLY point is to “increase your profile” at the expense of Chris’s readers.
If I were obsessed by it I probably would.
Cheney has already said she would not involve herself in anything that would det4act from Biden's vote to stop Trump. Face it Chris, you're not going to get a "horse race" for 2024 no matter how many times a day you drop to your knees and pray in the direction of Hudson Yards.
What I learned from this column today is that Sadaharu Oh is mentioned in a Beastie Boys song. Which I think is very cool. (I'm a fan of baseball and spent half my childhood in Japan.)