And Then There Were Two?

This week we saw the results of the long-awaited Iowa caucuses. Just before this event, former Governor Chris Christie dropped out of the Republican Presidential race

but still spoke out against the former president. The weather in Iowa was dismal with blowing snow and below-zero temperatures, so the turnout was depressed. The

eventual results, as reported by the New York Times, were for a total of 110,298 caucus votes, which was significantly down from the 2016 result of 186,932. The final tallies

showed that the former president won about half of the votes cast: Trump: 51% (56,260 votes), DeSantis 21% (23,420), Haley 19% (21,085), and Ramaswamy 8% (8,449).

 

While some are touting this as a big win, these numbers are not as impressive when one realizes these numbers represent a small portion of the total Republicans in Iowa (approximately 719,000). Pundits reported that the basis for DJTs support in Iowa was the Evangelical Voter, despite his lack of a religious focus, moral code, or church identification. He even ran strange ads that showed him as blessed and made him seem like one sent from God. One caucusgoer even claimed that good Christians could not vote for Democrats.

 

After that result, two candidates, Asa Hutchinson, and Vivek Ramaswamy, dropped out of the race and suspended their campaigns. Former candidate, and fellow Haley neighbor, South Carolinian Senator Tim Scott, endorsed DJT this week in a personal appearance with the candidate before a large crowd. Today, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis joined Ramaswamy by not only dropping out but also endorsing DJT. So, it appears the Republican ducks are falling under the pressure being applied by the leading candidate. They, along with elected congressional representatives and senators, supposedly have been told they are expected to endorse before Super Tuesday in March or face consequences.

 

Those actions leave Nikki Haley as the only viable opponent to the nomination of the former president. She touted her third-place finish in Iowa as the momentum she needed to do well in the New Hampshire primary. Since she appeals to more moderate voters and Independents, she is expected to do well in New Hampshire. Currently, she is polling about 15 points behind the Maga candidate. She does not seem to have any robust campaign organization in other states that could propel her to any primary wins. So, does she join the crowd and endorse the former president or stand back and see what lies ahead for her politically? I guess we shall soon learn the answer.

 

In case you are wondering where the Democrats are in this political season, well, they are getting there. After a disastrous caucus in 2020 in Iowa when the new tabulating software did not work well and the results were not known for days, the Democrats decided to not have a caucus this year. Since neither New Hampshire nor Iowa are demographically representative of the Democratic Party’s diverse base, the party wanted to showcase states that were to kick off the primary season. The party censured New Hampshire for declining to change its first in the nation's primary status, so the state could not run an official Democratic contest this year. However, there is an unofficial write-in campaign for President Biden, so he will at least have a showing. The Democrats start their campaign with the primary in South Carolina on February 3^rd , followed by a primary in Nevada on the 6th. The Republicans hold a Caucus in Nevada on the 8^th. Sixteen states are holding primaries on March 5^th, now dubbed Super Tuesday. Maryland, because of issues with its legislative session and restrictions about campaigning and fundraising, will not hold its primary until May 14^th, when most of the other states have already voted. However, since votes on the Democratic side are not contested, this will not make a difference in choosing the Democratic candidate. In another year, having such a late primary would make Maryland’s votes somewhat anti-climactic, but this year, without a contest, it does not make a difference.

 

Over the last year, press reports noted that Nazi memorabilia collector and great friend of Justice Clarence Thomas, Harlan Crow, and many of his wealthy business associates funded the group No Labels. Former Maryland Governor Larry Hogan just stepped down from the board of No Labels. He announced he was endorsing Nikki Haley and was not himself a candidate. Mother Jones reported on the donors listed by No Labels, many of whom are in the oil and gas industries or have ties to conservative causes. Senator Joe Manchin and former VP candidate Joe Lieberman are both involved with this group, thought by most Democrats to be a potential spoiler in the 2024 race, pulling more votes from Biden, than Trump. Manchin has not yet announced a candidacy, although he has flirted with it for a while. This third-party effort does not yet have a candidate, nor is it on the ballot in all states. Recently Move-on reported that No Labels is claiming that its workers are being harassed and intimidated by Democrats when they try to get signatures for ballot placement and has asked the Department of Justice to intervene.

 

According to Mother Jones:

“No Labels is continuing to organize petition drives to win lines on the 2024 state ballots. “We’re going for as many states as we can across the country,” Clancy recently told NPR. The group says its aim is to run a ticket comprised of a Democrat and a Republican, if the public sours on the available choices (such as Biden and Trump). Its top officials have issued conflicting statements about what would trigger the organization to proceed with its own nominee.

The most discussed potential candidate for No Labels has been Manchin, who has declined to say whether he would participate in this effort. Poll data suggesting a No Labels campaign would hurt Biden more than Trump—as well as the conservative bent of the few previously known funders of the group, such as billionaire Harlan Crow, the billionaire benefactor of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and a collector of Nazi memorabilia—has prompted Democratic strategists to speculate that this endeavor is a not-too-secret project to elect Trump or another Republican. Prominent Democratic operatives and Never-Trump Republicans recently met privately in Washington, DC, to discuss how best to counter a No Labels presidential campaign.”

“No Labels insists its work addresses the concerns of voters who have become disillusioned with modern American politics and the partisanship of each side. Yet it sticks with the cynical and common tricks of the trade and eschews transparency and accountability, cloaking the moneybags who underwrite its operation. The list of donors found in the IPFA (Insurance Policy for America) filing covers only a modest fraction of the money that has so far flowed into this No Labels venture; it is a small slice of the $70 million the group is aiming to collect for its 2024 plan.

The lion’s share of the money that has moved in and out of IPFA has not been disclosed in its filings with the IRS, and there is no telling whether the listed donors are representative of the organization’s overall sources of financing. Most of the funding for No Labels’ 2024 project remains secret, as this group that claims to be addressing popular disenchantment continues to use the same-old tactics of big-money politics and keeps the voters in the dark.”

Then, of course, there is anti-vaxxer Joe Kennedy and a few others, such as the Green Party with Jill Stein and activist Cornel West running as third-party candidates. Marianne Williamson, who ran in 2020, and Dean Philips are also running as Democrats. I hope No Labels does not get on the ballots across the country and cannot cause mischief, but I guess time will tell.

 

That’s enough for tonight.

Till next week – Peace!