(This story contains corrected information. Former Congressman Richard Gephardt’s position on “No Labels” was incorrectly stated in the first version of this post as being part of the organization. This story clarifies his that he not only is not, but that he is opposed to it.)
The “No Labels” political party is beginning to form itself out of the fog of idealism announced several months ago. It has drawn former Governor Jay Nixon into its ranks. But former Congressman and futile (1988) presidential candidate Dick Gephardt wonders if the effort puts the anti-Trump movement in peril.
Organizers say the party is for people who are disgusted with what the long-dominant Republican and Democratic Parties have become and who want to have a middle-ground political outpost upon which to hang their hopes.
Gephardt, who was the House Majority Leader and in line to become Speaker before the Republican takeover ended that possibility, is part of one of three Democratic organizations hoping to stop the movement.
For those who claim that both parties are being run by their extreme wings, this group that has labeled itself the “No Labels” party might seem to be a refuge. But two Democratic groups, Third Way and MoveOn, want to put a stop to the “No Labels” movement because they fear it will sap votes away from the mainline Democratic ticket and hand the presidency back to Donald Trump.
A spokesman for Third Way says “No Labels” is “dangerous.”
Gephardt is part of a super political action committee called Citizens to Save our Republic.
Nixon has told the APs Steve Peoples that the opposition groups are entitled to their opinion but “No Labels” is “entitled to use our constitutional and statutory rights to allow American to have another choice.”
The question now becomes whether the party formed to be a middle ground can find a middle ground with three groups that want to snuff out its movement early.
Regardless of how this intra-party turmoil is resolved—if it can be resolved—“No Labels” adherents need to address, and quickly, what it stands for in terms of policies instead of being some kind of ill-defined safe house for the Middle.
If “No Labels” is to survive, it needs a surface identifier, a logo.. It’s not enough to say it stands for The Middle.
Sooner or later it will have to define itself in terms of positions on issues. And finding an acceptable middle of The Middle will become a difficult challenge.
But before then, there’s another crucial issue.
What will the party symbol be? The William Jennings Bryan-William Howard Taft election of 1896 provided party adherents with symbols that are familiar to us today.
Earth & World, a website that specializes in lists and charts showing “different and unknown facts” about our planet has a list of the ten friendliest animals in the world. A new party certainly doesn’t want a threatening image (roaring lion, water buffalo, crocodile, vulture, shark, etc.).
Perhaps this guy would work (it is #1):
This is a Capybara, E&W says they are “immensely social and trainable; thus a dear friend to everyone.” There are a couple of problems, however. They’re not native to the United States. And they are considered the world’s largest rodent.
Some cynical observers might find a large rat to be an appropriate emblem for a political party but we’re not going to go there today. Mankind’s best friend, the dog, might be appropriate but who wants to be known as a member of “a dog of a party?” Besides, what kind of a dog would be most appropriate? Pit Bulls might fit the wing nuts of either party. But mainline folks night struggle with the dog to represet them. Something that is an edgy Golden Retriever might do.
A cross between a Golden Retriever and a German Shepherd might do. DogTime.com told us Golden Shepherds are good watch dogs and all-around family companions, “not especially barky, they will alert when strangers approach. These dogs are protective of their loved ones and friendly with people, children, and other dogs.”
A few Golden Shepherds in Congress would be good to have right now. Replace a few Dobermans.
Number three on the E&W list is the Dolphin. There’s some possibilities with that one. Intelligent. Communicative. Comfortable in deep water.
Number four is the cat. Not good. Nobody wants a party headquarters that would be known by detractors as the “cat house.” Their independence is a good cat/bad cat value. But they cover up their own messes and government coverups should not be appreciated no matter how badly the mess smells. Then again, a litter-box trained politician might be better than some that we have now.
The Panda? Nope. We’ve enough trouble with the Chinese owning our farmland. A Chinese animal symbolizing one of our political parties is a Yangtze Bridge too far.
Rabbit? No. Rabbits are favorite food items for Hawks. And our national government in particular is full of hawks. And we already have too many people, including a few in politics, who have rabbit-like moral standards.
Guinea pig? They also are part of the rodent family. Some people in the Andean part of Peru keep a lot of them in and around the house. For food. Dinner-under-foot. Cuy (pronounced “kwee”) is considered a delicacy.
Horse. The horse is one of the world’s most useful animals. Durable, unless they’re throughbreds. Dependable. That’s worth discussion.
Sheep. Heavens, no.
Nixon has refused to criticize either Biden or Trump during the years since he left office. As far as becoming part of a party with no name, he says, “I feel calm. I feel correct.”
Very Capybaric of him.