A Mysterious Third Party Enters the 2024 Presidential Race

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Political Scene | The New Yorker

Episode: A Mysterious Third Party Enters the 2024 Presidential Race
Date: July 17, 2023
Host: David Remnick
Guests: Pat McCrory (Leader, No Labels; Former Governor of North Carolina), Sue Halpern (Staff Writer, The New Yorker)

---

Overview

This episode investigates “No Labels,” a self-described centrist political movement gearing up for a potential third-party presidential run in the 2024 U.S. election. Host David Remnick interviews Pat McCrory, a leading figure in No Labels, to clarify the group’s motivations, ideology, and strategy. Remnick then speaks to journalist Sue Halpern, who has reported on No Labels’ structure, funding, and the logistical and political challenges facing any third-party movement. The episode probes the entity’s true intentions, its financial backers, and the possible consequences of its entry into the 2024 race.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. What Is No Labels and What Are Its Aims?

• No Labels is actively securing ballot access across the country but has not yet announced a candidate (01:17).
• Pat McCrory characterizes No Labels as a grassroots organization involving volunteers, staff, former/current officials, and community activists (03:07).
• McCrory insists No Labels does not intend to become a permanent third party (02:51).

Quote:

“No Labels is not planning to stick around as a third permanent political party…after we select candidates. We are not going to run the campaign.”—Pat McCrory (02:51)

2. Positioning and Ideological Ambiguity

• Remnick repeatedly presses McCrory to clarify the group’s ideology, suggesting it seems “center-right” (03:36).
• McCrory rejects ideological labels, aiming for a ticket comprising both a Republican and a Democrat (05:31).
• The platform remains vague; a “common sense agenda” will be released, focusing on compromise and broad appeal (07:07).

Notable Exchange:

Remnick: “You’re giving me the most generic outline... Are you looking for a conservative?” (06:14)
McCrory: “We’re looking for people can work together and understand that when you have a divided country, you have to compromise to get things done.” (06:41)

3. Lack of Policy Specifics

• Remnick pushes for specifics on issues like abortion and guns; McCrory refuses to discuss details, promising an agenda rollout soon (07:31).
• No Labels claims it will leave some latitude for its candidate rather than demanding allegiance to a rigid platform (10:52).
• Remnick expresses frustration about the lack of substance in No Labels’ beliefs beyond dissatisfaction with the major party frontrunners (08:09).

4. Ballot Access Challenges

• The primary focus and immediate challenge for No Labels is nationwide ballot access, which is hindered by state-specific laws and resistance from established parties (08:37).
• At present, No Labels was on the ballot in only a handful of states (09:35); by year’s end, it hopes to be on 20 ballots (08:37).

5. No Labels’ Candidate Selection Process

• The group will have a nominating convention with delegates from each state (10:02).
• McCrory notes a “search committee” and “nominations committee” will be involved, but specifics are minimal (10:02).

6. The Spoiler Question and True Motivations

• Remnick and Halpern detail how third parties have traditionally played spoiler roles in U.S. elections (13:13), citing historical examples like Ralph Nader and Ross Perot.
• Halpern suggests No Labels’ primary effect may be to block Democrats, particularly those favoring social welfare, rather than offering a true middle-ground alternative (13:32).

Quote:

“I think that the idea here is that they are really opposed to the Democrats who are interested in public policy that helps the middle class, that helps the poor. I think that they’re really interested in blocking Democrats as opposed to electing Republicans.”—Sue Halpern (13:32)

7. Funding and Leadership

• Funding is intentionally opaque; McCrory says donors fear retaliation and their names are kept private (03:54).
• Halpern reports that No Labels is backed by private equity, finance, and billionaire donors such as Nelson Peltz and Harlan Crow (16:45).
• The group is led and heavily influenced by Nancy Jacobson (CEO) and her husband Mark Penn, a former Democratic pollster who has drifted rightward (17:14–17:43).
• No Labels' main pollster, Harris Poll, is owned by Mark Penn’s holding company, suggesting insider dealings (18:02).

8. Potential Candidates and Public Perception

• No Labels resists naming potential candidates. Media speculation includes Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, and Larry Hogan (15:40).
• Manchin and Sinema are described as conservative Democrats who align with No Labels’ approach and have ties to industries such as fossil fuels and private equity (15:40).
• Halpern asserts that much of No Labels’ public messaging is “disingenuous” and possibly designed to shield conservative interests (14:13).

9. Criticisms and Grift Accusations

• Critics, including Lincoln Project's Rick Wilson, allege that No Labels is a political “grift,” raising money, maintaining opacity, and never intending to meaningfully nominate a candidate (18:02).
• Halpern contends the real agenda may be more about blocking Democratic policies, especially those raising taxes on the wealthy (14:13, 15:40).

---

Memorable Moments & Quotes with Timestamps

• On Ideological Vagueness:
  “Nobody runs against common sense. Common sense is a pretty generalized phrase to be charitable.”
  —David Remnick (07:19)

• On Agenda Secrecy:
  “We will be rolling out our agenda in July as our time goal... we’re doing this a very strategic rollout and a very studious rollout of the issues of today.”
  —Pat McCrory (07:31)

• On Spoiler Potential:
  “If a third party candidacy conspires to and succeeds in sinking Joe Biden, well, the Republican will be elected. And that inevitably, it seems at this point, would be Donald Trump.”
  —David Remnick (14:13)

• On Funding Source Secrecy:
  “Where the money comes from is from all over the nation... there are some people who do give money and they’re afraid of retribution... That’s why their names are allowed to be protected in the current system.”
  —Pat McCrory (03:54)

• On the Real Power Players:
  “It’s really being driven a lot by this woman named Nancy Jacobson, who’s married to a guy named Mark Penn... Mark Penn was one of Trump’s advisors during impeachment.”
  —Sue Halpern (17:14–17:49)

---

Key Segment Timestamps

• [01:17] — Remnick introduces No Labels, its ambitions, and the third-party legacy.
• [02:51] — Pat McCrory on No Labels’ non-permanent party intentions.
• [05:31] — McCrory emphasizes goal for bipartisan ticket, hints at candidate background.
• [07:07 – 08:09] — Remnick presses for policies and ideology; McCrory remains non-committal.
• [13:13] — Discussion with Sue Halpern on historical third-party spoilers.
• [14:45 – 17:49] — Halpern details No Labels’ funding sources and key personalities.
• [18:02] — The Harris Poll’s link to Mark Penn and criticisms of No Labels’ motives.

---

Summary & Takeaway

This episode unpacks the mystery of “No Labels,” a well-funded group presenting itself as a centrist alternative to Biden and Trump. Despite high-profile organizers and significant fundraising, their refusal to provide policy specifics or transparency about funding stokes skepticism about their intentions. Critics argue that their most likely impact is to spoil the election in favor of Republicans, especially given their connections to finance, private equity, and conservative Democrats.

The show leaves listeners with a nuanced, questioning view of No Labels: is it a genuine attempt to break party gridlock, or a strategic spoiler masquerading as a political breath of fresh air? As their “common sense agenda” remains unrevealed, the group’s true role in shaping 2024 remains, for now, unresolved.

Transcript

[A]

As summer draws to a close and the kids go back to school, I know I'm going to want to keep in touch with my kids at a price I can afford. Back to school Shopping can be a hassle, but your phone plan shouldn't be. That's why I made the switch to Mint Mobile. For a limited time, Mint mobile is offering three months of unlimited premium wireless service for 15 bucks a month. So while other parents are sweating overage charges, I have a little bit more room in my budget for cool back to school threads. Say bye bye to your overpriced wireless plan's jaw dropping monthly bills and unexpected overages, Mint Mobile is here to rescue you. All plans come with high speed data and unlimited talk and text delivered on the nation's largest 5G network. Use your own phone with any Mint Mobile plan and bring your phone number along with all your existing contacts. Dish overpriced wireless and get three months of premium wireless service from Mint Mobile for 15 bucks a month. This year, skip breaking a sweat and breaking the bank. Get this new customer offer and your three month unlimited wireless plan for just 15 bucks a [e-mail] New Yorker that's that's mintmobile.com New Yorker upfront payment of $45 required, equivalent to $15 a month limited time new customer offer for first three months only. Speeds may slow above 35 gigabytes on unlimited plan taxes and fees extra. See Mint Mobile for details.

[B]

This is the Political Scene and I'm David Remnant. No Labels is a would be political party that you may not have heard of yet. They haven't announced who their candidate is, but they've secured a considerable amount of funding and they're working behind the scenes to get on the ballot. Across the country, no Labels is pitched as a centrist movement to appeal to disaffected voters in both major parties. Now, the history of third party candidates, from Martin Van Buren to Teddy Roosevelt, Horace Greeley to Ross Perot, is an interesting one, but no one running from that position has ever won. And yet third parties can have real consequences. There are many to this day who believe that Ralph Nader cost Al Gore the election in 2000, or that Ross Perot spoiled things for George H.W. bush in 1992 and that led to the Clinton presidency. At this early point, Joe Biden and Donald Trump seem the likely nominees for their parties, yet polls tell us that they are profoundly unpopular with voters. So who knows? A third party could have an outsized impact. One of the leaders of no labels is Pat McCrory, the former governor of North Carolina. I spoke to him recently to try to understand what role this new party plays, if that's what it is. Intends to play in our political future.

[C]

No Labels is not planning to stick around as a third permanent political party nor after we select candidates. We are not going to run the campaign. That will be up to the.

[B]

Which leads me to ask, who is? No Labels.

[C]

They're. I mean, they're volunteers with a very small staff. I'm a volunteer, by the way. I accept no pay.

[B]

Right.

[C]

It's a grassroots effort of both grassroots people in all 50 states and also former and current elected officials and community activists like Ben Chavis, who was a big Biden supporter and used to work for Martin Luther King and actually served seven years in prison in North Carolina in which my predecessor gave him a part.

[B]

It seems to me that overall what this is, is a center right. A center right impulse.

[C]

I don't know where you get that center right.

[B]

Well, tell me what it is. Where's your juice coming from? Where's your money coming from? How are you? What's your view of how you can succeed with this lineup?

[C]

Well, we're setting up organizations in every state just like pro did, just like the parties do. We're brand new. We're starting from scratch. Where the money comes from is from all over the nation, and we're not. People are asking us about the money. But the fact of the matter is there are some people who do give money and they're afraid of retribution for fear if their name is used, there will be retribution from the Democratic and Republican establishment which will, will, will attack them.

[B]

Give me.

[C]

That's why their names are allowed to be protected in the current system. But once the campaign starts, everything will be based upon the legality of how campaigns are run in the United States of America.

[B]

Give me some examples of candidates that might fit the bill for you for no Labels.

[C]

You know, I'm reluctant to mention any names because we haven't started that process yet. I know the media has talked about some names. They have been elected officials that have been involved in our meetings. We have members of our problem solving caucus that could be. We think will be very active, but they're even reluctant, some of them, to get involved in the presidential process until after the primary because of fear of retribution. By the way, our parties have a monopoly on. How dare you go against the party structure. We will punish you for that.

[B]

Okay. But if you don't give me any potential candidates, and obviously the media asks you That's a logical question. What is an alternative type of candidate look like?

[C]

Most likely we'll have both a Republican and Democrat on the ticket. That's our goal right now. As Republican and Democratic on a ticket, I anticipate someone who has leadership skills, someone who has a history of compromise, someone who is good on the campaign trail, someone who might come in from military experience, business experience or. Or leadership in political experience. And we do not think we're going to have a shortage of people who would be interested. Because if you have 60% of the people dissatisfied with what the parties are going to present to us, if it stays the same, and again, I hope it doesn't, and then we'll take those names to the convention in Dallas in June.

[B]

Governor, with respect, with real respect, you're not telling me much. I mean, you're giving me the most generic outline of any. A candidate somewhere in the giant broad middle who doesn't happen to be Donald Trump or Joe Biden. That's correct. Are you looking for. Yes. Fantastic. Are they really? Are you looking for a conservative? Is overall somebody you're looking for is a conservative.

[C]

We're looking for people can work together and understand that when you have a divided country, you have to compromise to get things done.

[B]

Now, when you've had third party candidates in the past, they had some kind of ideological purpose or meaning, whether it was Ross Perot or Ralph Nader or Jill Stein, we've had them. You're telling me very, very little that's specific about what you want that person to be politically or ideologically.

[C]

We're going to be coming out with what we call the common sense agenda, where you'll kind of see and potential candidates will kind of see where we want them to take stands on.

[B]

Nobody runs against common sense. Common sense is a pretty generalized phrase to be charitable. Where are you on abortion? Where are you on guns?

[C]

We'll be rolling out our agenda in July as our time goal for doing that. I've played the game, I've been played by the game and I'm exposing the game. But what we're not gonna be do is trapped by the game and then sabotaged by the game of the two systems that set you up for failure. And, and that's what's happening right now in the political game of politics. We're doing this a very strategic rollout and a very studious rollout of the issues of today. And then we'll do the same thing and see who's the best fit for the people of America and We're listening to the people of America.

[B]

I hear you. But a politician, a statesman, believes in something. And what we're not talking about in this conversation, other than common sense and the most, most general and generic qualities is what no Labels believes in other than Donald Trump is untenable. And I think what I'm getting from you is that Joe Biden is too much to the left and too old.

[C]

Yeah. It's not what no Labels believes. And the American people are saying that they don't want either Donald Trump or Joe Biden. What we're doing right now is setting up the infrastructure in every, all 50 states, which is very hard because some of the political parties are trying to sabotage our efforts. We're getting on the ballot and hopefully all 50 states. I think we're on seven or eight ballots now. We hope to be on 20 ballots by the end of the year. The candidates themselves are going to have to get on 13 or 14 ballots according to the laws, because we have different laws in every state because. But I'm telling you right now, the political parties want to keep their monopoly or duopoly. And so they're, they're trying to make it hard for a legitimate effort to get on the ballots in a lot of states. And that's where our major priority is, because we're wasting our time if we don't have the leverage of getting on the ballots to possibly win a race. And that's where we're putting our effort and our money right now.

[B]

The Republican Party chooses its candidates, a convoluted system. And the Democratic Party also chooses a candidate through a combination of primaries, caucuses, and then a convention.

[C]

That's correct.

[B]

And there is at least some measure of Democratic elevation and choice there. I think we can agree.

[C]

How are you going to have been in that measure before?

[B]

Well, that's fair. How are you going to choose a candidate?

[C]

We're going to have a nominations first, a search committee, and then most likely a nominations committee. And then we'll bring names to our convention and we're going to have convention delegates from every state.

[B]

Polls tell us certain things about what in fact the American people do want. The American people want abortion rights. I mean, this is the polls. The American people want gun control and certainly in greater measure than we have now and a great deal else. What issues would a New Labels candidate respond to?

[C]

Well, we will be speaking on social issues. We will be speaking on financial issues. We will be speech on foreign policy issues.

[B]

But what will you say?

[C]

But we aren't going to be. We aren't going to. I know you'll speak on these issues.

[B]

But what have you got to say?

[C]

Excuse me. We have to also give some leeway to the candidates that we end up selecting. We're not going to. We're not also going to play the game where, you know, know each political party has a detailed platform which then the candidates just ignore a lot of these issues. People are somewhere in the middle on those. And the problem is the two parties are on the fringes with no compromise because you can't get through a primary if you dare compromise on some of these issues.

[B]

What are the beliefs that you have that you will not betray?

[C]

I'm not on your time period. Sorry. Because we're putting all our efforts right now. You think I'm rushing you and getting on the ballot.

[B]

You think I'm rushing you and I'm being unfair.

[C]

No, no. I'm. No, not at all. No. I have no problem with you asking the question, but I'm also telling you I'm not on that timeline to be able to answer that question as of yet.

[B]

Pat McCrory is a leader of the third party called no Labels and a former governor of North Carolina. The group is going to release what they're describing as a common sense agenda on Monday, and it's at an event with Joe Manchin and Governor John Huntsman of Utah. Joining me now is staff writer Sue Halpern, who recently reported on no Labels for the New Yorker. Sue, I have to admit I was very frustrated and came away from that conversation not knowing a hell of a lot about what no Labels has on its mind. Pat McCrory kept pointing out just how unpopular a Trump Biden rematch is among American voters. And that is true. We've never seen such poor favorability for a presidential race. But where does that leave them?

[D]

It is true that people don't want to see a rematch, but that doesn't mean people want a third party. You know, Americans are very fickle when you ask them this question. I mean, you ask people in 2016, do you want Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as the candidates? And most people said no. When Ronald Reagan was running, only 37% of people thought he should run for a second term. I mean, Americans are like that.

[B]

Now, third party candidates have not done well for a very long time in American politics. Traditionally, what they do is they peel off some votes from one side or another and they can play a spoiler role in a given election. Certainly Ross Perot did. What do you think is really going on Here.

[D]

I think that the idea here is that they are really opposed to the Democrats who are interested in public policy that helps the middle class, that helps the poor. I think that they're really interested in blocking Democrats as opposed to electing Republicans so they can say, you know, we.

[B]

Don'T like the end. What's the difference? In other words, if a third party candidacy conspires to and succeeds in sinking Joe Biden, well, the Republican will be elected. And that inevitably, it seems at this point anyway, would be Donald Trump.

[D]

Yes, I totally agree with you, but I think that's why it's completely disingenuous activity that they're engaged in. But I really think that it comes out of this idea that they don't want Democrats whose basic ideology is that we need to raise taxes to fund social welfare. I think that's something that they really oppose.

[B]

And how are they doing in getting on ballots around the country? Sue, you reported in your piece that they're on the ballot in just four states. Now.

[D]

In one of those states they're being challenged. And in another state in Maine, they got a cease and desist letter from the Secretary of State. They were telling people if they just signed this petition to get on the ballot. That was all that they were doing. But in fact, what they were doing was giving up their party affiliation, which meant that they couldn't vote in either the Democratic or the Republican primary. And the people who are signing it did not know that. So that was a little underhanded.

[B]

Now, in my, I have to admit, very frustrating interview with the former governor of North Carolina, he wouldn't fess up to being interested in anybody in particular as a possible third party candidate. But Joe Manchin has reportedly expressed interest in seeking the presidency even though his own Senate seat is in eternal danger because of the nature of the state he's from, from West Virginia.

[D]

Joe Manchin has been floated as a possibility. Kyrsten Sinema has been floated as a possibility. Larry Hogan, but maybe only as the vice president. Manchin and Sinema are interesting characters. You know, they are the most conservative Democrats. They kind of represent the ideology of no labels better than anybody else. They are people who take a lot of money from the fossil fuel industry, for instance. They take a lot of money from private equity. After Sinema was basically responsible for tanking Biden's Build Back better program policy, she got a great infusion of cash from private equity. She was kind of playing hardball for them and making sure that the Democrats idea of taxing the wealthy didn't go forward.

[B]

So where is their money coming from?

[D]

Ah, there's the $70 million question. They are funded primarily by people in private equity, by people in finance. They have a lot of billionaires funding them, including people like Nelson Peltz, who was a big Trump funder, including Harlan.

[B]

Crow, the billionaire who was so generous to Clarence Thomas, as ProPublica has uncovered.

[D]

Yes, he is very generous. It's really being driven a lot by this woman named Nancy Jacobson, who's married to a guy named Mark Penn. Mark Penn used to be a pollster and advisor to Bill Clinton. Kind of got shut out from Hillary Clinton and certainly from Obama, and got kind of a little angry, I think, at the Democratic Party for not embracing him.

[B]

And also moved well to the right of where he even was as a centrist.

[D]

Exactly. And during Trump's impeachment hearings, Mark Penn was one of his advisors. He was seen going in and out of the White House.

[B]

What's the connection between the Harris Poll and no Labels?

[D]

The Harris Poll is a company that was purchased by Mark Penn's kind of holding company. It's a very, very large, very lucrative company. It's called Stagwell, and Stagwell owns Harris Poles. Harris Poles is the pollster for no Labels. So that's kind of an insider, you know, little family dealing there. But, you know, some people think the whole, you know, like the Lincoln Project folks, Rick Wilson thinks the whole thing is just some kind of grift that, you know, that Mark Penn is pulling. You know, they've the no Labels people have raised something like $70 million to do this. They're going to have a nominating convention. They're going to do all sorts of things. But the one reason why I think that they haven't put forward a candidate is once they do that, then they are required to do all the things that political parties do. At the moment, they're operating as like a pack, essentially. They don't have to say who their donors are, for instance. And it does end up looking very much like a grift. But I really do think that it has more to do with the kinds of policies that a mansion and a cinema have tried to block. Maybe it's possible that in an earlier day we would call no Labels people who are kind of fiscally conservative and socially liberal. But I'm not even convinced that they're socially liberal. They're certainly more socially liberal than, you know, people who are against abortion and people who want to see public schools funded and public libraries funded. But they are definitely fiscal conservatives. I mean, that's just a given.

[B]

Sue Halpern, thanks so much.

[D]

Thank you, David.

[B]

Sue Halpern is a staff writer and you can find her piece what Is no Labels trying to [e-mail].

[C]

America is.

[A]

Changing, and so is the world.

[B]

But what's happening in America isn't just a cause of global upheaval. It's also a symptom of disruption that's happening everywhere.

[A]

I'm Asma Khalid in Washington, D.C. i'm.

[B]

Tristan Redman in London. And this is the Global story.

[A]

Every weekday, we'll bring you a story from this intersection where the world and America meet.

[B]

Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.

[D]

From.

[C]

PRX.