At the August 6, 2024 Washington state primary, Damond Townsend ran for Secretary of State with the ballot label “No Labels.” He ran against two Democrats and one Republican. He placed fourth, with 96,586 votes, 7.31%.
Because of the Washington top-two system, he won’t be on the ballot in November. But under Washington state’s old pre-top-two law, he would have been on the ballot in November. The old law said a party gained qualified status by polling 5% for any statewide race. It seems very likely that under the old law, he would have polled at least 5%, and the No Labels Party would have become ballot-qualified.
The No Labels organization, which was fiercely opposed to anyone running for any office other than President, did not take any steps to interfere with Townsend’s ballot label.
No other organized minor party ran any candidates in the Washington 2024 primary for statewide office, except that the Libertarian and Green Parties had candidates for Governor, and the Socialist Workers Party had a candidate for U.S. Senate. None of them got as much as 1%. No organized minor party had any candidates for U.S. House, except for one Green in the Second District.
https://www.cnn.com/travel/jus-sanguinis-blood-right-european-citizenship/index.html
EURO — BLOOD RIGHT CITIZENSHIP — AKA ALLEGIANCE VIA FATHERS NATION -STATE
It’s not clear that he would have had 5% under the old system. Support for minor parties typically declines between August and November, especially when there’s a presidential election driving turnout.
“The No Labels organization, which was fiercely opposed to anyone running for any office other than President, did not take any steps to interfere with Townsend’s ballot label.”
Odd, isn’t it. And frankly a bit of a red flag, considering the lengths they went to, to sue others out of running under their name.
Maybe they just had too many lawsuits going and missed one? Or maybe they aren’t worried about August elections, only November?
@Nuña,
In Washington, the party label indicates the party preference of the candidate. When the Top 2 Primary was being litigated, one SCOTUS justice wondered if a person liked Campbell’s Soup, did it mean that Campbell’s Soup liked him? The SCOTUS did not rule that Top 2 was constitutional, but rather that the determination by the district court that Top 2 violated the association rights of political parties was precipitous and premature. Washington AG Rob McKenna successfully argued that Washington had created a limited 1st Amendment forum where a candidate could express his personal political views. Washington could have let candidates express their views on other issues (Perhaps 17 syllables in lines of 5-7-5 — my suggestion, not McKenna’s).
The SCOTUS remanded the case to the district court to determine whether voters would confuse a personal political expression as being an endorsement by a political party. The great Sam Reed as Secretary of State devised the ballot style (e.g. “prefers No Labels Party”) as well as the language on the ballot that explains the meaning of the party labels. In addition, most voters at the time voted by mail and would have the opportunity to explore the candidates, and not depend on slogans (e.g, “Ugh, Red Good, Blue Bad”).
Washington also had a Voter’s Guide. This is a mandated part of the initiative/referendum process, in which each household is provided a detailed explanation of ballot issues which may be complex. Reed included statements/bios of statewide candidates, and some counties did the same for congressional and legislative candidates and candidates for local offices. Since then, the legislature has provided funding, and the Voter’s Guide is also online.
A voter could read why Townsend chose “Prefers No Labels Party”. The chief electoral office is someone you would want to be the least partisan (e.g., compare to the awful partisan SBOE in North Carolina).
The No Labels Party never attempted to qualify in Washington by holding nominating conventions. I do not see the national party having standing to challenge the 1st Amendment protected speech of Damon Townsend.
They should have standing. Their party names should be like trademarks, or better yet, actual trademarks.