Howard Schultz for President?

[RiverDog]

We all remember Howard, the guy that made his fortune by starting his Starbuck's empire in the Seattle area, bought the Sonics, then essentially helped them to move out of town by selling them to Clay Bennett.

He's all but announced his intentions to run for POTUS, but even though he's a life long Democrat, he might be running as an independent, which would be an unmitigated disaster for the Dems as it would split the anti Trump vote and virtually guarantee a 4 year extension of the current reality show in the White House.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/howard-sch ... 0-minutes/

He's a lot closer to my political values than any of the likely Dem candidates, but I cringe when I think of the repercussions his candidacy would entail.

Another interesting possibility would be if Schultz, running as an independent, were to win a few states and deny both Trump and the D candidate from gaining a majority of electoral votes, which would throw the election into the Democratic controlled House of Representatives. I wonder how many Americans actually know of that clause in the Constitution?

[Aseahawkfan]

Screw him. He did Seattle dirty. Why do we want this type of guy as president? Sell our country out and tell us he had no choice? Forget him.

[RiverDog]

Screw him. He did Seattle dirty. Why do we want this type of guy as president? Sell our country out and tell us he had no choice? Forget him.

In a way, I can't say as I blame you. Schultz claimed that the reason he sold the team to Clay Bennett was that being an outsider with a threat to move the team would give him more leverage to get an arena deal done. I didn't buy that excuse for a second. He simply sold the team to the person the commissioner wanted him to. If he had a commitment to the city, he could have held out and sold to a local like Ballmer that would have kept the team here.

But POTUS is a different job than the owner of a professional sports franchise. Unlike Trump, Schultz is a self made billionare, grew up poor, first in his family to have gone to college, started out his career by working as a salesman. He has a much better perspective on life in this country than does our current spoiled rich kid POTUS. He also rejects many of the policies that liberal Democrats hold near and dear, which is why he's running as an independent as the far left that's now in charge of the Democratic party would never accept him. I'm a lot more likely to vote for him than I am Bernie or Hillary 2.0.

[burrrton]

...as the far left that's now in charge of the Democratic party would never accept him.

If social media is any indication, this is a HUGE understatement.

[RiverDog]

...as the far left that's now in charge of the Democratic party would never accept him.

If social media is any indication, this is a HUGE understatement.

Yea, both parties seemed to be controled by the far extremes. That's one of the reasons why I yearn for a credible 3rd party alternative.

What the Dems need to do is quit advancing far left candidates like Bernie and Elizabeth Warren (aka Hillary 2.0) and identify candidates with a more centrist point of view that would appeal to the non Trump conservatives. They're going to get the far left no matter who they nominate. Otherwise, Schultz will take a 15-20% bite out of the center, split the anti Trump vote, and enable Trump to win the election with something like 40% of the popular vote.

[burrrton]

They're going to get the far left no matter who they nominate.

I'm not so sure. I think the left has a little of the progressive version of the fringey tea party thing going now- there are going to be purity tests where *any* concession to moderation will be viewed as disqualifying.

I guess we'll see.

[RiverDog]

They're going to get the far left no matter who they nominate.

I'm not so sure. I think the left has a little of the progressive version of the fringey tea party thing going now- there are going to be purity tests where *any* concession to moderation will be viewed as disqualifying.

I guess we'll see.

In the primaries, yes, which is their fatal flaw. At least as far as the primaries go, they won't vote for the candidate with the best chance of defeating Trump (which is to say a more centrist candidate like Schultz), they'll vote for someone like Bernie or Hillary 2.0.

But the minute you put Trump's name on the ballot, they'll check mark anyone's name.

[Aseahawkfan]

I want to see a Jewish person run like Bernie just to see how much the nation has changed as far as anti-Jewish sentiment goes in the voting population. So Schultz or Bernie would let us see how that goes. First Jewish president would be an interesting thing to see.

[Hawktawk]

Sounds as good as anything I’ve heard yet in terms of options for 2020. I find it rich that the Democratic Party that last cycle coronated a corrupt old biddy hag now thinks it can tell a guy that running independent will elect Trump so don’t you dare . Any party that lost to Trump should STFU. Any decent democratic candidate would have buried trump Russian interference notwithstanding . A more interesting debate might be a primary challenge to trump. A recent poll shows that among republicans and trump voting independents a full THIRD would prefer another primary option on the ballet for 2020.


So far this is looking like a Democratic Party poised to make the same mistake as the repubs did last time. Too many candidates splitting the money and the votes. It’s anticipated the final field could approach 30 candidates .

[RiverDog]

Sounds as good as anything I’ve heard yet in terms of options for 2020. I find it rich that the Democratic Party that last cycle coronated a corrupt old biddy hag now thinks it can tell a guy that running independent will elect Trump so don’t you dare . Any party that lost to Trump should STFU. Any decent democratic candidate would have buried trump Russian interference notwithstanding . A more interesting debate might be a primary challenge to trump. A recent poll shows that among republicans and trump voting independents a full THIRD would prefer another primary option on the ballet for 2020.


So far this is looking like a Democratic Party poised to make the same mistake as the repubs did last time. Too many candidates splitting the money and the votes. It’s anticipated the final field could approach 30 candidates .

I agree with you for the most part. However, I don't think that having too many candidates will be a problem for the Democrats. Most just run trial balloons and, like our Gov. Inslee, will drop out after the New Hampshire primary. I also don't agree that splitting the money will be a big problem. Money isn't nearly as big of an issue as it once was, a good example being how much money HRC spent in relation to her opponent in 2016. Social media has given candidates free access to the public.

What I agree with you on is what the Democratic party has become. The fact that they are scared out of their wits at the prospect of an independent bid from Schultz speaks volumes as it demonstrates just how far to the left that they've moved. They don't seem to embrace this "big tent" philosophy as they used to advertise themselves as being. I saw a clip yesterday of the DNC chairman saying that pro choice is "non negotiable" for them and that they won't support any anti abortion candidates. Same goes for the anti capitalists rhetoric we've been hearing out of people like Bernie and Hillary 2.0. That kind of message will not appeal to the 401K Gen X folks and cause them to either stay home or embrace Schultz. It's stances like those that have driven the moderate Dems off the reservation and one of the major factors for giving us Donald Trump and polaring the country.

[Hawktawk]

I agree and disagree on the money thing. Social media doesn’t open campaign offices or put boots in the ground . But it is a huge factor that didn’t really exist in terms of infuencing elections until recently .

In the case of Trump cable networks fawned over him due to the high ratings and wound up giving him an estimated TWO BILLION in free media . This included cnn, nbc etc who now bash the man they had a hand in electing . So many ironies.

I think this could be the cycle where an independent like Schultz could have a chance of pulling from both parties and also that a strong republican primary challenger could recover votes from disaffected republicans like me.

I completely agree with the assessment of the lunatic fringe trajectory of the Democratic Party . The only thing I agree with them on is a hatred of trump. Honestly I think barring a said strong independent bid unseating trump or he just bags it the Dems will win the White House anyway.

The same ideological party drew over 8 million more votes in the midterms in a referendum on Trump the man with a very good economy and many promises kept already baked in.

there is no upside for him because he can’t quit tripping over his little mushroom and creating negative headlines.Of course everyone including trump thought he was going to lose last time too.

[RiverDog]

I agree and disagree on the money thing. Social media doesn’t open campaign offices or put boots in the ground .

The #1 expense for any national campaign is advertising, and Twitter and Facebook are free. Besides, "boots on the ground", ie going door-to-door, working the telephones, etc, has become a relic of the past. People don't welcome strangers on their doorsteps nor answer unsolicited phone calls like they did in the 50's and 60's. Just a few people sharing a post can reach more people than scores of volunteers manning telephones. Social media is to politics what radio was in the 30's and 40's and what TV was in the 50's and 60's. HRC had a huge network flush with cash. Trump and the Republicans out smarted them.

I think this could be the cycle where an independent like Schultz could have a chance of pulling from both parties and also that a strong republican primary challenger could recover votes from disaffected republicans like me.

Unless he actually wins a few states, his candidacy will virtually guarantee another 4 years of Trump, and I just don't see him drawing that many votes in any of the 50 states. If he's ahead in a couple of state polls, I'd probably vote for him, otherwise, barring another HRC nomination, I'm voting for the D. My #1 objective is getting rid of Trump. We'll clean up the mess the next morning.

I completely agree with the assessment of the lunatic fringe trajectory of the Democratic Party . The only thing I agree with them on is a hatred of trump. Honestly I think barring a said strong independent bid unseating trump or he just bags it the Dems will win the White House anyway.

An independent isn't going to win a general election. IMO the only way an independent becomes POTUS is if the election gets thrown into the House and someone like Schultz emerges as a compromise.