Howard Schultz, the former Starbucks CEO, is “seriously considering” running for president as an independent. But because he’s politically liberal, Democrats are freaking out and trying to get him not to run, as he might snag some of the Democratic vote and hand the election to Trump:
Democrats were out in full force on Sunday blasting the idea of an independent presidential bid by longtime Democrat and billionaire businessman Howard Schultz, who said he was “seriously thinking” of doing so.
Julián Castro, a former Housing and Urban Development secretary under President Barack Obama and a contender for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, urged the former Starbucks CEO to not pursue such a run.
“I have a concern that if he did run, that, essentially, it would provide Donald Trump with his best hope of getting re-elected,” Castro said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress, went much further than Castro, tweeting that “Vanity projects that help destroy democracy are disgusting.”
“If he enters the race, I will start a Starbucks boycott because I’m not giving a penny that will end up in the election coffers of a guy who will help Trump win,” she said.
Although I wasn’t alive in 1992, to me this echoes Ross Perot’s independent presidential run that year. Both Schultz and Perot are wealthy businessmen concerned with fiscal issues over social issues. Schultz’s biggest issue is the $21 trillion national debt, he has ripped the idea of single-payer healthcare, and thinks Democrats have veered too far left in recent years. You also can’t ignore the fact that Perot undoubtedly took votes from people who otherwise would’ve voted for George H.W. Bush, ensuring a Bill Clinton victory. This is what the Democrats are fearing would happen to their nominee, thereby making Trump’s path to reelection easier.
Now I’m not saying Schultz and Perot are similar to a T. For one, the election hasn’t even begun. Moreover, I highly doubt Schultz could come close to receiving 18.9% of the vote, which is what Perot did in ’92, and neither do I think Schultz could convey an effective populist message that Perot was able to convey, especially since Trump himself rode the waves of populist resentment towards the political establishment a mere two-and-some-change years ago.
Speaking of Trump, here’s what he had to say about Schultz’s potential presidential bid:
If Schultz’s candidacy could cause just a couple percent of Democrats to vote for him instead of the Democratic nominee, then I think he should run. Trump could likely beat whomever the Democrats nominate without Schultz running as an independent, but a little help from the ex-Starbucks CEO should not be unwelcome.
Make The West Great Again 