Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz criticized for running as an Independent Presidential Candidate

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

PsychedelicDiamond:
It's all gona be oligarchs and media personalities from now on, huh?

It's always been like that.

CM156:
I don't like Starbucks, so I don't think I'll be voting for him. But if the guy in charge of Chick-Fil-A runs, I would vote for him.

Is it because he doesn't like gays?

Boycott his coffee. The only reason he's threatening an independent run is that he's afraid of his taxes rising if any Democrat other than that corporatist neoliberal Bloomberg wins.

#Outlaw Billionaires

I'm pretty sure that he only decided to run because he and his buddies are afraid of a tax hike.

To him, it's a win/win. Either he runs as an independent and wins, thereby becoming president and ensuring that his taxes don't go up, or he runs as an independent and loses, thereby sapping enough votes for Trump to squeak out a plurality victory and ensuring that his taxes don't go up.

Off-topic: a lot of the conservative backlash to AOC's tax proposal has been thoroughly dishonest, in my opinion. People who are supposedly tax experts were willfully misrepresenting how the proposal would work to claim that AOC wanted to take "70% of your paycheck."

(Even if your paycheck was over $10 million annually - the bracket AOC wanted to tax at 70% - the way progressive taxation works means that you would not actually be taxed 70% of your total income. You would only be taxed 70% of your annual income that exceeds $10 million. So if you earned $15 million, you would pay the 70% rate on only $5 million of that income, and you would pay the existing rates on the other ten, in brackets as scaled by your income. There are only two thousand people in America who earn over $10 million a year; for the other 99.95% of Americans, there would be no change in their taxes.)

Marik2:
Is it because he doesn't like gays?

It's because his chicken sandwiches are the best in the nation. Every time I eat one I think "The guy who invented these could run a nation"

bastardofmelbourne:
I'm pretty sure that he only decided to run because he and his buddies are afraid of a tax hike.

To him, it's a win/win. Either he runs as an independent and wins, thereby becoming president and ensuring that his taxes don't go up, or he runs as an independent and loses, thereby sapping enough votes for Trump to squeak out a plurality victory and ensuring that his taxes don't go up.

I've seen this worry a lot, but I'm wondering: will this guy's votes really reach the triple digits? Your typical centrist voter is unlikely to vote independent and your typical lefty hates this guy.

So, let's see, he's against taxes and against deficit spending. What does that leave? Cutting spending. Military? Doubt it. He's basically just running on cutting social security and/or medicare to line his own pockets.

Pyrian:
So, let's see, he's against taxes and against deficit spending. What does that leave? Cutting spending. Military? Doubt it. He's basically just running on cutting social security and/or medicare to line his own pockets.

There is a certain logic behind him running.

The Republican Party has been moving away from socially liberal free marketeer policies; there's every reason to think a credible candidate could drop right into that spot and strip a large chunk of moderates and Republican voters - although given that the Republican Party is already so deep in social conservatism, it's a toss-up whether they'd end up taking more votes off the Democrats.

The USA and lots of European countries are also gasping for proper representation of socially illiberal leftists. They're currently being picked up by the far right.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/howard-schultz-challenge-to-democrats-nominate-a-centrist-for-president-and-ill-abandon-my-independent-campaign/2019/02/14/208c25de-309d-11e9-813a-0ab2f17e305b_story.html

Yeah fuck off with that garbage. No, we dont want to elect you! Go run your stupid campaign and lose you piece of shit. Oh man, and will Trump not run if we promise to elect Trump? Fuck oooffffff.

Saelune:
Oh man, and will Trump not run if we promise to elect Trump?

That's real 4D chess right there. I think he should make the proposal.

CM156:

Saelune:
Oh man, and will Trump not run if we promise to elect Trump?

That's real 4D chess right there. I think he should make the proposal.

Maybe he should start with Tic-Tac-Toe first. Tell him its about who can build a whole wall first.

Saelune:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/howard-schultz-challenge-to-democrats-nominate-a-centrist-for-president-and-ill-abandon-my-independent-campaign/2019/02/14/208c25de-309d-11e9-813a-0ab2f17e305b_story.html

Yeah fuck off with that garbage. No, we dont want to elect you! Go run your stupid campaign and lose you piece of shit. Oh man, and will Trump not run if we promise to elect Trump? Fuck oooffffff.

"He has paid for internal polling that he says suggest he would be competitive in a three-way race against President Trump and a liberal Democratic candidate such as Sen. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.)"

If he thinks Kamala Harris is too far left, that is fucking atrocious. Schultz is a Republican.

Agema:

Pyrian:
So, let's see, he's against taxes and against deficit spending. What does that leave? Cutting spending. Military? Doubt it. He's basically just running on cutting social security and/or medicare to line his own pockets.

There is a certain logic behind him running.

The Republican Party has been moving away from socially liberal free marketeer policies; there's every reason to think a credible candidate could drop right into that spot and strip a large chunk of moderates and Republican voters - although given that the Republican Party is already so deep in social conservatism, it's a toss-up whether they'd end up taking more votes off the Democrats.

The USA and lots of European countries are also gasping for proper representation of socially illiberal leftists. They're currently being picked up by the far right.

Right until socially conservative Republicans run their mouth and forever remove the mystique that, no, euphemism alluding to institutionalized bigotry is still bigotry. Thing about Republicans is they're big on small government, right until they need to push around minority groups to appeal to their equally bigoted supporters.

What you're saying here has effectively been the Democrat playbook since before Clinton. Market liberalism, with feel-good empty rhetoric. If Republicans legitimately liked market liberalism and didn't place emphasis on all that social conservatism, they simply turned blue back with all the Clintons.

On the flipside, in the same way a Nixon turned California Red, and Texas Blue.

Saelune:

CM156:

Saelune:
Oh man, and will Trump not run if we promise to elect Trump?

That's real 4D chess right there. I think he should make the proposal.

Maybe he should start with Tic-Tac-Toe first. Tell him its about who can build a whole wall first.

Interstellar Hungry Hungry Hippos

"We have the best hippos, believe you me. They eat, and eat, and they eat better than any of those low energy hippos. No president has had better hippos than me. Crooked Hillary has no hippos, none at all. SAD!"

CM156:

Saelune:

CM156:

That's real 4D chess right there. I think he should make the proposal.

Maybe he should start with Tic-Tac-Toe first. Tell him its about who can build a whole wall first.

Interstellar Hungry Hungry Hippos

"We have the best hippos, believe you me. They eat, and eat, and they eat better than any of those low energy hippos. No president has had better hippos than me. Crooked Hillary has no hippos, none at all. SAD!"

And yet the one with fewer marbles somehow was declared the winner.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here