Schultz

It's way too early to begin discussing contenders for the presidency in 2020. The Democrats will field a large team of politically correct candidates, and it should be amusing to watch and listen as each of them promises lots of free stuff (e.g., college, income, health care), social justice, an end to "racism" and "misogyny" in our country, and an all-encompassing leftist ideology that will lead to a utopian existence for us all.

But there's a potential problem—a Democrat billionaire, Howard Schultz, founder of Starbucks, has announced he's going to run as an independent. Instantaneously, Schultz has been attacked by progressives as "megalomaniacal," "a "billionaire" (that's a pejorative among SJWs), misinformed, etc., etc. Here's a representative example from Michelle Goldberg in the NYT:

... [Former NYC Mayor Michael] Bloomberg’s research underscores the folly of Schultz’s trial balloon. On Monday, Bloomberg, who is contemplating a 2020 run as a Democrat, put out a statement that seemed aimed at Schultz, though it didn’t mention him by name. “In 2020, the great likelihood is that an independent would just split the anti-Trump vote and end up re-electing the president,” wrote Bloomberg. “That’s a risk I refused to run in 2016 and we can’t afford to run it now.”

By flirting with such a risk, Schultz is demonstrating a level of megalomaniacal recklessness that is itself disqualifying. “I think all American citizens should be worried about the possibility of Donald Trump being re-elected with 40 percent of the vote,” said Wolfson.

Then again, on “60 Minutes,” Schultz likened Democratic proposals for universal health care to Trump’s border wall. Perhaps from his vantage point, re-electing this president doesn’t seem uniquely catastrophic when set against the danger of European-style social democracy. He recently set out on a nationwide tour, so hopefully he’ll hear from Americans who disagree. Meanwhile, among the challenges we’re called upon to meet in this moment of profound democratic crisis, finding another place to get a latte is an easy one.

The Dems seem worried that someone like Schultz can serve as a spoiler. That may or may not be true. But dig deeper. What they're really telegraphing is that they know (deep down) that the "democratic socialist" ideology won't fly with the majority of Americans, but given that Trump is so bad (in their opinion), they can back into the presidency because of an anti-Trump vote. The implication: independents will hold their noses and vote for whatever democratic socialist the Dems offer up, simply so that Trump is ousted. Deep, deep down, this indicates that many Dems, Goldberg included, don't have a lot of faith in their upcoming political message. It can only work if it's blended with Trump hatred.

Enter Schultz and the anti-Trump vote gets split. Disaster for the Dems.

Look for the politics of personal destruction, Starbucks boycotts, and a whole lot more to be aimed at Schultz if he gains any traction over the next year. Get out the popcorn. This is going to be fun.

UPDATE (1/31/2019):
-----------------------------
The editors of the Wall Street Journal noticed the same thing I did, but have a different take on why:

The way progressives are denouncing Howard Schultz, you’d think he is Donald Trump’s first cousin. The former Starbucks CEO said Sunday he might run for President as an independent in 2020, and Democrats have since been shrieking like teenagers at a horror movie. They seem to fear a policy debate, which is exactly why a Schultz candidacy could be good for the country, including Democrats.

Senator Elizabeth Warren wasted no time on Twitter deriding “billionaires who think they can buy the presidency to keep the system rigged for themselves while opportunity slips away for everyone else.” The Democratic pundit class, which means nearly every pundit, rushed to say Mr. Schultz should stick to grande cappucinos and leave politics to the professionals who . . . lost to Mr. Trump.

They’re trying to bully Mr. Schultz out of running, but along the way they’re making the case for why he should. Take economics, where Ms. Warren, Sen. Kamala Harris and other Democrats want Americans to shut up and jump on their bullet train to Bernie Sanders’ utopia. On policy Mr. Schultz is closer to a John F. Kennedy or Bill Clinton Democrat.

Kennedy and Clinton were centrist Dems who were supported by Dems (of their day), Independents, and more than a few Repubs. Today's Democratic Party is moving quickly to the hard left. Their policy prescriptions are based on the fantasy notion that socialism works (it doesn't); that free stuff leads to more freedom (it doesn't), and that big intrusive government can help the poor and middle class (it won't when it becomes the authoritarian bludgeon they desire).

Deep down, they know this, but they can't admit that their world view is deeply flawed. So they rely on the politics of personal destruction, rather than entering into a legitimate debate. Next on the agenda: some woman will claim that Schultz accosted her (it won't take much), proving he's an enemy of #MeToo, or some innocuous statement he made in high school will be used to characterize him as a "racist." The Dem smear shops are working feverishly to disqualify Schultz ... bet on it. We'll see if they succeed.

UPDATE (2/5/2019)
----------------------
As I predicted when I wrote this post less than week ago, the Dems have launched a opposition research attack intended to destroy Howard Schultz' campaign for president. CNBC reports:

Democrats screamed “spoiler!” when former Starbucks CEO and Chairman Howard Schultz said more than a week ago that he was thinking about running for president as a centrist independent.

Now a major Democratic group is putting that outrage to work with opposition research focusing on the coffee giant’s history of settling lawsuits with its own employees.

American Bridge 21st Century – which has a war chest supported by influential financiers such as George Soros, investment executive Bernard Schwartz and real estate tycoon George Marcus, according to federal filings – is mounting an offensive against Schultz, whom many Democrats see as a threat to potentially siphon votes away from the party’s nominee in 2020.

The super PAC, which was founded by David Brock, a liberal commentator and leader of Media Matters for America, gave CNBC a first look at the research. It says Starbucks paid $46 million in settlements to employees complaining about wage and compensation issues, much of the time while Schultz was often at the helm.

It's worth noting that David Brock was identified in Sharyl Attkisson's best-selling book, The Smear, as the leader of one of the most dishonest, unethical, and effective smear shops inside the beltway. He was a close associate for the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Of course, smears are okay as long as they are launched by Democrats against any person or entity that threatens them. This is only the beginning.