The Starbucks guy deserves a 60 Minutes feature? Do they think he's Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or something? He isn't. He's just another super-rich, under-taxed old white guy who thinks he should be king. I think 60 Minutes would be better off-- as would America-- if they ran an interview with author Marianne Williamson, who is announcing her campaign tonight in Los Angeles. She sure has more interesting things to say than Schultz does! Schultz showed himself to be nothing but a rich asshole and moron (trained monkey). And yes... of course he said, "Extremists on both sides." When Schultz says "I want to see the American people win; I want to see America win," he's already exhibiting symptoms that autocrats all have-- an identification with their self being the nation. He looked dangerous on 60 Minutes last night. When publishing the Nick Troiano/Charles Wheelan OpEd on Howard Schultz Sunday, the Washington Post identified them as officials of "Unite America," without identifying Unite America as the new name for the failed Centrist Project that formed, in part, around an attempt, through the Simpson-Bowles Commission (Obama's very worst policy thrust), to wreck Social Security and Medicare at the behest of wealthy donors who hate paying taxes to help poor people. In 2018, Nick Troiano and Charles Wheelan ran 3 gubernatorial candidates, 2 U.S. Senate candidates and 10 state legislative candidates, all of whom lost. Now they are eager to run another right-of-center turd, Schultz, the Starbucks billionaire, this time as president. In 2018, the Unite America superPAC raised $209,020 and contributed to just one federal candidate, $5,000 to Marty Grohman, an independent congressional candidate in Maine who ran against progressive Democrat Chellie Pingree and took 29,670 votes (8.7%). Of the $209,020 they collected, another $40,914 went to the Centrist Project Election Fund. The rest... who knows?Anyway, their OpEd is worthless drivel and although I included the link, I don't recommend anyone read it... unless you like hearing from conservatives trying to mask what they are by calling themselves "moderates." How about this for a clueless suggestion, considering the abject failure Macron's presidency has been: "By choosing a Republican running mate to forge what they might call a unity ticket, and assembling a bipartisan Cabinet, Schultz could unite center-left and center-right Americans who would vote as a coalition without having to leave their current parties, similar to what independent Emmanuel Macron did to win France’s presidency."If you need to read something about Howard Schultz, over and above the ego of a (billionaire) man who thinks his very first foray into political service should be as President, try Edward-Isaac Dovere's piece in The Atlantic Saturday, Ex–Starbucks CEO Could Get Trump Re-elected. "Before there was Jill Stein," wrote Dovere, "there was Ralph Nader. Before there was Nader, there was Ross Perot. None won. All argued that the Republican Party and the Democratic Party were basically the same, and the only way to make real change was to ditch them both. Each was blamed for siphoning off enough votes to throw the presidential elections. These days, the difference between the parties is starker than it’s ever been in modern times. Yet here comes Howard Schultz, a billionaire who feels that he might be the answer to American politics, and that he’d run for president as an independent."What happens when Schultz wakes up and realizes how hard it is-- and expensive-- to get on the ballot in all 50 states and DC? Will he then decide to enter the Democratic primary after all? Remember, any anti-Trump vote in 2020 that doesn't go to a Democrat-- be it a progressive like Bernie, Liz Warren or Merkley or to a corporate shill like Biden or Gillibrand or any of the 20 others-- helps reelect Trump and end American democracy. One Democratic strategist put it this way: "He’s Ralph Nader without any of Nader’s redeeming qualities. What’s his value proposition for America? Make America like a corporate chain?" Or is it that anyone who has $3.3 billion must be great?He can call his new independent party the How Are We Going To Pay For These Things? Party LLC. "It concerns me," the billionaire who's apparently never read any MMT literature told CNBC's Squawk Box last June, "that so many voices within the Democratic Party are going so far to the left. I say to myself, 'How are we going to pay for these things,' in terms of things like single payer [and] people espousing the fact that the government is going to give everyone a job. I don't think that's realistic... I think we got to get away from these falsehoods and start talking about the truth and not false promises... I think the greatest threat domestically to the country is this $21 trillion debt hanging over the cloud of America and future generations. The only way we're going to get out of that is we've got to grow the economy, in my view, 4 percent or greater. And then we have to go after entitlements.""And then we have to go after entitlements." No wonder Nick Troiano and Charles Wheelan were so excited about him! This guy is pure poison. It is hard to imagine him taking votes away from A Bernie/Stacey ticket. He will attract conservatives who hate Trump but can't bring themselves tp support anyone who backs a pro-worker agenda. If he runs-- and stays in the race-- he's likely to do to Trump what that Ross Perot did to George H.W. Bush. One thing is sure... after his 60 Minutes appearance last night, Twitter showed it was revolted by him. Gee, just in my own little Twitter poll (above), 92% of the voters picked "against him" or "donate to his opponent" as their reaction to his appearance and only 5% said they want to vote for him.Another view of the same tweet stream, but with a little poll I ran. It was before 60 Minutes ran. He would have probably done worse if I ran the roll afterwards. Still, 9% of respondents said they would vote for him. What country! What a world! What a species!
Source