Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For a businessman who grew a small coffee roaster into an inescapable global chain, who ensured that even his part-time workers had benefits and who has given about $150,000 to Democratic campaigns, former Starbucks Chairman Howard Schultz is generating tepid — or even hostile — responses within the party as he weighs a presidential bid in 2020.
That’s partly because — as Schultz told “60 Minutes” on Sunday — he’s considering running as an independent, a prospect many worry could draw support from the eventual Democratic nominee and hand President Donald Trump another four years in office. Among those urging him not to run as an independent are David Axelrod, the former adviser to President Barack Obama, and Tina Podlodowski, the Democratic Party chairwoman in Washington state, where Schultz has lived for decades.
“It concerns me that so many voices within the Democratic Party are going so far to the left,” Schultz told CNBC last June. “I ask myself, ‘How are we going to pay for all these things?’ in terms of things like single-payer or people espousing the fact that the government is going to give everyone a job. I don’t think that’s realistic.”
And here is Trump trying to bait Schultz into the race, because he knows it will help him:
Howard Schultz doesn’t have the “guts” to run for President! Watched him on @60Minutes last night and I agree with him that he is not the “smartest person.” Besides, America already has that! I only hope that Starbucks is still paying me their rent in Trump Tower!
I hope Hilary does run, she will take away some votes from others.
I cannot immediately think of anything that would be better than Hillary running for president, yet again. Talk about dropping a turd in the punchbowl.
Could Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., be generating more early buzz than former President Barack Obama did more than 10 years ago? If attendance is any indicator, the answer could be yes.
For those of you who are focused in on Bernie, Beto and Elizabeth Warren, as if that is where the action certainly must be, you might want to think again.
Margaret Thatcher’s description of herself as a “conviction politician” alarmed some Britons but delighted others because her convictions were incompatible with the flaccid centrist consensus that had produced their nation’s 1970s stagnation. In 1979, voters rolled the dice, sending her to Downing Street. In Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrats have their Thatcher, if they dare.
When elected leader of Britain’s Conservatives, Thatcher, disgusted by a colleague’s rhetorical mush about a glorious “middle way,” slammed onto a table Friedrich Hayek’s tome The Constitution of Liberty and exclaimed, “This is what we believe!” Today, with a forthrightness perhaps more bracing than prudent, Warren advocates a radical agenda that is approximately Thatcherism — capitalism invigorated — inverted.
Bwahaha. It is apparently time to fit old George for a rubber room.
Could Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., be generating more early buzz than former President Barack Obama did more than 10 years ago? If attendance is any indicator, the answer could be yes.
For those of you who are focused in on Bernie, Beto and Elizabeth Warren, as if that is where the action certainly must be, you might want to think again.
No that’s her area. She used to work in SF. Why I’m. It surprised she has a big crowd.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.