Spoiler
Oh I see, he’s doing it on purpose. Stupid of me not to realize.
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1089907949148012545
Bloomberg is one of those critics.
In 2020, the great likelihood is that an independent would just split the anti-Trump vote and end up re-electing the President. That's a risk I refused to run in 2016 and we can't afford to run it now. https://t.co/SmHM6cYUg7 pic.twitter.com/iQ2CK5o2k6
— Mike Bloomberg (@MikeBloomberg) January 28, 2019
Andrew Ross Sorkin at the Times:
Mr. Schultz, in an interview with The New York Times on Sunday, said he planned to crisscross the country for the next three months as part of a book tour before deciding whether to enter the race to challenge President Trump in 2020.
No need for that. Decide not to right now. Being a CEO is not a good apprenticeship for being president, even before we get to the electing Trump issue.
“We have a broken political system with both parties basically in business to preserve their own ideology without a recognition and responsibility to represent the interests of the American people,” Mr. Schultz said in the interview.
“Republicans and Democrats alike — who no longer see themselves as part of the far extreme of the far right and the far left — are looking for a home,” he added. “The word ‘independent,’ for me, is simply a designation on the ballot.”
“The far left” – what is he smoking. The Democratic party is to the right of Nixon. It’s a million miles from anything that could be called the far left.
Mr. Schultz said he was well aware of the criticism, but said it was misplaced.
“I am certainly prepared for the cynics and the naysayers to come out and say this cannot be done,” he said. “I don’t agree with them. I think it’s un-American to say it can’t be done. I’m not doing this to be a spoiler.”
Asked if he would consider changing his mind and run as a Democrat, he said, “I feel if I ran as a Democrat I would have to be disingenuous and say things that I don’t believe because the party has shifted so far to the left.”
“When I hear people espousing free government-paid college, free government-paid health care and a free government job for everyone — on top of a $21 trillion debt — the question is, how are we paying for all this and not bankrupting the country?” Mr. Schultz said.
In other words, he doesn’t want to pay higher taxes on his billions of dollars. He’s rich, therefore the Democratic party is Far Left. We already have one of those but hey let’s have another. Real estate fraud meets syrupy coffee: who will prevail?
“It’s as big of a false narrative as the wall,” he added. “Doesn’t someone have to speak the truth about what we can afford while maintaining a deep level of compassion and empathy for the American people?”
Deep compassion and get your fucking filthy hands off my billions.
Mr. Schultz’s success or failure may lie in who emerges as a top contender in the Democratic Party. If Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is seen as a moderate, decides to run, it would probably make it difficult for Mr. Schultz. However, he said he sees a clear opportunity if a far-left candidate emerges.
“If you have a choice between President Trump and a far-left progressive Democrat,” he said, “many people think President Trump will get re-elected.”
They’re not far left. Let go of the damn Overton window.
I don’t know — actually running for president is a lot of work to put in just to save money. But the bit about the book tour perked my attention. What better way to get free media to promote your book than to run for president? Not because Schultz wants the royalties from higher book sales, I’m assuming it’s just the ego boost.
The stuff about Biden irks me, too. I almost want to wade into the political betting markets just to bet against Biden. His polling numbers are mostly based on name recognition. He was fine as the amiable Uncle Joe riding shotgun with Obama (who was young-ish and healthy), but as a candidate for the top position he will flame out almost as quickly as his previous two efforts. He has a total glass jaw. He’s vulnerable to attack for almost all of the things Hillary got attacked for (the crime bill, cozy relationship with banks and other lenders), and whether I like it or not, there isn’t much appetite for an “experienced politician” in this cycle among actual voters. His latest boneheaded move, helping a GOP congressman get re-elected, is not going to play well for primary voters.
Plus also he’s just too damn old. Funnily enough the odds of dying at any given moment go up over time, and I think it’s stupid and irresponsible for people as old as Trump or Clinton or certainly Biden to run for president.
Also there’s what he did to Anita Hill.
RED HERRING ALERT:
I have NEVER heard ANYONE suggesting the first two items on his list of Impossible Dreams mention the third one. Right up there with the “far left” Democrats. Way to muddy the waters. If health care and education were presented to the electorate as something they were being deprived of or denied, because the rich and corporations are paying less than their fair share (and less than they’ve paid in the past), things might work out a bit differently. They might actually demand it. As it is they’re always framed as unaffordable harbingers of Socialism and an affront to Freedom. That the huge American military machine is somehow not considered an unaffordable harbinger of Fascism is never discussed. The whole “America is already the greatest country in the world” thing is an obstacle to it actually becoming a better place for its citizens. And that’s a tragedy.
“When I hear people espousing free government-paid college, free government-paid health care and a free government job for everyone […] Doesn’t someone have to speak the truth about what we can afford while maintaining a deep level of compassion and empathy for the American people?”
Does no one in USA look outside their own fucking nation? I’ve not heard anyone suggest this ‘free government job’ idea in America, and I don;y know of nations that have such a thing, but many nations have education and health systems that are either free or very heavily subsidised, and none of them seem to be sinking.
Can someone please tell me what “un-American” means, whether in this context or any other?
Enzyme,
Based on Schultz’s comments, un-American appears to mean ‘capable of understanding the consequences of your intended actions.’
Enzyme, people who use un-American usually mean “anyone who thinks this country is about anything but getting rich, promoting wealth, and not having to think about anyone else outside my own immediate family and friends who all look like me.” Anyone who takes seriously the over-hyped, under-practiced ideals of America, the idea of “all men are created equal” (and especially anyone who extends that to women) is un-American.
People who actually believe in the ideals so many people mouth with empty hearts usually do not go around calling people un-American.
UnAmerican (adj.) (1) An idea that constitutes thoughtcrime; (2) A person who holds or expresses such ideas
Hmmm.
FWIW, on this side of the pond, un-British means something along the lines of “Thinking that huffing and puffing is not enough to change reality”.
So there we are. I’m not sure which is worse.
Enzyme, I would think that unAmerican is worse, since it usually translates to “being black; being immigrant; being liberal; being feminist; being non-Christian”. At least all those groups, no matter race, gender, creed, or what have you, could in theory think huffing and puffing is enough to change reality. Though why they would want to, I cannot begin to guess (unless you’re a big bad wolf and your prey has built a house made of straw).