Schultz heckled 'don't help elect Trump!' as he eyes White House

[webfact]

Schultz heckled 'don't help elect Trump!' as he eyes White House

 

Starbucks Chairman and CEO Howard Schultz delivers remarks at the Starbucks 2016 Investor Day in Manhattan, New York, U.S. December 7, 2016. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo

 

(Reuters) - A day after Howard Schultz said he might run for U.S. president, a heckler shouted "don't help elect Trump" at the former Starbucks CEO, voicing concerns that his independent bid could help President Donald Trump win re-election in 2020.

 

In an interview with CBS' "60 minutes" aired on Sunday, Schultz said he was seriously thinking of running as a centrist independent in 2020.

 

Democrats immediately urged Schultz to think again, saying he would take votes away from the Democratic Party nominee.

 

"Don't help elect Trump, you egotistical, billionaire, asshole," shouted the heckler at a Schultz book promotion in New York City on Monday.

 

"Go back to Davos with the rest of the billionaire elite who think they know how to run the world," the heckler added, before being pulled aside by security.

 

In an on-stage interview at the book event, Schultz was asked if he would drop out of the 2020 race if polls showed his candidacy would help re-elect Trump.

 

"If I decide to run for president as an independent, I will believe, and have the courage and conviction to believe, that I can win,” Schultz said. "I'm certainly not going to do anything to put Donald Trump back in the oval office."

 

Schultz described himself as a "lifelong Democrat," but said Americans were tired of the "revenge politics" of the Republican and Democratic parties.

 

No independent candidate has ever won a U.S. presidential election, although some have played the role of third-party spoiler

(Reporting By Andrew Hay; Editing by Michael Perry)

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-01-29

[from the home of CC]

I hope people realize that most successful businessmen are psychopaths - their zero empathy goes a long way when it comes to predatory business practices.

[goferman]

#boycottstarbucks

Edited January 29, 2019 by goferman
turned on notification

[JAG]

1 minute ago, goferman said:

#boycottstarbucks

No need to boycott them here - at B150 for a mug of (at best mediocre) coffee I'm surprised anyone can afford to go there ..

[Jingthing]

53 minutes ago, goferman said:

#boycottstarbucks

I think this is a great idea if he runs. Helping reelect "trump" is a kind of treason. Most Starbucks customers are probably democrats. He should get the message soon, run and we'll boycott, and hopefully that should scare him away. If he doesn't want to elect "trump" he can try to get nominated as a democrat. Of course he wouldn't get nominated but who really cares? 

[Boon Mee]

Rather laughable on the face of things as Trump has no viable opposition from the Democrats. 

All those with TDS just need to sit down and buckle up for 6 more years of MAGA. 

[DoctorG]

There is a new poll (Pew I think) that shows the majority of Democrats would like to get away from the extreme Left so he could get some of those people. Depending on his message he could also pull in the Centre Right. Elections are usually won in the centre which is logical and obvious. Go extreme either side and you lose.

[rudi49jr]

11 minutes ago, DoctorG said:

Go extreme either side and you lose

I would call The Donald pretty extreme, yet he still won.

Edited January 29, 2019 by rudi49jr

[wwest5829]

9 minutes ago, DoctorG said:

There is a new poll (Pew I think) that shows the majority of Democrats would like to get away from the extreme Left so he could get some of those people. Depending on his message he could also pull in the Centre Right. Elections are usually won in the centre which is logical and obvious. Go extreme either side and you lose.

Raising the minimum wage, joining the rest of the western nations in having a national healthcare program, extending public education for a further two years (includes public university or technical college education), rolling back the wealthy tax breaks to reduce both the deficit spending and reduce the income/wealth gap = extreme left? Yes, well then, I'm there and unless the established party powers recognize the justified frustration/anger in the working middle class then the madness continues. Individual #!, far out of his depth was the one promising change (well, of the two major party nominees).

[DM07]

15 minutes ago, DoctorG said:

There is a new poll (Pew I think) that shows the majority of Democrats would like to get away from the extreme Left so he could get some of those people. Depending on his message he could also pull in the Centre Right. Elections are usually won in the centre which is logical and obvious. Go extreme either side and you lose.

Funny, that other polls show, how a majority of US-citizens are absolutely FOR "left" ideas, like universal health care, free college- education, stronger gun control, a green deal, the fight against climate change (eg renewable energy), legalization of pott and so on and so forth!

 

[wwest5829]

6 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

I would call The Donald pretty extreme, yet he still won.

Won the office but far from winning the popular vote. The Democrat powers that were, defaulted by not addressing the frustration/anger. The majority of voters voted for someone else or stayed home uninspired.

[DM07]

1 minute ago, wwest5829 said:

Won the office but far from winning the popular vote. The Democrat powers that were, defaulted by not addressing the frustration/anger. The majority of voters voted for someone else or stayed home uninspired.

Very true!

I , for one, am still convinced, that Bernie would pulverized Trump, on his policies alone!

 

[DoctorG]

9 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

I would call The Donald pretty extreme, yet he still won.

You might think that way but in reality he is not all that extreme. Loud and bombastic, most certainly, but remember he was a Democrat so he is not that far Right.

[LomSak27]

Schultz can't win a majority in liberal Seattle, or a majority in the conservative eastern half of Washington state. How the heck he thinks that translates to winning the POTUS nationwide is anyones guess. Maybe he is taking acid again.

Edited January 29, 2019 by LomSak27

[Jingthing]

4 minutes ago, DoctorG said:

You might think that way but in reality he is not all that extreme. Loud and bombastic, most certainly, but remember he was a Democrat so he is not that far Right.

Who cares what he was, dude?

He is extreme. 

[Jingthing]

10 minutes ago, wwest5829 said:

Won the office but far from winning the popular vote. The Democrat powers that were, defaulted by not addressing the frustration/anger. The majority of voters voted for someone else or stayed home uninspired.

Nope. That's a myth that has been proven wrong. The main reason he won besides help from Putin was his white resentment massaging race baiting demagoguery. 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

14 minutes ago, DM07 said:

Funny, that other polls show, how a majority of US-citizens are absolutely FOR "left" ideas, like universal health care, free college- education, stronger gun control, a green deal, the fight against climate change (eg renewable energy), legalization of pott and so on and so forth!

 

They are and it's understood that a progressive elected president is going to have to compromise with congress. So why not start at the more purist position instead of starting at the compromise position. That's a mistake Obama may have made. He didn't even try to go for universal health care so the ultimate compromise was not as good as it might have been as he started too right wing to begin with. On the other hand, if he started very left, he might not have passed anything. That's politics and it's not going away. 

[Jingthing]

15 minutes ago, DM07 said:

Very true!

I , for one, am still convinced, that Bernie would pulverized Trump, on his policies alone!

 

In 2016, who knows, but personally I think if Bernie had been nominated he would have been red bated into the ground. As far as 2020, his peak time has passed, and I think it's less than a 50 / 50 chance that he will even run! In any case, he won't be nominated, but it will be important who he eventually endorses as it's clear the democratic race is going to be hotly competitive. 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Jingthing

[55Jay]

That heckler has been banned from using Starbuck's toilets. 

[DoctorG]

53 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Who cares what he was, dude?

He is extreme. 

Dude? Really? Are you 15?

[malibukid]

2 hours ago, JAG said:

No need to boycott them here - at B150 for a mug of (at best mediocre) coffee I'm surprised anyone can afford to go there ..

who comes to Thailand to drink Starbucks coffee? Yuck!

 

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by malibukid

[HLover]

Just now, malibukid said:

who comes to Thailand to drink Starbucks coffee?

Seems to be overweight American looking types.

[Jingthing]

11 minutes ago, DoctorG said:

Dude? Really? Are you 15?

No, dude.

https://www.livescience.com/3739-linguist-deciphers-word-dude.html
 

Quote

PITTSBURGH -- Dude, you've got to read this. A linguist from the University of Pittsburgh has published a scholarly paper deconstructing and deciphering the word "dude," contending it is much more than a catchall for lazy, inarticulate surfers, skaters, slackers and teenagers.

 

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Jingthing

[DM07]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

In 2016, who knows, but personally I think if Bernie had been nominated he would have been red bated into the ground. As far as 2020, his peak time has passed, and I think it's less than a 50 / 50 chance that he will even run! In any case, he won't be nominated, but it will be important who he eventually endorses as it's clear the democratic race is going to be hotly competitive. 

Aaaaaah...I am not that sure in both cases!

Trump would have had nothing on him and calling him a socialist, when he actually stands for ideas MOST Americans are in favor of, would have gotten old and lame, very fast!

I also think, he is still a driving force in 2020- I would love to see him being the candidate.

Unfortunately, I assume, the Dems will pick someone wayyyyyy more "centric" then him, because they are still too frightened of their own shadow!

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, DM07 said:

Aaaaaah...I am not that sure in both cases!

Trump would have had nothing on him and calling him a socialist, when he actually stands for ideas MOST Americans are in favor of, would have gotten old and lame, very fast!

I also think, he is still a driving force in 2020- I would love to see him being the candidate.

Unfortunately, I assume, the Dems will pick someone wayyyyyy more "centric" then him, because they are still too frightened of their own shadow!

I think they will definitely NOT go centrist! Sanders led the way. His time has passed to pass the torch. I think he knows that too. There are multiple progressive choices already in and more to come. 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Jingthing

[DM07]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I think they will definitely NOT go centrist! Sanders led the way. His time has passed to pass the torch. I think he knows that too. There are multiple progressive choices already in and more to come. 

I guess, we will have to wait and see! 

 

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, DM07 said:

I guess, we will have to wait and see! 

 

Yeah, I agree. I shouldn't be so confident about anything. Biden is a centrist and he has a real shot but if he made it he would probably partner with a progressive V.P.

 

I remain intrigued by Amy Klobuchar. She's progressive on paper but she gives off that Midwestern (white) vibe that centrists of all parties could like. Also there was a recent objective analysis in Wapo of who was the most electable choice against "trump" based on recent election data. It was Amy Klobuchar. The reason was how strong she was in her recent senate election is heavily pro "trump" districts. Being able to beat "trump" is priority one to most democrats. It's odd though. I think she will run but she'll be entering a crowded lane of lady progressives including Harris who is another former prosecutor. 

 

It's so early. Harris looks so strong right now but any day things can change a lot, and then there's Corey Booker who's got so much passion. 

About Harris, it's not P.C. to go there but identity does matter particularly when you're running against a white nationalist demagogue. Is Harris perhaps "too much too soon" in the minorities department? If she wins, she would of course be the first woman president which the country is definitely ready for, so no issues with that. But then she's ALSO mixed race, Jamaican and Indian, from recent immigrant parents. That get's complicated as she seems to project her identity as African American rather than Indian. OK, so to the majority of African Americans their identity is related back to Africa generations ago of slave ship origin. Harris, like Obama, that's not mainstream African American. Yeah Obama won two times but there was a big big backlash to Obama and a lot of it was about white resentment. The Indian thing, less relevant I suppose as there isn't really a significant well known history of race issues with South Asians in the U.S. Of course personally objectively none of that should matter. I'm wondering if it will.

Corey Booker on the other hand, he would be the first "real" African American president. Sorry for being so un P.C. but this stuff is real in U.S. culture and politics. 

Edited January 29, 2019 by Jingthing

[DM07]

25 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Yeah, I agree. I shouldn't be so confident about anything. Biden is a centrist and he has a real shot but if he made it he would probably partner with a progressive V.P.

 

I remain intrigued by Amy Klobuchar. She's progressive on paper but she gives off that Midwestern (white) vibe that centrists of all parties could like. Also there was a recent objective analysis in Wapo of who was the most electable against "trump" choice based on recent election data. It was Amy Klobuchar. The reason was how strong she was in her recent senate election is heavily pro "trump" districts. Being able to beat "trump" is priority one to most democrats. It's odd though. I think she will run but she'll be entering a crowded lane of lady progressives including Harris who is another former prosecutor. 

 

It's so early now. Harris looks so strong right now but any day things can change a lot, and then there's Corey Booker who's got so much passion. 

About Harris, it's not P.C. to go there but identity does matter particularly when you're running against a white nationalist demagogue. Is Harris perhaps "too much" in the minorities department? If she wins, she would of course be the first woman president which the country is definitely ready for, so no issues with that. But then she's ALSO mixed race, Jamaican and Indian, recent immigrants That get's complicated as she seems to project her identity as African American. OK, so to the majority of African Americans their identity is related long ago from Africa on slave ships origin. Like Obama, that's not mainstream African American. The Indian thing, less relevant I suppose as there isn't really a significant well known history of race issues with South Asians in the U.S. Of course personally objectively none of that should matter. I'm wondering if it will -- too much going on with her minority identities too soon.

Corey Booker on the other hand, he would be the first "real" African American president. Sorry for being so un P.C. but this stuff is real in U.S. culture and politics. 

I am not American, so I have the luxury of going a bit more "off the beaten track", with my wishes and "analysis" and give a more "rest of the world approach"!

 

I think, it is high time, that the Dems stop being a softer copy of the Reps.

If you look at the polls, you see, that the USA maybe ripe for social- democratic policies!

There is so much support for "left" or "left leaning" ideas, that ...damn it...go for it!

 

I like Bernie, as a politician and as a personality and I think, he might be a good candidate, because he has this "grandfather" -appeal, the elder statesman- vibe!

 

Biden -sorry to say- would be a disaster, as would another run of Hillary be!

The Schultz- guy and any other billionaire, who runs on business- success also is a bad idea!

A country is no business- period!

 

Of the ones, that are somehow in the mix, I still have no favorite!

I would have loved Ojeda, because he seems to be a straight forward guy, but he was right to withdraw, as his chances were zero...sad to say!

 

So...Bernie or bust...or I am still waiting for "my" candidate!

 

 

(Hope we are not too far off- topic)

 

Edited January 29, 2019 by DM07

[Jingthing]

I don't get where you're coming from with Bernie or bust. There are numerous progressive candidates including Harris and more will enter. So unless you're addicted to Bernie's man frump style, I don't get it. 

I want a progressive that can beat "trump." I think most of them can including Harris, Booker, and Klobuchar. But not Warren. I think she would lose. 

Then there is Beto. Is he really a progressive? Probably not and I hope he doesn't run because I think he was a fad that has already faded.

Edited January 29, 2019 by Jingthing

[DM07]

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

I don't get where you're coming from with Bernie or bust. There are numerous progressive candidates including Harris and more will enter. So unless you're addicted to Bernie's man frump style, I don't get it. 

I want a progressive that can beat "trump." I think most of them can including Harris, Booker, and Klobuchar. But not Warren. I think she would lose. 

Then there is Beto. Is he really a progressive? Probably not and I hope he doesn't run because I think he was a fad that has already faded.

All the ones you mention are "fine"...as is Warren!

But - for me...as an outsider- the lack the charisma, that I found in Bernie!

I am not "addicted"- I am just convinced, he was/is an excellent politician, running on excellent policies and he has the "charisma".

 

Of the ones you mentioned, I would like Booker the best, but still...not my first choice!

 

Let's just agree to disagree!

Edited January 29, 2019 by DM07