Consider how similar that is to what Meade said to the Starbucks barista the other day: "I just want to say that I support your boss, Howard Schultz. Because I hate the Democrats, and I hate the Republicans, so go Howard."
Similar, but different, of course. Rich assumes everybody is a Democrat or a Republican and therefore wary of someone who threatens the 2-party game. Meade voiced opposition to both parties. There may be "bipartisan detestation" of Schultz, but "bipartisan" doesn't mean everyone, only everyone in one of the 2-parties, and a lot of us are on the outside and therefore not in a state of detestation but Schultz-curious.
Rich writes:
Sometimes I wonder if there is such a thing as “centrism” in our politics anymore beyond its use as a branding strategy for pundits and out-of-work politicians hustling to be hired as talking heads. ... Schultz’s potential third-party presidential candidacy is a ludicrous exercise in plutocratic ego that is of benefit to no one except Trump.I did a little (obviously unscientific) poll yesterday on the blog. My question, "What is Schultz doing?"
I'm not saying these results are accurate, but look how strong the result is. 75% of you think Schultz is sincere and not ludicrous or egomaniacal.
পোস্টগুলি
৭৯টি মন্তব্য:
Frank Rich has spent many years demonstrating that he is a Democratic hack working for an organization run by and filled with the same, so there's that.
Yep, the Dems are in a panic over Schultz. Someone should pop some corn.
You need a big ego to run for President, at least in modern times. Schultz is no different than nearly every other person who has ever run for President.
So let me get this straight: He's worse than Trump because he benefits Trump.
Who else falls into this category, I wonder.
Rich doesn't know anybody who doesn't detest Schultz, but I bet he can imagine their aroma.
Yep, the Dems are in a panic over Schultz.
That's good for Trump. Lefties can't emote unlimited hysterics on TWO major fronts without turning people off.
Howard is ready for prime time. He fakes sincerity with the best of them.
It amazes me how many people don't realize that at lest 95% of Americans don't follow politics much at all.
Three way race: Trump | Schultz | Hillary. Tell me he wouldn't have a shot.
"He is sincere". What the hell does that mean? So when i apply for a job and i have no qualification except that i want a job, i should get the job.
He's after the SMOD vote.
Don't believe polls. But... this one is interesting because I have a feel for the self selected pool of respondents. Most, I think, take the choices serious and answer with little intent of skewing the poll or voting to send a message. That 75% take him serious is very interesting. Most of the Dems, I dont take serious at all. I did not take President Trump serious for more than a year. At the tail end of the primaries the President started to get my attention, and I started to take him serious.
Today, it is clear that not a single politician of any stripe could do what President Trump is doing. Name another President that has succeeded at almost everything he has addressed.
Today the new jobs numbers were just released. 304,000 new jobs. A number 50% higher than forecast.
I see no candidate announced or mentioned that is capable of sustaining what President Trump has gotten started.
Say, should me and the Mrs check out that production of ‘Hello Dolly’?
Today the new jobs numbers were just released. 304,000 new jobs. A number 50% higher than forecast.
Trump's best way to ride out triumphant is to avoid a second term. The business cycle is a bitch.
"He is sincere". What the hell does that mean? So when i apply for a job and i have no qualification except that i want a job, i should get the job.
You have never hired anyone,have you?
Sincerity about your understanding of the position you're applying for and sincerity about succeeding at the position, is a huge factor in hiring. I'll train a person like that. Better than a self important credentialed person, that only sees the job as a weighpoint, on their way to the fame and fortune that they believe is owed them.
I know some people who should have known better that voted for Ross Perot in 1992. This urge in the electorate is out there and has been there for a while. Howard is testing the market, and he is a shrewd marketer. He bought decent (if mediocre) coffee to America. Now he can bring fiscally sound, traditionally liberal politics back. Trump is raw and feisty. Many people dislike that. Howard has a great morning cuppa for you. It’ll only cost $5.00 per cup. You want soy? We got it.
"I’ve tried to tell in this book: how we can all reimagine a better future by learning from the past with as much clarity and wisdom as we can muster," - his book
There's his problem right there! We aren't allowed to look at the past with "clarity" the past never happened.
Oh, and he used "muster" when he should have used "marshall." They are already downvoting his book, BTW.
""He is sincere". What the hell does that mean?"
It means he's not just selling a book and pretending to consider running, and he's not going to run just to gratify himself, but he will run to win if he runs. That is, his talk about running for President is sincere in that he's genuinely considering it and if he does present himself as trying to become President, it will be because he is trying to become President.
“The business cycle is a bitch.”
Yeah, but we had eight years of slow groth/ no growth under Obama, so it’s nice to let ‘em run for a while just to prove that it is still possible. But your fundamental point is right. Trump’s best move might be to pick up his chips and say “I fixed it for you. Don’t screw it up.”
Also, a writer doesn't "tell," he shows. It's flabby prose, but we are not electing a poet laureate.
Schultz-curious. Love that.
Hmmm. I wonder if Frank Rich (who, I have to say I did not know was still around) ever thought Barack Himself was an active participant in 'plutocratic ego' display? What a baggage depot Frank Rich is.
Do NOT look to New York, LA, Washington, or Seattle for approval of Howard Schultz comments. These people will get violent before they allow the country to elect anyone but their next Chosen One. They will all be on board for Kamala the Hun. No one else is allowed to get in their way.
Though I was not a Hun, I know hun when I see hun.
"the business of the country has always been a constant struggle to balance the seemingly competing priorities of humanity and prosperity"
Those are his goals, doesn't sound very socialist. Hubert Humphrey and Dick Nixon would have heartily agreed, along with Dutch Reagan and Tip O'Neill. Not today's Democrats though.
We detest the NYT, Frank Rich, Linda Greenhouse and all the rest of them.
Rich said... Sometimes I wonder if there is such a thing as “centrism” in our politics anymore beyond its use as a branding strategy for pundits and out-of-work politicians hustling to be hired as talking heads
As a centrist, I agree with him. There are two kinds of centrists and neither works for politics. The first kind is the people that don't care. They don't exist in "our" politics.
The second kind are the people Schultz wants to represent. Those people are centrist between Democrats and Republicans the way platypuses are centrist between aardvarks and ducks.
Like Trump, Schultz is getting a lot of free publicity. That the Times and the Dems hate the Starbucks guy is good for him.
The Times and The Dems are terrified White Women will vote for him. They will. Schultz would do very well in the suburbs.
I see now that I read this guy's story before in The Power of Habit. That book is a short, life changing read.
Please don't use 'qualifications' as your reason to dismiss Howard Schultz. There is no better demonstration of the false narrative of 'government experience' than the last 2000 years of civilization. There's been plenty of government experience that have messed up key decisions, caused wars, killed millions, shackled millions more, overtaxed, underperformed, enriched themselves on the backs of their 'people', and generally mislead...all while saying what they do is 'for the people'.
I can't recall the Constitution stipulating that the President had to be (a) a lawyer, (b) a current office holder in a city government or higher, or (c) had to be in a union. Frankly- we need term limits to make sure Government office holders gain some actual life experience and perhaps even a bit of economic (read: business) experience. Get them the hell out of office after 2 terms. Enough!
Schultz is very sincere about preserving his wealth. He’s putting the pressure on The Dems to avoid The Socialism spouted by The Senators.
"The business cycle is a bitch." Sure is, and whoever is in power is gonna find out just how nasty she can be. Of course, the answer will be Socialism but it won't really matter. The next pop you hear will be the Big Bubble of Everything.
"always been a constant struggle to "
Redundant so it's flabby. At least we can infer that he wrote it himself, or cheaped out on the ghost writer. He could have afforded an editor, one would think.
Schultz had a speech scheduled yesterday, the local news in Seattle was already talking about protests scheduled to be held across the street. Wonder when antifa will start attacking Starbucks.
Today the new jobs numbers were just released. 304,000 new jobs. A number 50% higher than forecast.
Trump's best way to ride out triumphant is to avoid a second term. The business cycle is a bitch.
Business cycles are real.
Dems take control of the White House and they, given full cover by the media, will go with that excuse.
The fact being, no single person, no politician, no economist, no expert of any stripe could pretend to imagine, a path toward creating what President Trump has created.
I have confidence that President Trump is the best President to manage that business cycle.
Small quibble. I think the poll shows he's not ludicrous. Not sure it shows he's not egomaniacal.
And I'm with Meade on this one.
He came from the projects in Brooklyn, which has to scare Democrats, and probably explains the lack of polish in his writing. It's a Horatio Alger story; they deny that it's possible, It's a strong contrast with Trump.
Who detests Schultz? I mean, how much of nothing do you have to have going on in your life to be worrying about an interesting wrinkle -- and small for now -- in politics?
One way Schultz might help re-elect Donald Trump is if the left turns their ire on him.
Oh, and he used "muster" when he should have used "marshall." They are already downvoting his book, BTW.
At least he didn’t say “garner”
Sure, I detest Schultz. But less than I detest 100% of Democrat politicians and 92% of Republican politicians. Everything’s relative.
A hilarious statistic from Ann:
75% of you think Schultz is sincere and not ludicrous or egomaniacal.
Of course, as shown above in the comments, about the same ratio of Ann's readers would say President Trump is an honest man, a decent man, and an excellent chief executive.
Howard Schultz is free to imagine. He imagined an America full of expresso shops, and he excuted brilliantly. Look at the locations of his company-owned shops— all are in high traffic areas, and if the locations don’t produce they are closed. The one I went to was in a building with two tenants— a big law firm and a big advertising firm— and was below an el stop and across the street from a big television and radio station. There was a line out the door all day.
Slumming again, eh, Pickering?
Hilarious is a roof full of snow falling on John Pickering's head. Then a truck driver accelerating to punch his way through the snow pile.
"75% of you think Schultz is sincere and not ludicrous or egomaniacal."
Actually, one can believe that Schultz is "getting attention and testing whether a presidential candidacy could work" and/or genuinely working on what he thinks can be a successful run at the Presidency" and still believe that he is ludicrous and/or egomaniacal - they are not mutually exclusive.
Similarly, one need not believe that "President Trump is an honest man, a decent man" to believe that he is an excellent chief executive.
Of course, as shown above in the comments, about the same ratio of Ann's readers would say President Trump is an honest man, a decent man, and an excellent chief executive.
Honest man? I can think of no President in my life time could be shown to honest.
Decent man? Sure. Again as decent as any politician anyway. President Trump has made decisions in the past, I am sure he regrets. He is due redemption like any soul that seeks it
Excellent CEO? Suites me just fine. You may value style over substance. I like results.
304,000 new jobs.
Democrats, as well as neverTrump Republicans, seem to be having a much more favorable reaction to the idea of this white billionaire throwing his hat in the ring, probably because he wants to run as a Democrat.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/bloomberg-building-data-organization-crush-trump/581710/
""He is sincere". What the hell does that mean? So when i apply for a job and i have no qualification except that i want a job, i should get the job."
When one applies for a job, there is usually a basic HR screen ("does the candidate meet the published qualifications?") followed by one or more interviews.
In this case, the published qualifications are "natural born citizen" and "attained the age of 35 years."
This job candidate meets the published qualifications. As with a more conventional job, it's the second part that is difficult.
Although it does seem strange that Shultz, who just yesterday was considered positively by the Democratic Party apparat, has so suddenly been transformed into an Untouchable.
It's not as if he's just been convicted of some heinous crime. Umm, is it?
"Three way race: Trump | Schultz | Hillary. Tell me he wouldn't have a shot."
He wouldn't have a shot.
After reading all of this shit - how can anyone deny the FACT THAT THE MEDIA IS AN ARM TO THE DEMOCRAT PARTY.
"Trump's best way to ride out triumphant is to avoid a second term. The business cycle is a bitch."
Trump does not have to ride out triumphant. He just has to ride through November 03, 2020 triumphant.
The democratic hack press is a plutocratic egotistical corruption show.
Schultz biggest problem is what happens when he picks his Veep nominee.
If he picks a democrat, all of the republicans will hate him.
If he picks a republican, all of the democrats will hate him.
Also:
If he picks a man, all of the democrats will hate him.
If he picks a religious person, all of the democrats will hate him.
If he picks a person with the slightest queasiness about abortion, the democrats will hate him.
If he picks a person that loves this country, the democrats will hate him.
If he picks a person that was successful in business, the democrats will hate him.
If he picks s person that is in favor of school choice, the democrats will hate him.
If he picks a person that says the economy since JAN 2018 has been amazing, the democrats will hate him.
He will need to find an apolitical person that (he hopes) the electorate will respect.
The problem with that approach is that if such a candidate exists they do not put any electoral college votes in play.
My best guess is that he will have to choose some retired four star general.
John Pickering said...
"Of course, as shown above in the comments, about the same ratio of Ann's readers would say President Trump is an honest man, a decent man, and an excellent chief executive."
Honest and decent? Grading on the Presidential curve, better than some and worse than others. Decency is a poor indicator of a successful President- see either of the Bushes and Carter. Speaking for myself, I judge a chief executive by results so just in the last couple of days we have the best January stock performance in 30 years and job creation of about double forecast. Just this morning, he's holding the Russians accountable for their violation of a nuclear treaty which Obama (PBUH) let slide. So, excellent.
Just part of the coordinated effort to stop Sgt. Schultz from running.
It all about stopping Trump - 24/7.
Blogger My name goes here. said...
"Three way race: Trump | Schultz | Hillary. Tell me he wouldn't have a shot."
He wouldn't have a shot.
Shultz/Condi Rice
Pickering doesn’t read the comments here very closely. As has been mentioned above, Trump is graded on a curve against the available choices. Which in 2016 was HILLARY FUCKING CLINTON. That’s up with which the Democrats came. <<- Apologies to non native speakers of English.
They don't pull out the long knives for nothing. Some segment of the political world is very, very nervous.
And I reject the narrative that a third-party candidate can't get elected. Things "never" happen until they do--look at Trump--and we are living in some atypical times.
How is Trump "disingenuous"? Seems to me, for better and worse, what you see is what you get.
Ann i must sincerely say that your response was pure BS. Babbling from a sophomore.But at least you were sincere in your response.
Maybe you are just not bright enough to understand this blog, Otto. If you want party line commentary, right or left, you should go somewhere else. Your welcome to stay, of course, it’s always nice to have ridiculous comments to laugh at here and there.
Reposting my comment from last night:
The Financial Times has a different take. This article considers the possibility that Shultz and other "oligarchs" (meaning billionaires without whose support the Democrat party would not be able to pay their bills) who support the Democrat Party are taking the proposed wealth tax seriously and warning the Democrats that they can act as spoilers for what they would regard as chump change.
Worth considering.
I agree with Michael (9:59).
"Similar, but different, of course."
Actually, just different: Meade was posing as anti-bipartisan.
Of course, Bruni has no clue, and, as usual among progs, is just projecting: we righties don't detest Schultz.
He seems to be pro-capitalist, anti-higher debt, and prog on most everything else, but disenchanted with Dem craziness.
Plus he is more likely to hurt Dems than the GOP. Not detestable.
rehajm said...
“Lefties can't emote unlimited hysterics on TWO major fronts without turning people off.“
Leftists say, “Hold my soy latte....”
Large, significant third party runs usually arise within the party that holds the presidency at the time- see the elections of 1912, 1968, and 1992. Even Nader, whose effort wasn't large, arose out of the 2nd Clinton term in 2000. Schultz is an outlier in this regard- but then so was Trump in 2015, but Trump did it differently- he ran as a major party candidate. I also don't think Trump would have run a third party candidacy if he had lost the nomination.
I honestly think Schultz should run in the Democratic primaries if he really wants to win the presidency- I think there is literally zero chance to win as a third party candidate. My model of the electorate is that 35% votes Democrat all the time regardless of who the candidate is, 35% votes all the time Republican regardless of who the candidate is, 10% votes Democrat when they vote at all, 10% votes Republican when they vote at all, and 10% switch their votes back and forth in every election. At best, I think a 3rd party candidate can win a maximum of 20% of the vote- this will win literally zero states in the US- it can't even throw the election to the House as a result.
Schultz is in for a hard road if he runs- it will get much, much worse for him going forward. The Democrats are not shy about using every lever available to shut his candidacy down, up to and including arresting him on bogus criminal charges.
Blogger Big Mike said...I agree with Michael (9:59) said...How is Trump "disingenuous"? Seems to me, for better and worse, what you see is what you get.
¡Claro que sí!
This article considers the possibility that Shultz and other "oligarchs" (meaning billionaires without whose support the Democrat party would not be able to pay their bills)
Exactly. Democrats who forget that the party is a top/bottom coalition against the middle will have a tough row to hoe. Not to mention, the most important thing in a government as far as people swimming in money are concerned, is a government that can be bought. That’s why Hillary could be so up front about being a whore for money. That’s how Pelosi keeps control of the party.
Billionaire owned rag criticizes a billionaire fallen from favor.
As a conservative, I think Schultz sounds vaguely reasonable but he could never gain my vote.
The establishment will always do their best to destroy candidates who appear not able to be bought; Trump, Palin, now Shultz. It’s like the mob boss saying from the movies: “The only thing you can do with an honest cop is to put him down.”
IF Shultz runs as a third-party candidate, will the mainstream press treat him as viciously as it can be expected to treat Trump?
Or might it treat Shultz even worse (because heretics are always far more threatening to the establishment than heathen)?
Amazing how your IQ increases as you move towards the center. No values , no convictions , just effeminate style at best.
(eaglebeak)
I think you're misreading the poll, Althouse. I checked genuinely working, etc.--I think he genuinely believes it, but that doesn't mean he's not an egomaniac or ludicrous in believing it.
Blogger Otto said...
Amazing how your IQ increases as you move towards the center. No values , no convictions , just effeminate style at best.
Sick burn, Otto. Sick burn.
It's Horatio Alger vs the Alger Hiss Democrats.
"Blogger Caligula said...
IF Shultz runs as a third-party candidate, will the mainstream press treat him as viciously as it can be expected to treat Trump?"
Probably. Gotta hand it to them. They're not a bit half-hearted about this seppuku thing.
I am going to say here that Schultz is what he thinks is a *normal* Democrat, one in the style of Bill Clinton. Positioned in a place that distances himself from the hard left fringe.
He really thought that was where the critical mass of the Democrat party was located. I think he is absolutely flabbergasted that the critical mass of the party is the free-healthcare free-education punish the rich identocrats.
Further I bet he thought he was going to run on a JFK style we can make it better optimistic "ask not what your country can do for you, but what can do you for your country" style campaign.
We will see how fast he learns.
He's stolen a march on Bloomberg, but Bloomberg can use him as a stalking horse.
Just saw a poll indicating that his unfavorables run 10 to 1 against favorables with all three groups, R, D and I. (Of course over 50 per cent don't know who he is.)
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন