• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Howard For President?

Hawkeye10 said:
He wants to, as an independent....the plan is the D's nominate someone too far left of the nation... then there is Trump.....we pick the only sane choice, Howard.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how...usly-considering-running-for-president-2019-1

Twitter is pissed on the fear that Howard would split the Anti Trump vote and give Trump a chance of winning.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/howard-schultzs-2020-presidential-flirtation-brutalized-on-twitter

I think Howard would never do anything to jeopardize being adored at parties, and now that it has been explained to him that he is not to jeopardize the D candidate Thrashing Trump he will quickly dump this idea.

What Say U?
Click to expand...

Schultzs is a MINO. Moderate in name only. Seriously, he's like the Gary Johnson of Moderates. What type of guy starts off his potential campaign with, "I don't want to talk about what I would do as President."

Democrats are pissed that he's thinking about running, but he might get some votes off of Republicans disgruntled with Trump who care about the debt.
 
NeverTrump said:
Schultzs is a MINO. Moderate in name only. Seriously, he's like the Gary Johnson of Moderates. What type of guy starts off his potential campaign with, "I don't want to talk about what I would do as President."

Democrats are pissed that he's thinking about running, but he might get some votes off of Republicans disgruntled with Trump who care about the debt.
Click to expand...

Howard wants to help America but what he is getting is "Shut up and sit down!".
 
washunut said:
He might lay the groundwork then wait to see if Trump wins his primary. If Trump wins the Republican nomination I agree Howard would probably pass on running. If some other person beats Trump, say Romney then you might see Howard in the race.
Click to expand...

I think that read is exactly opposite of the reality. I think Schultz will run if Trump is the Republican candidate, and he won't run, or drop out, if someone like Romney is the Republican nominee.

I would say that for me, if Schultz proves to be the moderate right candidate that he currently appears to be, he has a good chance at stealing enough votes from both sides to win the presidency, Teddy Roosevelt-style.

And, as someone who was decidedly anti-Trump in the primary, and forced into defending Trump given the absurdly leftist party that the Democrats have become, I might actually vote for Schultz in 2020 if he proves to be a champion of individual liberty against the authoritarian Democrats and the hapless Republicans.
 
NeverTrump said:
We're not getting the wool pulled over our eyes again. No more Billionaires.
Click to expand...

:roll:

Do you have any remnant of ideology that you can attribute to having belonged to the GOP within your lifetime, or have you gone full-conversion?
 
washunut said:
He might lay the groundwork then wait to see if Trump wins his primary. If Trump wins the Republican nomination I agree Howard would probably pass on running. If some other person beats Trump, say Romney then you might see Howard in the race.
Click to expand...

Trump vs a lefty Dem (anybody but Biden, right now) is exactly the scenario that would bring Schultz in, not keep him out.
 
jmotivator said:
I think that read is exactly opposite of the reality. I think Schultz will run if Trump is the Republican candidate, and he won't run, or drop out, if someone like Romney is the Republican nominee.

I would say that for me, if Schultz proves to be the moderate right candidate that he currently appears to be, he has a good chance at stealing enough votes from both sides to win the presidency, Teddy Roosevelt-style.

And, as someone who was decidedly anti-Trump in the primary, and forced into defending Trump given the absurdly leftist party that the Democrats have become, I might actually vote for Schultz in 2020 if he proves to be a champion of individual liberty against the authoritarian Democrats and the hapless Republicans.
Click to expand...

If Romney were to be the Repub nominee then I think Schultz would not run.
 
Jack Hays said:
If Romney were to be the Repub nominee then I think Schultz would not run.
Click to expand...

That's what I said. I think his politics as expressed are closer to Romney, and I think his reason for floating the idea is that he sees Trump as weak in 2020, so his run is as an alternative to an authoritarian Democrat.

Then again, he's not actively trying to woo Democrats right now, so he could just be trying to peal off Republican votes.

Who knows?
 
jmotivator said:
That's what I said. I think his politics as expressed are closer to Romney, and I think his reason for floating the idea is that he sees Trump as weak in 2020, so his run is as an alternative to an authoritarian Democrat.

Then again, he's not actively trying to woo Democrats right now, so he could just be trying to peal off Republican votes.

Who knows?
Click to expand...

If he intends to run as an independent then he needs both.
 
Jack Hays said:
If he intends to run as an independent then he needs both.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, which is why I hedged my bets on his motivations. He's certainly not positioning himself as a moderated version of the Democrat platform at the moment, he's positioning himself as an alternative to Trump.
 
jmotivator said:
Absolutely, which is why I hedged my bets on his motivations. He's certainly not positioning himself as an alternative to the Democrat platform at the moment, he's positioning himself as an alternative to Trump.
Click to expand...

If the election were today he would get my vote.
 
Jack Hays said:
If the election were today he would get my vote.
Click to expand...

As I said, he might get mine too, but his campaign bus is only idling in the driveway right now. I'm withholding a full opinion until it has some miles on it.

It's rather interesting how close the landscape is to 1911, though, at least as far as public perception goes.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
He wants to, as an independent....the plan is the D's nominate someone too far left of the nation... then there is Trump.....we pick the only sane choice, Howard.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how...usly-considering-running-for-president-2019-1

Twitter is pissed on the fear that Howard would split the Anti Trump vote and give Trump a chance of winning.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/howard-schultzs-2020-presidential-flirtation-brutalized-on-twitter

I think Howard would never do anything to jeopardize being adored at parties, and now that it has been explained to him that he is not to jeopardize the D candidate Thrashing Trump he will quickly dump this idea.





What Say U?
Click to expand...

What Schultz might do is pick up a lot of independent support if he runs more or less in the center. In-Between the rightist Trump and a leftist Democrat. Remember 54% of all independents disliked both Trump and Clinton in 2016. 12% of independents ended up voting third party against both. Also as history has shown approximately 90% of those who affiliate or identify with the two major parties will vote for their candidate.

What a Schultz candidacy might do is give those folks in the middle, someone to vote for instead of against, instead of voting for the major party candidate you least want to lose as happened in 2016. More independents wanted Hillary to lose more than Trump, but in reality, a majority wanted neither.

If the democrats nominate someone who can attract the independent voter, unlike Hillary who couldn't. Whether Schultz runs or not becomes irrelevant. If the Democrats go with far left wacko, that puts Trump back into the game and could make Schultz an important cog when it comes to deciding who wins.

Schultz might surprise and garner more GOP never Trumpers than taking votes away from the Democratic candidate. Who knows until it happens? Even without Schultz, I think it's important for the Democrats to shy away from the ultra northeastern liberal when it comes to their nominee. All that does is put Trump back into a position where he might win. 2020 is an election for the Democrats to lose by their actions, decisions and choices. Of course, so too was 2016. So we'll see.
 
jmotivator said:
:roll:

Do you have any remnant of ideology that you can attribute to having belonged to the GOP within your lifetime, or have you gone full-conversion?
Click to expand...

No. The party has gone too far right. I wouldn't even mind a 90% tax on multi-billionaires knowing that it will never affect me and that the Tax Cuts from Trump did diddly-squat for the average joe.
But of course, Shlutz doesn't want that...
 
NeverTrump said:
No. The party has gone too far right. I wouldn't even mind a 90% tax on multi-billionaires knowing that it will never affect me and that the Tax Cuts from Trump did diddly-squat for the average joe.
But of course, Shlutz doesn't want that...
Click to expand...

So, again, if your claim is that the GOP has drifted away from you then what ideology has the GOP held in your lifetime that they no longer support, but you still do?

I asked that question and you respond with 90% tax on the wealthy... when was that ever a GOP plank?
 
jmotivator said:
So, again, if your claim is that the GOP has drifted away from you then what ideology has the GOP held in your lifetime that they no longer support, but you still do?

I asked that question and you respond with 90% tax on the wealthy... when was that ever a GOP plank?
Click to expand...

I never claimed it was. But let's just go with the personality, and attitude of the man they are all beholden to support. His vile behavior has no place on my conscious and it really exposes the hypocrisy of the modern day evangelical right.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
He wants to, as an independent....the plan is the D's nominate someone too far left of the nation... then there is Trump.....we pick the only sane choice, Howard.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how...usly-considering-running-for-president-2019-1

Twitter is pissed on the fear that Howard would split the Anti Trump vote and give Trump a chance of winning.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/howard-schultzs-2020-presidential-flirtation-brutalized-on-twitter

I think Howard would never do anything to jeopardize being adored at parties, and now that it has been explained to him that he is not to jeopardize the D candidate Thrashing Trump he will quickly dump this idea.





What Say U?
Click to expand...

I say the only sane choice at this time is to re-elect President Trump. Even if his only lasting accomplishment is to put good people with the right concept of what the courts are intended to be on the federal and Supreme courts, it would be worth re-electing him. He is doing good things for the economy and the working class despite all the negatives. I don't trust Howard or anybody the Democrats are doing to continue that. I would choose Howard over any of the Democrat hopefuls or declared candidates though.
 
Perotista said:
What Schultz might do is pick up a lot of independent support if he runs more or less in the center. In-Between the rightist Trump and a leftist Democrat. Remember 54% of all independents disliked both Trump and Clinton in 2016. 12% of independents ended up voting third party against both. Also as history has shown approximately 90% of those who affiliate or identify with the two major parties will vote for their candidate.

What a Schultz candidacy might do is give those folks in the middle, someone to vote for instead of against, instead of voting for the major party candidate you least want to lose as happened in 2016. More independents wanted Hillary to lose more than Trump, but in reality, a majority wanted neither.

If the democrats nominate someone who can attract the independent voter, unlike Hillary who couldn't. Whether Schultz runs or not becomes irrelevant. If the Democrats go with far left wacko, that puts Trump back into the game and could make Schultz an important cog when it comes to deciding who wins.

Schultz might surprise and garner more GOP never Trumpers than taking votes away from the Democratic candidate. Who knows until it happens? Even without Schultz, I think it's important for the Democrats to shy away from the ultra northeastern liberal when it comes to their nominee. All that does is put Trump back into a position where he might win. 2020 is an election for the Democrats to lose by their actions, decisions and choices. Of course, so too was 2016. So we'll see.
Click to expand...

Case in point I decided some time ago that I will not vote for Trump again. What this looks like is the left fearful that Howard will muck up their dreams of getting a radical in the POTUS chair hopefully with a D congress so that they can roll over opposition in America. This will certainly include packing SCOTUS.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Case in point I decided some time ago that I will not vote for Trump again. What this looks like is the left fearful that Howard will muck up their dreams of getting a radical in the POTUS chair hopefully with a D congress so that they can roll over opposition in America. This will certainly include packing SCOTUS.
Click to expand...

I could never vote for Trump, so I'm with you there. But there are a number of Democrats whom I also couldn't vote for. Whether Shultz runs or not won't stop me from voting third party again as I did in 2016 if the Democrats come up with a wacko leftist as their nominee. Trump at this time doesn't stand a snow balls chance in Hades of being reelected. But the Democrats nominating some wacko Northeastern far out leftist would let Trump back into the game. I firmly believe any other Democrat, alive or dead would have beat Trump easily in 2016 with the lone exception of Hillary.

The Democrats made that huge mistake once, ignoring the wants of America as a whole. They certainly could do it again in 2020. It wasn't like the Democrats didn't have advance warning about Hillary, a poll in February of 2016 showed 56% of all Americans wanted the democrats to nominate someone other than Hillary. The Democrats ignored America as a whole, Trump is that consequence. Will they do it again in 2020? Time will tell.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
He wants to, as an independent....the plan is the D's nominate someone too far left of the nation... then there is Trump.....we pick the only sane choice, Howard.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how...usly-considering-running-for-president-2019-1

Twitter is pissed on the fear that Howard would split the Anti Trump vote and give Trump a chance of winning.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/howard-schultzs-2020-presidential-flirtation-brutalized-on-twitter

I think Howard would never do anything to jeopardize being adored at parties, and now that it has been explained to him that he is not to jeopardize the D candidate Thrashing Trump he will quickly dump this idea.





What Say U?
Click to expand...

Now that Schultz has earned the Hawkeye endorsement, his campaign is doomed.
 
Perotista said:
I could never vote for Trump, so I'm with you there. But there are a number of Democrats whom I also couldn't vote for. Whether Shultz runs or not won't stop me from voting third party again as I did in 2016 if the Democrats come up with a wacko leftist as their nominee. Trump at this time doesn't stand a snow balls chance in Hades of being reelected. But the Democrats nominating some wacko Northeastern far out leftist would let Trump back into the game. I firmly believe any other Democrat, alive or dead would have beat Trump easily in 2016 with the lone exception of Hillary.

The Democrats made that huge mistake once, ignoring the wants of America as a whole. They certainly could do it again in 2020. It wasn't like the Democrats didn't have advance warning about Hillary, a poll in February of 2016 showed 56% of all Americans wanted the democrats to nominate someone other than Hillary. The Democrats ignored America as a whole, Trump is that consequence. Will they do it again in 2020? Time will tell.
Click to expand...

There is a bigger picture here where because of the failure of journalism more than any other one thing the elites in the coastal cities who have long run America dont know where America is, and what's more they barely care, certainly not enough to go find America. This rolls into what Peterson says about how the failed universities have since they gave up on education trained up a group of radicals that he estimates now number 5%-6% of the population, and since so many of the elites have had their brains molded there that 5-6% might be enough to hijack the country, so now they are making their move. I have not heard him say it but clearly the experience of TRUMP THE EXISTENTIAL THREAT is a prime motivator for not waiting.

EDIT: The big story here is that conservatives not stepping up to deal with the rot of the university and the vast decline of journalism was a big mistake.
 
Last edited:
As one heckler put it, just another egotistical billionaire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom