Friends: Very Special Lady Considering 2020 Presidential Run

|
|
Posted: Jan 28, 2019 2:01 PM
Friends: Very Special Lady Considering 2020 Presidential Run

Among the various 2020 developments of the last few days, the rumor that Hillary Clinton is mulling another presidential bid may be the least consequential.  Even as many Democrats seem to lack any (or almost any) appetite for yet another attempt by Mrs. Clinton to achieve her lifelong ambition, she may be reading public dissatisfaction with Trump as widespread buyers' remorse that would redound to her benefit -- even though a number of post-election surveys didn't support that view.  Nevertheless, some dreams die hard, so release the trial balloons:


I tend to agree that she'll eventually opt out of joining an already-crowded and ever-growing field, but one should never underestimate the extent of this individual's myopic tone-deafness. Meanwhile, one of her top 2016 tormentors is said to be gearing up to jump back into the fray -- thus tilting the primary landscape further leftward, and bringing with him a sizable base: 

Sen. Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent, is making another run for the White House. Two sources with direct knowledge of his plans told Yahoo News that Sanders, an independent and self-described “democratic socialist,” plans to announce his presidential bid imminently. While Sanders has been considering a bid for months, one of the sources said he was emboldened by early polls of the race that have consistently showed him as one of the top candidates in a crowded Democratic primary field.

If he can command even a sizable portion of his coalition from last cycle, he'll be a formidable force. And what if his hilariously fact-challenged pal AOC comes on board, using her massive social media presence to boost her ideological comrade?  That combination could be enough to make rivals shudder.  But even more likely to send a shiver down the collective spine of the entire Democratic Party is this prospect:

Former Starbucks Corp. Chief Executive Officer Howard Schultz -- who may be considering a presidential run in 2020 -- says both Democrats and Republicans are falling short when it comes to working effectively for Americans. “We’re living at a most fragile time,” Schultz told CBS News’ “60 Minutes” in an excerpt of an interview scheduled to be broadcast on Sunday night...President Donald Trump is “not qualified” to lead the country, he said. And “both parties are consistently not doing what’s necessary on behalf of the American people and are engaged, every single day, in revenge politics.”

Liberals' worry is that if the anti-Trump (or Trump-skeptical) vote is split between the Democratic nominee and an independent who appeals to a significant slice of moderates, the incumbent would benefit.  That's why many Democrats are openly begging Schultz not to run.  Does this barrage -- and we're only scratching the surface -- count as a collective freakout?   


I realize the comparison is far from perfect, but I strangely do not recall this degree of fury and hyperbole ("destroy democracy!") being directed at this guy, who at one point seemed like a real threat to sap potentially crucial electoral votes from Donald Trump.  In any case, Schultz brings enormous personal wealth to the table, alongside a message that could appeal to millions of disenchanted voters; a message, incidentally, that he's seeking to amplify in a new book, fueling additional speculation that he's serious about running.  Unsurprisingly, some independents love the idea:

In reportedly exploring an independent campaign for president, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz has set off endless catastrophizing about him supposedly spoiling the 2020 election and getting President Trump reelected. At least one Democratic leader is already calling for him to get out before he even gets in. These early attempts to suppress a candidate because of his political independence are at best anti-democratic and at worst a new kind of political bigotry. Schultz deserves a chance to make his case, and our country would be better for it. Furthermore, he could win. Schultz is at least as qualified as any other declared, or likely, 2020 presidential candidate. Who better to champion economic opportunity for all than an entrepreneur raised in public housing who not only created hundreds of thousands of jobs worldwide but also gave employees, including part-timers, health coverage and a plan for stock ownership? Having worked in independent politics for more than a decade, we’ve seen how both parties have rigged the rules to their own advantage. We know how our electoral system can sometimes produce results contrary to most voters’ preferences in multi-candidate elections. But we are confident that Schultz, whose significant resources could buy both name recognition and spots on all 50 state ballots, can win the presidency

The authors of this Washington Post op/ed go on to spell out some conditions under which Schultz could agree to run, in order to minimize 'spoiler effect' howling. They suggest committing to withdrawing from the race after the final general election presidential debate if there's no plausible path to victory for his campaign, and declining to pursue his effort if the Democrats nominate a more moderate candidate in the mold of Joe Biden.  I'm not sure whether any of this is workable, but it's certainly intriguing, and the Left's meltdown has been sight to behold.  As is this:  


I'll leave you with the latest example of how the battle to challenge President Trump is going to be...unusual: