The Democrats are in a bit of a snit because Starbuck's Howard Schultz might run as an independent. They're afraid that such a run would siphon votes away from the Democrat candidate, and give Donald Trump a victory in 2020.
Neera Tanden, president of the liberal think tank Center for American Progress and confidante of 2016 Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, tweeted: "Vanity projects that help destroy democracy are disgusting. "If he enters the race, I will start a Starbucks boycott because I'm not giving a penny that will end up in the election coffers of a guy who will help Trump win."
It is a reality in two party America that independents can inadvertently act as a spoiler, but to suggest that such an effort destroys democracy is in actuality an assault on democracy in itself.
We could have better government on every level if we were not married to the two party reality. Note, I did not write two party system, because the Constitution never specified having parties, or the number of them.
Meanwhile, the Democrat pundits are suggesting that Schultz could best fulfill his hopes for America by not running, but fund the get out the vote effort.
The founding fathers saw the party system & Parliament in Britain as a bulwark against the Monarchy. However, a successful rebellion against the King and Acts of Parliament made the idea of duplicating intact the British system untenable. Hence, the initial decision under The Articles of Confederation provided for strong separate sovereign states with powerful Governors and elected legislators. But, 13 years experience demonstrated that this proved inadequate to face the challenges and demands required to expand and fund the nation, much less engage with foreign unified nations. So, the establishment of a true federal system, comprised of separate states and a national representative legislature, under a binding Constitution outlining the respective rights, obligations, and powers of both was enacted.
ReplyDeleteThe underlying sectional differences between the states produced conflicting ideas about trade & monetary policy and made the rise of political parties to express & promote policies inevitable. By the time Washington left office, these differences, personified by the Adams & Jefferson factions, evolved into the party system that has defined American politics ever since.
For decades now, BOTH of the crooked & corrupt Clintons have been vanity projects working very, very hard to help destroy American Democracy.
ReplyDeleteBut, hey, whatever those hard-working propagandists in the Lame Stream Media want me to believe, I always say!
I just wish someone could or would verify that infamous Fusion GPS Dossier that Hillary hired that disgraced British spy Steele to fabricate one of these days, that's all.
Here in Minnesota - Jesse Ventura ran for governor in 1998, under the Reform Party (which later became the Independence Party.) He won by claiming that he would make sweeping changes, and appealed to many young, first time voters. Neither the Repbu's or Dem's would work with him, it became a three party government where each party got 1/3 of the spoils.
ReplyDeleteHaving won a major election, the Independence party, became recognized as a legitimate party up until 2014, when none of it's candidates got more than 5% of the vote.
IMO these parties are disruptive, and siphon off votes from the 'popular' party.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteAs bad as the two party system seems to be multiple party systems have their own problems and it's my guess there is no increased level of voter satisfaction. In France, a multi party system, newly elected Macron came out of the blue, without a party and won the presidency, after that he created a new party to get fresh people and ideas into the National Assembly. The resulting party, the Republic on Marche won big in the following legislative elections. The result, isn't good,I believe when riots in France make American news but it's major news. People still have the same gripes but the disappointment is fresh and profound. In other words, the system may not be the problem, the problem may be mankind in general.
Rank choice voting.
ReplyDeleteAngry Democrats are planning to boycott Starbucks if former CEO Howard Schultz runs for president. The 65-year-old billionaire has said that he may run as an independent - a move which could peel votes away from whoever wins the Democratic nomination to face President Trump.
ReplyDeleteImagine that - Trump / Schultz two quasi third party candidates running for POTUS! We have entered the era of Billionaire politicians.
We have ranked choice voting here in Minneapolis - a horrible idea. Without a primary - we had 12 people running for mayor. It's so complicated that it takes a week before you know who won. Many don't trust the process. To me, it's open to fraud.
$8 for a cup of coffee and a finger-size biscuit? Wait till the millennials find out this is the guy who has been ripping them off all these years.
ReplyDeleteJosh Cowen said:
ReplyDelete"Wait till the millennials find out this is the guy who has been ripping them off all these years."
Josh -
Actually, you have that half right.
For well over a decade, democrat politicians have been selling each of their tax hike proposals in the lingo of Starbucks. "This tax hike is less than a Grande cup of coffee (per day) at Starbucks." Or "This tax hike is less than a Venti cup of coffee (per day) at Starbucks."
So wait until the millennials find out that BOTH Schultz AND the democrats have been ripping them off for years.
At least with Schultz and Starbucks, the millennials actually got a little SOMETHING to show for their money.
Try to keep up. So far, nothing has been disproved in the Steele Dossier. Most have been proven true, confirming the employment of cutouts by Russian intelligence to aid the Trump campaign and hurt the Dems. The "pee" incident has not been verified...though the Russian attempts to silence the escort's testimony certainly doesn't suggest she is lying. Cohen in Prague has not, at least publicly, been confirmed, though "leaks" have said cellphone pings indicate he was either in or near Prague. Steele is only described as "disgraced" by Repug propaganda because he sought to inform the press after he felt his warnings were being ignored. This was a violation of DOJ policy about speaking to the press...not a reflection of the accuracy of his reporting. In fact, he is held in high esteem by the intelligence community.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, his reporting was not influenced by the Dems. He was originally hired, via Fusion, by Repugs.....candidates seeking the Repug nomination. The Dems simply took over the Fusion contract after Trump secured the nomination...probably were tipped off about the negative info concerning the Russian penetration of Trump by perhaps the Bush faction or a combination of a few of the other unsuccessful Repug candidates who had access to the Dossier.
Candidates always seek (and secretly often help fund) and encourage third party and perceived weaker general election prospective nominees to run. It's just part of the effort to game the system as much as one can.
trent hall@4:48, I would appreciate if you and all others could refrain from phrases such as repugs, or any other derogatory about republicans or democrats. it adds nothing, and distracts from the dialogue
ReplyDeleteIs that why disgraced former FBI Director James Comey confessed that pretty much all of the infamous Steele Dossier was never confirmed either before or after the FISA warrant to spy on candidate Donald Trump's U.S. Presidential campaign was obtained, because I 'can not keep up'?
ReplyDeletethehill.com/opinion/white-house/420408-comeys-confession-not-verified-before-or-after-fisa-warrant
One of these decades, I just wish that someone --- anyone --- could or would produce anything remotely resembling actual evidence which might actually hold up in an actual court of law to at long last prove this slanderous & libelous Russian Collusion stuff, that's all.
Happy witch hunting Herr Kommissar Mueller!
Once again Trent provides insight into the thinking of our average Democrat. Ill informed, believing falsehoods to be true and ignorant of facts half or America has known to be true for some time now. Why do we know more than folks like Trent, because we actually read and listen to credible non liberal news sources. This is something they just won't do and this self imposed ignorance is worn as a badge righteousness. The truth is, they end up looking like fools on sites such as this and in mixed company.
ReplyDeleteI concede that on "sites such as this" I look like a fool.
ReplyDeleteHowever, try telling all the Trump folks who have been indicted or who are about to be or who have already plead guilty and are awaiting sentencing for lying about their contacts with Russians /cutouts associated with Russian intelligence that it is all just a bad dream, that they can rely on "credible non liberal news sources" that it is just all fake news concocted by a "liberal" press. I'm afraid none of them going to jail are going to be reassured by Fox Noise.
Reich wing "news" sources are conservative faith based outlets for the rubes.....CNN/MSNBC/ABC/CBS/NBC/Washington Post/NYT are evidence based reporting. Trumpkins caught in the BS bubble are going to be so disappointed that the world isn't flat, despite being told by Russ/Hannity/Hewitt/et.al. otherwise.