goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on January 30, 2019, 01:59:01 PM
-
I think Howard Schultz may need his own thread. I’m gonna state right up front that this may not be a good thread. It could be a total disaster or waste of time.
But at least for now, Schultz interests me in a way that none of the other liberal krazies running for president do. Here is a guy who was a mega patron of liberal politicians, and a huge critic of conservatives, who is now pondering a run as an independent because he thinks the other candidates have gone completely socialist, and even worse, the democrat base is also too socialist for him to have any chance of winning the nomination.
And it seems to me that what sparked Mr. Schultz to throw his hat in the ring is the belated realization that, though he may be doctrinaire liberal on social issues, he’s rich. And not merely Dem-politician-millionaire rich, but successful businessman billionaire rich. And the Occassional Cortex’s of the New Democratic Socialist Party are coming for him if they gain power. And that worries him, as it should.
So maybe this thread shouldn’t be just for Schultz, but other rich libs like him. Like Bloomberg. Who are kind of having an “oh eff, what have we done?” moment. This is interesting to watch. It’s also interesting to watch the Dems’ media operatives, who adored guys like Schultz and Bloomberg, turn on them.
-
We've done a weird pub billionaire president so we should probably do a weird dem billionaire president just to even things out.
-
I am fundamentally against any CEO/business executive being POTUS, regardless of how much I agree with their politics.
-
I’ve watched a couple Schultz interviews, and he’d be way more liberal, way less weird, and way less entertaining than Trump. Just throwing that out there. The dude’s actually kinda boring. I guess I’m less interested in Schultz himself, but much more interested in his motivations. It’s fun to watch when the lightbulb goes on.
-
I’ve watched a couple Schultz interviews, and he’d be way more liberal, way less weird, and way less entertaining than Trump. Just throwing that out there. The dude’s actually kinda boring. I guess I’m less interested in Schultz himself, but much more interested in his motivations. It’s fun to watch when the lightbulb goes on.
He is vastly more successful than Trump. And yes, he is a boring guy
-
The idea that a billionaire is scared of anything is pretty ridiculous, if some socialist takes 99% of your wealth you still have more money than most can spend in a lifetime. Stop worrying so much and go enjoy your life.
-
https://twitter.com/Indivisible_WA8/status/1089646802092011520
-
Legit curious what that rally would look like.
Like, you’re not mad at the guy and might even like him, so you’re not gonna be loud and obnoxious. But you want to show him you’re passionate too.
Flash mob maybe? That’s what I’d do I think.
-
WE HAVE,
A VOICE,
AND DISAPPROVE YOUR WOULD-BE CHOICE
WE DON'T,
HATE YOU,
JUST HATE THE THING THAT YOU MIGHT DO
SO PLEASE,
DON'T RUN,
MORE YEARS OF TRUMP WOULD NOT BE FUN
AND THANKS,
FROM US,
FOR SECULARIZING CHRISTMAS!
-
if he stays in the race, which he won't, it would be really funny if oklahoma voted for him.
-
Haha
https://twitter.com/nunesmaxwell/status/1090786020923191296
-
he is getting fleeced by polling firm and consultants and is promoting a book. he is not running, but if he does he will be a complete non-factor.
-
I do enjoy how the democratic twitter machine has attacked him with a vigor typically reserved for Trump and Jacob Wohl
-
I never heard of the guy until about a week ago.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I never heard of the guy until about a week ago.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have but only because of that stupid Starbucks "Race Together" thing a couple years ago
-
no wonder he can't name any presidents in the last 50 years.
https://twitter.com/ChrisDaniels5/status/1090642502338588672
-
I find the effort to destroy Schultz pretty amusing.
-
I never heard of the guy until about a week ago.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have but only because of that stupid Starbucks "Race Together" thing a couple years ago
I only knew about him from the Peanuts cartoons.
-
Here's some short and long stuff on why tonight may be hilarious:
https://twitter.com/Art_Thiel/status/1091000402676375554
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9Dp20ydm1E
-
I find the effort to destroy Schultz pretty amusing.
What is there to destroy?
-
He'll probably get my vote if he lasts.
-
I find the effort to destroy Schultz pretty amusing.
What is there to destroy?
I was thinking that there isn't really much effort involved.
Like, the replies to this are very entertaining but not difficult to compose:
https://twitter.com/HowardSchultz/status/1090847674268405760?s=19
https://twitter.com/TheDweck/status/1091015377629245442?s=19
-
It's a pretty immature knee-jerk reaction. No one is interested in discussing the substance of his message.
-
It's a pretty immature knee-jerk reaction. No one is interested in discussing the substance of his message.
The WSJ editorial or the Twitter replies?
-
what, pray tell, is his message?
in reality, he's received far more coverage than he merits. he's appeared all over cable new shows and cnbc for some reason decided their viewership was anxiously awaiting news of every word he uttered. for a guy with all the demonstrated electoral appeal of a tulsi gabbard or pete whatever the eff his name is.
-
https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/status/1090991528020004865
-
what, pray tell, is his message?
in reality, he's received far more coverage than he merits. he's appeared all over cable new shows and cnbc for some reason decided their viewership was anxiously awaiting news of every word he uttered. for a guy with all the demonstrated electoral appeal of a tulsi gabbard or pete whatever the eff his name is.
It appears to be that nothing trump has done is outrageous but a freshman member of the house floating higher taxes for around 16k filers is just too much to bear
-
what, pray tell, is his message?
:lol:
https://twitter.com/CBSThisMorning/status/1090241532618330114
-
what, pray tell, is his message?
in reality, he's received far more coverage than he merits. he's appeared all over cable new shows and cnbc for some reason decided their viewership was anxiously awaiting news of every word he uttered. for a guy with all the demonstrated electoral appeal of a tulsi gabbard or pete whatever the eff his name is.
From what I gather his platform is Trump is unfit for office and Medicare for All is Unamerican, but mostly he just wants to say the two party system is broken and sell books
-
but mostly he just wants to say the two party system is broken.
yeah, that's pretty much all i got from him too.
-
White middle class gen x men love this guy.
-
I honestly don't know why he wouldn't run as a republican
https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/01/30/howard-schultzs-policies-reduce-debt-cut-entitlements-oppose-medicare-all-taxes-wealthy/?utm_term=.8a711e2e1316
-
I honestly don't know why he wouldn't run as a republican
he'd have to wait till 2024 for one thing.
-
i posted this before in the democratic candidate thread, but i'll add it in over here too. you can see the schultz quadrant is about as empty of pubs as it is of dems. an potentially viable indy or third party candidate would be the opposite of schultz, over in the trump/perot quadrant (in a non-trump year, and if the pubs pull back closer to their pre-trump space).
https://twitter.com/cmcarter425/status/1090272038881701888
-
i posted this before in the democratic candidate thread, but i'll add it in over here too. you can see the schultz quadrant is about as empty of pubs as it is of dems. an potentially viable indy or third party candidate would be the opposite of schultz, over in the trump/perot quadrant (in a non-trump year, and if the pubs pull back closer to their pre-trump space).
https://twitter.com/cmcarter425/status/1090272038881701888
That's interesting. Lots of people claim to be in that quadrant but really are only socially liberal when it comes to weed and maybe gay marriage and nothing else.
-
Lots of people claim to be in that quadrant but really are only socially liberal when it comes to weed and maybe gay marriage and nothing else.
that quadrant is also very overrepresented in the media and on goEMAW.com, so it seems like there are a lot more of them than there are. it's basically the highly-educated, young white male quadrant.
-
Yeah, Schultz isn't the guy. But I like the idea of a Schultz (just not him personally). And yes, he would have to attack the democrats in order to split the pub vote. I mean, that's obvious.
-
Lots of people claim to be in that quadrant but really are only socially liberal when it comes to weed and maybe gay marriage and nothing else.
that quadrant is also very overrepresented in the media and on goEMAW.com, so it seems like there are a lot more of them than there are. it's basically the highly-educated, young white male quadrant.
yes this makes a lot of sense
-
I will probably vote for this guy but I don’t like him. Unless Trump gets primaried obv.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Yeah, Schultz isn't the guy. But I like the idea of a Schultz (just not him personally). And yes, he would have to attack the democrats in order to split the pub vote. I mean, that's obvious.
Same
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Me to the lady handing out his little autographed campaign coasters.
(https://i.makeagif.com/media/1-11-2018/2frFNn.gif) (https://goEMAW.com/gif/shawn-kemp-blocks-mark-price-november-27-1993more-80s-2frFNn)
-
He said that the 3 big things Democrats promulgate that make it so he can't be part of them are:
1) Medicare for all
2) Free college
3) Everyone being guaranteed a government job
-
He said that the 3 big things Democrats promulgate that make it so he can't be part of them are:
1) Medicare for all
2) Free college
3) Everyone being guaranteed a government job
Is this a criticism, or what?
-
I mean, I see 1. [single payer, in some form] as inevitable, but we should transition strategically so as to not shock the economy. 2 and 3 are dumb, even though we ought to bring down the cost of 2 considerably. But that, too, will take some strategic unwinding.
-
Are democrats guaranteeing everyone government jobs? That drew a lot of wuts from the crowd.
-
I mean, I see 1. [single payer, in some form] as inevitable, but we should transition strategically so as to not shock the economy.
see this is much closer to a "bring the country together" take. Schulz said MFA is "not American".
-
Spracne 2020?
-
Lots of people claim to be in that quadrant but really are only socially liberal when it comes to weed and maybe gay marriage and nothing else.
that quadrant is also very overrepresented in the media and on goEMAW.com, so it seems like there are a lot more of them than there are. it's basically the highly-educated, young white male quadrant.
The reason there aren’t many people in that quadrant is that it’s actually a massive contradiction to be “socially liberal” and “fiscally conservative.” Being socially liberal on things like drugs and shredding family values cost our government a shitton in unintended consequences.
-
I’m running on an aggressive SHREDDING OF FAMILY VALUES platform. And drugs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
That homo marriage is going to bankrupt the country
-
That homo marriage is going to bankrupt the country
There are a shitton of consequences
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Lots of people claim to be in that quadrant but really are only socially liberal when it comes to weed and maybe gay marriage and nothing else.
that quadrant is also very overrepresented in the media and on goEMAW.com, so it seems like there are a lot more of them than there are. it's basically the highly-educated, young white male quadrant.
The reason there aren’t many people in that quadrant is that it’s actually a massive contradiction to be “socially liberal” and “fiscally conservative.” Being socially liberal on things like drugs and shredding family values cost our government a shitton in unintended consequences.
For sure. Also, IMO the most important social issue discussed today, Medicare for All, is also the most important economic issue. I'm at the point where if you call yourself socially liberal and are against M4A, what are the issues you're socially liberal about, other than shredding family values?
-
I don't think holding contradictory beliefs is actually an issue for very many people.
-
I don't think holding contradictory beliefs is actually an issue for very many people.
yeah, I can do it easy
-
I don't think holding contradictory beliefs is actually an issue for very many people.
:lol: :thumbs:
-
For sure. Also, IMO the most important social issue discussed today, Medicare for All, is also the most important economic issue. I'm at the point where if you call yourself socially liberal and are against M4A, what are the issues you're socially liberal about, other than shredding family values?
you can divide both of the social and fiscal axes into an almost infinite number of less comprehensive axes. some of which naturally or logically correlate and others which don't. like m4a is sort of on a social welfare axis, which may or may not correlate with views on human rights, civil liberties, social equality, foreign policy (too complex for one axis, but i don't want to break it into multiple axes), populism, etc. you could also either oppose or support m4a based on all sorts of reasoning that is not essentially ideological (hypothesized efficiency/efficacy, concern for economic disruption (spracne?), distrust of either business or govt, exposure to/trust in medical care in other countries, etc).
so i don't think your idea that you can use m4a as a useful litmus test for social liberalism is accurate or useful.
-
For sure. Also, IMO the most important social issue discussed today, Medicare for All, is also the most important economic issue. I'm at the point where if you call yourself socially liberal and are against M4A, what are the issues you're socially liberal about, other than shredding family values?
you can divide both of the social and fiscal axes into an almost infinite number of less comprehensive axes. some of which naturally or logically correlate and others which don't. like m4a is sort of on a social welfare axis, which may or may not correlate with views on human rights, civil liberties, social equality, foreign policy (too complex for one axis, but i don't want to break it into multiple axes), populism, etc. you could also either oppose or support m4a based on all sorts of reasoning that is not essentially ideological (hypothesized efficiency/efficacy, concern for economic disruption (spracne?), distrust of either business or govt, exposure to/trust in medical care in other countries, etc).
so i don't think your idea that you can use m4a as a useful litmus test for social liberalism is accurate or useful.
what is a useful litmus test for social liberalism?
-
For sure. Also, IMO the most important social issue discussed today, Medicare for All, is also the most important economic issue. I'm at the point where if you call yourself socially liberal and are against M4A, what are the issues you're socially liberal about, other than shredding family values?
you can divide both of the social and fiscal axes into an almost infinite number of less comprehensive axes. some of which naturally or logically correlate and others which don't. like m4a is sort of on a social welfare axis, which may or may not correlate with views on human rights, civil liberties, social equality, foreign policy (too complex for one axis, but i don't want to break it into multiple axes), populism, etc. you could also either oppose or support m4a based on all sorts of reasoning that is not essentially ideological (hypothesized efficiency/efficacy, concern for economic disruption (spracne?), distrust of either business or govt, exposure to/trust in medical care in other countries, etc).
so i don't think your idea that you can use m4a as a useful litmus test for social liberalism is accurate or useful.
what is a useful litmus test for social liberalism?
do whatever you want but don't make me pay for it.
-
what is a useful litmus test for social liberalism?
i don't think there is one. btw, i should have mentioned environmentalism, which probably doesn't correlate much with a lot of the other exes.
-
https://twitter.com/williamjordann/status/1091488430050160641?s=21
-
lmao
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
every show that had him on this week should take a moment to reflect on why they're so bad at their jobs.
-
https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1091192400003952640
-
yes, lmao at that earlier today
-
that's almost certainly a russian bot/troll though.
-
that's almost certainly a russian bot/troll though.
Yeah.
Related, I still don't really understand the endgame of russians rough ridin' with idiots on twitter and facebook or why that's necessarily worse than anyone who tries to influence people's votes for their own personal motivations through assorted marketing ploys. But I also feel if our population is so stupid to be manipulated by that, we deserve any consequences that come. The problem people are the stupid victims, not the advantage-takers.
-
that's almost certainly a russian bot/troll though.
Yeah.
Related, I still don't really understand the endgame of russians rough ridin' with idiots on twitter and facebook or why that's necessarily worse than anyone who tries to influence people's votes for their own personal motivations through assorted marketing ploys. But I also feel if our population is so stupid to be manipulated by that, we deserve any consequences that come. The problem people are the stupid victims, not the advantage-takers.
yeah, the problem is most people are rough ridin' idiots
-
also on the russian endgame thing from the smart people I've heard talk on it they say they want whatever is worst for the other nations, or that sows more discourse. and the reason is russia rough ridin' sucks and making everywhere else also seem to suck makes them suck relatively less. which is why they were all in on Trump, obv.
-
what is a useful litmus test for social liberalism?
i don't think there is one. btw, i should have mentioned environmentalism, which probably doesn't correlate much with a lot of the other exes.
yeah I didn't think that original post through very well. Stances like wanting cops to kill fewer people or making it harder to get guns are definitely major socially liberal positions that certainly don't require fiscal liberalism.
-
also on the russian endgame thing from the smart people I've heard talk on it they say they want whatever is worst for the other nations, or that sows more discourse. and the reason is russia rough ridin' sucks and making everywhere else also seem to suck makes them suck relatively less. which is why they were all in on Trump, obv.
I'd love to watch a subtitled recording of the meetings in which russians concocted this scheme.
-
No one can touch Schultz on billionaire voter issues.
https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1092589787259781125
-
Lol
-
:lol: at people itt flying their rube flags
-
No one can touch Schultz on billionaire voter issues.
https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1092589787259781125
I mean that pretty much explains why anyone is still talking about him
-
:lol:
-
i'd like to see the data here, but this is a very interesting observation.
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1092818595472699395
-
No one can touch Schultz on billionaire voter issues.
https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1092589787259781125
I mean that pretty much explains why anyone is still talking about him
I'm not sure if you guys are laughing at this for the right reason. I mean, it is hilarious. Not because he is trying to dodge being wealthy, but because he is trying to dodge it in the most liberal way possible by making up a new, innocuous term. This is what liberals always do. Those people aren't illegal immigrants - they're undocumented workers. They're not rich guys - they're people of means. They're not fat ass diabetics - they're people of size. Etc. etc. etc.
Sadly, it looks like Howard isn't even going to get off the launch pad because he's so terrible at politics. Honestly Howard, did you really think you were going to apologize and tweet-delete your way through a crowded field of far left progressives and their media adjuncts? 2020 needs somebody like you in the race, but you aren't cutting it. :facepalm:
-
It's hilarious for both reasons KSU
-
No one can touch Schultz on billionaire voter issues.
https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1092589787259781125
I mean that pretty much explains why anyone is still talking about him
I'm not sure if you guys are laughing at this for the right reason. I mean, it is hilarious. Not because he is trying to dodge being wealthy, but because he is trying to dodge it in the most liberal way possible by making up a new, innocuous term. This is what liberals always do. Those people aren't illegal immigrants - they're undocumented workers. They're not rich guys - they're people of means. They're not fat ass diabetics - they're people of size. Etc. etc. etc.
Sadly, it looks like Howard isn't even going to get off the launch pad because he's so terrible at politics. Honestly Howard, did you really think you were going to apologize and tweet-delete your way through a crowded field of far left progressives and their media adjuncts? 2020 needs somebody like you in the race, but you aren't cutting it. :facepalm:
I wonder what it's going to be like to have a mega anti-Russian Ultra Left Wing Progressive in the White House? Somehow I picture that military day parade happening after-all, replete with razor sharp precision masses of ultra-progressives unfurling banners of praise and good will towards dear leader, as another squadron of F-35's roars by overhead.
-
Yeah, probably
-
I always thought the centrist Dems we the ones obsessed with Russia.
:dunno:
-
https://twitter.com/WasonCenter/status/1100350161853865984
-
https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/1100524467766419456?s=21
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
He is so maga
-
Schultz had a very good town hall in KC