Rich Person Howard Schultz Forgets How Much We Hate Rich People; Threatens to Run for President



Don't under-estimate the potential of Howard Schultz to screw up the 2020 election just because you - and a lot of snarky strangers on Twitter - don't like rich people.

Remember, no one took Jill Stein serioulsy either, and she never had a shot at becoming President - but if everyone who voted for her in Wisconsin had voted for Hillary instead...

Same for Pennsylvania.

Same for Michigan.

All that's necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to act like total idiots, treating politics like checkers instead of chess.


All that's needed for evil to triumph is for asshats to insist their throwaway vote for a spoiler candidate who doesn't have a snowball's chance of winning was an act of "conscience" when it's point out to them that it resulted in evil actually triumphing.


If you go with the whole 'rich people are evil' thing, is there a threshold for when your hate begins? What if someone has net-worth of $1 million and they got there by saving a lifetime of their paychecks? Or $2 million? Unless you plan on a revolution where the working poor (everyone basically in America) rise up and cut the heads off of the ruling class, you should think twice about who you demonize. It makes people with money who would otherwise be on your side think twice about being on your side.


everything i've heard about HS and how he ran sbux and the sonics tends toward the dictatorial end of the spectrum. in some case, it was a benevolent dictator, but others not so much. which might be great for running a company but not so much for govt stuff.


@1, Don't let Hillary off the hook due to a third party candidate getting their measly 1%. She was a mediocre campaigner who didn't aggressively court votes in the battleground states. A lot of people sat on their hands in Michigan and Wisconsin because Hillary was an unpopular candidate who couldn't make the case for herself.


I hope he runs and it causes the media to dig up some stupidly horrific thing he has done and that the whole matter ruins him and his entire family forever. The End. We all live happily.


The author really dislikes people with money.


@6 - please don't take my disdain for crack-pot candidates and their supporters for letting Hillary off the hook - she was a crappy choice for the Democratic nominee (I caucused for Bernie) and she ran a campaign with an epic lack of strategy.


@3 COMTE for the WIN!


I think you underestimate the mischief this man is capable of.
Trump has demonstrated how vulnerable our system is to being hijacked by a small minority of ignorant nihilistic fucks.


"What better expression of our democracy, than to give the American people a choice they deserve? [The choice of me.]" Wow. Is he always this lacking in self-awareness? Has he let the "job creators" title (euphemism) go to his head that much?

@11: That only makes sense in ranked-choice voting systems, which so far, only Maine has. Don't let me stop indulging your victim complex though, and my "hating you for voting." I assume you're typing with only one hand, the other already nailed to the cross.


Wm. Steven Humphrey - You really think people voted for Trump because they wanted to run an experiment? They voted for him because they hate brown people and whatever misconception an “elite” is.


@3 Yes, it is a throwaway vote, but for me, its either vote third party or don't vote (for President) at all. I believe that most people who vote for third party candidates do so because they believe that the two party system is trash and would never vote D or R.


As Wild Bill Clinton once said (as he took the Dems to the Corporate Center)
with glee (and pushed the far right so far right, they went a little Krazy):

"Where ELSE they gonna go?!"


@16: Be sure to thank your buddy, raindrop for his brilliant suggestion of paddling trolls.
WHAP! There you go. Maybe you'll vote more wisely in 2020.
@17 kristofarian: After 26 years I'll still take Wild Bill Clinton / Al Gore over Trumpty Dumpty / Dencey Pencey any day and thrice on Sunday. The Clintons brought us to an economic surplus, remember. And they didn't sell out the U.S. cheap to Vladimir Putin and the KGB to safeguard their own business interests.


@17 kristofarian: I STILL can't believe you actually agreed with muffy----even ONCE.


Gotta be the stopped-clock Theory,
don'tchya think, auntie Gee?


Sargon Bighorn, it's just not worth your time and energy. I used to think I could reason with the people concern-trolling about third party votes, but one can't, because they're not engaging in good faith. If they were, they would take the fact that there are dozens of times as many non-voters as third-party voters seriously and focus their energies there rather than railing at third-party voters (which also doesn't convince any of them to vote for your candidate) - a messaging strategy with a 1% conversion rate to actual votes gets a LOT more votes from a population of 634,238 than a population of 31,072, to use Wisconsin's 2016 numbers for non-voters and Stein voters respectively (and that's only including non-voting registered voters; there are also unregistered people eligible to vote). But they're really interested in tribal signaling rather than being effective, and you're just going to make yourself angry going back and forth.


I hope he gets into the race. Just to watch The Stranger lose it's collective shit as Schultz splits the left will make for some entertaining Slog postings.


@4 I know you posed the question sarcastically, but I think it's one that ought to be taken seriously.

There does come a point when the acquisition of wealth changes from something prudent (it's a good idea to save against a rainy day, for retirement, for the kids' education, etc.) and turns into something pathological (I want more to flatter my ego, because Jeff Bezos has more, because I must have the recognition). For Dog's sake, look at Trump. What a train wreck of a life!

Happily, psychologists have been able to provide for us a figure at which more money does not appear to buy more happiness. And so we can do a few calculations to determine at what point the acquisition of wealth has the potential to turn into something darker. For instance, you can buy yourself an annuity at age 50 that will yield you $75,000 per year for life, inflation adjusted for about $2 million.

Now, most parents would also want to leave something to their kids and grandkids. They might also hold assets like their residence. They might own a cottage somewhere, or be snowbirds and own a house in Florida or Arizona.

Add it all together, and it's difficult, even in an expensive housing market like Seattle, to see the total assets you need to live a very good and happy life exceeding $5 million.

But there are probably things I'm overlooking, so let's play it conservatively and double that amount again, to the $10 million figure that Elizabeth Warren is using as the figure where her wealth tax would kick in.

So there's your answer: I would say that anyone who has more than $10 million in assets is someone we should look at more carefully. They likely have an unhealthy fixation on the accumulation of personal wealth that renders them particularly vulnerable to corruption, self-dealing, etc.


He'll only discover that buying the American voter is similar to a cup of his coffee: obscenely over-priced and with burnt after-taste


@24 FTW!


@23 Totally agree. Now let's get the news out to all the folks readying their pitchforks and torches.


I already stopped buying anything at Starbucks a long time ago. Problem is, it's hard to escalate my jihad beyond that. How do i get back every dollar i ever spent there?


This asshole is gonna burn us just like he burns his coffee


As someone who worked at Starbucks for 16 years, five times as long as any other job I've ever held, I'm grateful to Schultz for the steady work. I also appreciate him giving health benefits to part time employees and his generous stock option plan. However, he has a long history of hostility to labor unions and of closing stores where there was any hint of organizing. Same thing in the corporate offices, where any such talk would quickly be put down. Add to that his lack of government experience, his history of property disputes with the city and his neighbors, and of course, his shoddy treatment and betrayal of Sonics fans, and there is no way I could bring myself to support him. We don't need another inexperienced, arrogant billionaire from New York running for president. We don't need a "nice" or "benevolent" Trump-Lite. I doubt he could even be elected mayor of Seattle.

Now if he wanted to run for city council, I might be willing to give him a chance. We need all the help we can get there.


This is hate speech. Why is this OK?


“We hate rich people”

Give me a break. No different than we hate Jews, immigrants, black people etc...

How much can someone save before you hate them?



Out of curiosity, how long ago was it that you put yourself through college by working two jobs?

I did it fairly recently ... worked 3 jobs + full time student ... and I have a massive amount of student loans that I'll likely never be able to pay off, and health insurance with costs rapidly approaching half of my income. Maybe times have changed?


@24 KewGardenCorpseFlower: I second pat L on nominating you for the WIN!! BRAVO!!
@25 pat L: I second the nomination.
Griz has nothing more to add to that--not even complimentary cinnamon sprinkles.
@31: ...says the rabid, vituperative (look it up, dear), pearl clutching troll who still hasn't gotten her shots yet but managed to conveniently change her avatar. Down, muffy, down. Take a nap. Better yet, roll over and drop dead.


@20 kristofarian; Oh, my. Are you and muffy Did she bite you? Hold you at gun point? Whack you over the head with an overstuffed Gucci bag? Good grief, Charlie Brown, because that's the only logical conclusion I can draw at this point. And here I thought you were properly immunized. God help you both.


@25 pat L: Clarification: meaning I can't top your nomination with anything better. Well called.


Trump has been a media darling since the 80s (media darling = someone everyone loves or everyone hates, that attracts viewers, listeners, or readers and raises the ad revenues). He was high profile and nationally known even before he had a reality show (in fact, it's a reason he got one). And that high profile made him appear to many as a viable candidate for the Presidency (because people in the US today rather stupidly believe celebrity means competence and intelligence . . . NOT).

Shultz is pretty much a non-entity to average Americans outside Seattle (where he's still despised for selling and losing the city an NBA team). Schutz is just a coffee monger who will hold little appeal for the many Americans who no longer can afford Starbuck's overpriced coffee and want access to health insurance that's independent of their employment status.

Sanders (never mind if you supported him or not) at least is a sitting US senator known outside his home state so his potential candidacy was more legitimate.

Besides, after the Trumpster, many Americans are now becoming wary of electing another "business leader" to the Presidency. Some are beginning to realize that the government of the US is not a business and attempting to run it that way leads to disaster.

Besides, my personal opinion is that Schultz is just fronting for Bezos who's terrified of what a Democratic majority and Democratic President might do to his empire. Schultz is the Seattle billionaires’ boys' club candidate.


@20 and @31: Double-WHAP! Get your shots, both of you, before it's too late.


@39: Have you been to Clark County or Hawaii recently, muffy? Or is it Millie (I love the Barbara Bush hairdon't--it really suits you)? Jesus, I urged you to get your shots. Poor kristofarian has my deepest heartfelt condolences. And now the two of you have more blemishes than a couple of lovesick English Springer Spaniels.


@1 NoSpin: That's largely why I willingly avoid Twitter and so highly admire Washington State AG, Bob Ferguson.
@2 Foghorn PeaBrain: You can thank your buddy, raindrop, for his brilliant suggestion of troll paddling. WHAP! there you go.
@31: Oh, and by the way, muffy----why then did Hillary, of whom you so strongly despise, go on to soundly defeat Trumpty Dumpty BY 3 MILLION POPULAR VOTES on November 8, 2016? So much for hatred. With dumb friends of Trump like you, who needs enemas? Sitz, BooBoo, sitz!


@42: Oh, that's right---she CAN'T sit! I guess muffy's hemorrhoids must be acting up. Oh well, there's always stand up routines....


@44: Hairdresser, my ass. You need a dog groomer and a flea bath, muffy. While you're at it, check your rug for infestations, and get your shots already. I notice you haven't mentioned kristofarian, lately. Did the poor boy run off?


@44: Hillary couldn't get rightfully inaugurated into the White House as #45 on January 20, 2017 because:
1.) Vladamir Putin and the KGB illegally hacked into the 2016 U.S. election rigging the system so that the outcome would be in favor of Trumpty Dumpty;
2.) The Koch brothers and other evil filthy, stinking rich white RepubliKKKan men launched a big misleading campaign full of lies to turn the average working white voters to turn on their friends and neighbors by supporting Trumpty Dumpty's evil MAGA agenda, and by doing so, shooting themselves in the foot regarding taxes, healthcare and government safety nets they're usually the most accustomed to getting by their Big, Bad Guv'Mint;
3.) The Electoral College is an outdated system that was put in place by white plantation owners, NOT to serve 100% of the people of the United States, and
4.) Chickenshit MAGA trash like you are too deathly afraid of ever having a woman serve as U.S. President, despite however impressive her resume and infinitely better fit for the job she is over her grossly inept, xenophobic male opponent. Are you and your ilk would rather destroy the world and all of the rest of us than admit you chose a reprehensibly destructive, self serving idiot.
So--are you going to blame me for Trumpty Dumpty's failure to Bring Back Coal, too, muffy?
The coal industry is dead, and so is the credibility to your side of any argument. Admit it--you're really just pissed that I called your true pathetic identity out. LOL


@44: Oh, and muffy........? WHAP!