Schultz To Sever Democratic Vote


AP Images

Howard Schultz announces potential run for president.

Jaydi Swanson, Views Editor

After announcing his potential run for president as an independent candidate, former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz is receiving well-deserved backlash.

Seconds after revealing his plan on “60 Minutes,” Schultz was called an “egotistical billionaire” by an audience member and was accused of inadvertently boosting president Donald Trump’s chance of re-election. But Schultz does not see it that way. He believes he has a shot at winning and breaking down the two-party system.

“I must be doing something right to garner this much attention…,” Schultz said on CBS. “What I have offered the American people is simply an opportunity to hear my story and an opportunity to say, ‘We don’t have to have two parties. There can be another choice.’”

He’s not the first to have this dream, and he won’t be the last. But if Schultz follows through with this plan, we will feel the effects of his loss for four long years.

While Schultz said on “60 Minutes” that no one wants Trump out of office more than he does, he is too confident in the American people’s willingness to change: independent candidates have always caused more harm than good. Schultz’s name on the ballot would split the democratic party, leaving Trump to soar ahead with more solid Republican support. And this is the last thing we want.

Fearful that he will ruin the parties chance of taking office, Democratic candidates have spoken out against Schultz’s candidacy.

“In 2020, the great likelihood is that an independent would just split the anti-Trump vote and end up re-electing the president,” former New York City mayor and potential democratic candidate Mike Bloomberg said, reported by CBS. “That’s a risk I refused to run in 2016, and we can’t afford to run it now.”

Sure, Schultz could be a good president. Sure, he could be helpful to our country. Sure, it’s nice to think that Americans could look past the issue of political parties and agree on something for once.

But when another four years with Trump is the risk, the slim chance of rewards is not enough.