Starbucks' Schultz weighs independent bid
Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz's flirtation with an independent presidential bid could have an interesting effect on the 2020 calculus.
Schultz told "60 Minutes" on Sunday that he is 'seriously thinking of running for president" as a "centrist independent," arguing that "both parties are consistently not doing what's necessary on behalf of the American people and are engaged, every single day, in revenge politics."
The idea of a centrist white-knight has long been romanticized in presidential politics, and in theory, there appears to be an opening.
President Trump remains historically unpopular, and the new NBC/WSJ poll shows less than a third of Americans believe the president is "knowledgeable and experienced enough to handle the presidency."
And Democrats are embarking on a presidential nominating contest that promises to be highly competitive and expose their own ideological divides.
But even if Schultz has the money to solve one big challenge—the organizational disadvantage faced by candidates outside of the major party organizations—he'll still face overwhelming odds to win the White House, or let alone to be the first third-party candidate to win a state since George Wallace in 1968.
Even as Americans appear frustrated with their political parties, political scientists have long argued that "independent" voters ultimately lean one way or another, and can be pretty reliable partisans.
While Trump's base isn't enough to necessarily win a presidential election on its own, the new NBC/WSJ poll shows the GOP still stands largely behind the president—86 percent approve of his job performance so far, compared to 39 percent of independents and just 5 percent of Democrats.
And more than 70 percent of Republicans rated the president favorably with each of the following metrics: being direct and straightforward in communicating with the American people; being effective and getting things done; changing business as usual in Washington; being a good negotiator; knowledgeable/experienced enough to handle presidency; and being steady and reliable.
So while it's possible that an independent alternative like Schultz cleave off some Republicans or Republican-leaning independents from Trump, a base that strong could help insulate the president from any losses he could suffer from his own party.
That's why we've seen so many Democrats are warning against a Schultz candidacy, out of fear that he'd provide a safe harbor for "hold-your-nose" Republicans and moderate Democrats.
There's precedent for that, but in favor of the Democrats—when Ross Perot peeled away voters from President George H.W. Bush in 1992.
Part of that fear comes from 2016, where the third-party vote made up more than the margin between Trump and Hillary Clinton in swing states like Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. That reignited the Democratic anger at third-party voters, an anger that had been dormant since Ralph Nader's 2000 showing in Florida.
It's not clear that all those votes would have gone to the Democrats but for the third-party challenge. But for Democrats looking to make 2020 a clear referendum on Trump, any third alternative complicates that calculus.