Your 2020 Presidential Candidate Speculation Thread

i don't know Eliza, but there were all those NYT Trump Voter profiles that quoted them as saying, "He shouldn't say those things, BUT..."

Krugman has had some good tweets on this today, specifically this one:

More generally, the socially-liberal/economically conservative position -- the lower right quadrant in this figure -- is basically the Empty Quadrant of American politics -- except in green rooms 5/ pic.twitter.com/fNXcxLV9bg

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) January 29, 2019

otoh

ha that would be nice - let the plutocrats fight it out and make way for social democracy - the benefits of a fractured ruling class https://t.co/z9yoAAHgbT

— Doug Henwood (@DougHenwood) January 29, 2019

LOL

I mean so far Schultz's entire platform appears to be "please don't tax my riches, we'll work something out," and I don't think that's going to work.

I thought his platform was "what's a billionaire to do to get some service around here?"

his platform is free $3 starbucks gift cards for everyone. it's a $1 billion annual program

not a fan of Mr Coffee, but isn't it possible he'd draw more votes from Yam a la Ross Perot?

― a Mets fan who gave up on everything in the mid '80s (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, January 29, 2019 11:07 AM (fifty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think the notion that schultz could split the right vote emanates from the belief that right-wingers truly want a moderate, low-tax guy with a calm and principled demeanor. i don't know what more they have to do to prove to you that is not true https://t.co/DBicCeZdsT

— Elizabeth Bruenig (@ebruenig) January 29, 2019

look at all the guys who ran in '16 for the republican nomination, and look who they chose. they already had the opportunity to pick a suit with a managerial disposition. they didn't want one

— Elizabeth Bruenig (@ebruenig) January 29, 2019

That doesn’t mean they all don’t want one and clearly such a constituency still exists they just don’t control the party anymore (and arguably if they had unified behind one candidate they would’ve beaten trump who was never able to capture a majority in the primaries).

no that's true. but i'm not at all confident his candidacy would be a good thing (or a wash) for the dem nominee.

it would be a bad thing for starbucks business, so hopefully he won't do it.

I am all for things that are bad for Starbucks and this guy has zero chance so yeah you go ahead and fuck up your career bro

yeah 'boycott starbucks because you hate trump' is one of those things that people could actually follow through with. there's probably not a more ideal brand for democrats to have that kind of stupid leverage over.

I'm sure he still has unvested exec comp left of course but he has nothing to do with starbucks anymore.

but yeah still bad for starbucks so whatever.

even if it doesn't hit his pocket that directly, he's gotta still have tons of personal ties to the top of the company. plus its brand is basically what he's running on.

Tax brackets will be renamed tall, grande, and venti

if he ran for president, would he agree to sell off his investments in Starbucks, etc?

or, in the post-Trump world, does no one even bother to care about conflicts of interest

I’ve still never even pissed in a Starbucks.

We're going to shut America down for a day to solve racism!

it's like how David Brooks and Tom Friedman spent the eight years of the Obama administration wishing that we had a cautious, consensus-minded moderate as President https://t.co/23nRWAqXqU

— Seth D. Michaels 🐕 (@sethdmichaels) January 29, 2019

I’ve already decided to boycott Starbucks until he drops out (or until he doesn’t manage to cost the dem candidate the election). And I’m a basic bitch who actually likes Starbucks.

Meantime

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/29/tulsi-gabbard-2020-election-1134055

My heart, she breaks

Elizabeth Bruenig
✔
@ebruenig
i think the notion that schultz could split the right vote emanates from the belief that right-wingers truly want a moderate, low-tax guy with a calm and principled demeanor. i don't know what more they have to do to prove to you that is not true

otm

rip big man

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti will not run for president https://t.co/kTfhdGm7oP

— Steve Clow (@steveclowLA) January 29, 2019

LOL

Elizabeth Warren responds to Howard Schultz: "We have a billionaire who says he wants to jump into the race and the first issue he's raised is 'no new taxes on billionaires'. Let's see where that goes." https://t.co/C4KzJeCZvx

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) January 29, 2019

I just got invited to an "Energy Geeks for Kamala" cocktail party in Oakland

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/29/cnn-town-hall-kamala-harris-1135735

During the town hall, Harris laid out several policy objectives, including an endorsement of a “Green New Deal” to combat climate change, calling the issue an “existential threat.”

I feel bad for not watching, let alone going to the Kamala Harris CNN thing. Did anything interesting pop up? I think it took place on the other side of my neighborhood

I hope Kamala Harris likes martinis. She looks like she does. If so, she has my votel

Re Garcetti: me neither

I guess you could argue with her stance but imo this was a thoughtful reply about criminal justice reform from the Harris town hall (this was the only tweet with the full clip that I could find):

Oh, Riley Fink, you tried it.

Kamala Harris takes a ‘gotcha’ question on her record as a prosecutor and just shreds it.

pic.twitter.com/dADW24j19w

— The Hoarse Whisperer (@HoarseWisperer) January 29, 2019

yeah she's gonna win

lol

Yeah I dont think this is gonna derail her

i'm glad to see her making it a point to not only say she opposes the death penalty but also explain why. haven't heard that from a politician in a long time actually

I get grossed out by the idea that one should be opposed to the death penalty because it “costs taxpayers money” rather than because it’s murder

I'm not sure that's her point

I think the point was wrongful convictions

She made both points

Wrongful convictions is a very important reason the death penalty is horrific.

But it is also wrong to execute guilty people.

yes

completely agree

it was a really good answer tbf

Harris "open to multiple paths" re m4a

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/29/politics/kamala-harris-medicare-for-all-eliminate-private-insurers-backlash/index.html

Some people listen to arguments that involve money, though. Capital punishment is less of a party/partisan issue than most other wedge issues, so if you can swing people by saying life in prison costs less than executing convicts, give it a shot.

no outright waffling on M4A yet AFAICT but it does seem like her positions are still somewhat in flux xp

Fine its appealing to assholes who love money. Still find it an offputting answer.

I’m not really a consequentialist, i’m discovering.

xp

Is there any county with single payer healthcare that bans private insurance? I don't think so, right? I can't imagine the US *ever* leading the way on that front.

re: m4a, being willing to support other plans is fine, and her spokesperson reiterated her m4a support, which is the right move. the time for compromise is when the bills are actually being considered, not during the campaign