Ever since Howard Schultz announced on Sunday that he was considering an independent bid for president, a kind of mass hysteria has gripped the left broadly. The overwhelming reaction was one of fear: that the former Starbucks CEO would split the Democratic vote, guaranteeing a second term for President Trump. Others responded with dismissal, arguing that there is “zero appetite” among voters for a Schultz presidency. Rather than engage with Schultz—who, it is true, has offered little of substance other than attempting to incite undue panic about the national debt—Democrats have thrown an entitled tantrum.

This behavior bears an unflattering resemblance to the lane-clearing that party officials employed ahead of the 2016 election, coronating Hillary Clinton as the presumptive Democratic nominee well before the Iowa caucuses. And we all know how that turned out. If the Democrats want to ensure that Schultz doesn’t do irreparable damage to their 2020 chances, they had better take him seriously—even if it’s more than his feeble agenda deserves.



For all of the media attention that Schultz has received on his exploratory publicity tour, though, this is not yet the crisis that many imagine. Schultz may be a temporary distraction from the nascent primary season, but he’s also an easy target: an out-of-touch billionaire with unpopular ideas straight out of the Democratic Party of the 1990s. He presents a stark opportunity for Democrats to show where they stand—by rejecting Clintonism once and for all.

Schultz’s path to the White House is improbable, but Democrats have reason to worry. He has been singularly focused on ridiculing their policy proposals, particularly universal health care and tax hikes on the wealthy, and argues that they have become just as extreme as Trump’s Republican Party. While Schultz has yet to develop a robust platform, his statements betray a clear political strategy: He knows that Trump’s Republican support is largely immovable, so his only chance of success is to steal substantial votes from the Democrats. “To win a majority of electoral college votes, which Schultz says would be his goal,” The Washington Post’s Michael Scherer reported on Thursday, “he would have to ultimately replace the Democratic nominee as the favored choice of voters who do not want Trump to win a second term. In practice, this has led Schultz to focus far more of his initial fire on Democrats than Trump.”



Schultz has other advantages. Much of the mainstream media, and especially the Beltway press, is uncomfortable with political polarization—and very comfortable with moderates and rich people. Thus, Schultz “got a super-cushy red carpet for his possible 2020 presidential run ... despite his lack of political experience,” argued The Washington Post’s Margaret Sullivan. “Why do journalists and news organizations insist on doing this? I think the answer is pretty clear. It’s because they want to appear fair without taking any chances.” At Daily Kos, Eric Boehlert wrote that “Schultz is clearly benefiting from our Davos-style political culture, where billionaires are automatically held up as symbols of what is right and just. And if a billionaire raises his hand and says he wants become president without facing any primary-season opponents, the media parts like the Red Sea and prepares a seat for him in front of an eager television host.”

