When former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz fired up his White House 2020 burners last week, it wasn't clear to me whether he intended to launch a political-war zeppelin, the Hindenburg or a trial balloon.
The first metaphor suggests, generously, that he knew exactly what he was doing by alienating Democrats with talk of an independent run. The received wisdom is that this would spoil the vote in favor of a second term for President Donald Trump, if Trump does or can seek it. The contrarian thought — again, very generous — is that it would force Democrats to forestall any dart to the left.
The second metaphor maintains that Schultz was trying to appeal, not alienate, by tapping into a quiet centrist majority, but that he botched the liftoff such that his campaign, if he undertakes it, is a nonflier, weighed down with every embittered coffee menu pun you can think of.
The third, perhaps the conclusive one, reveals that he commands attention, if not accord — or policy.
We'll see. It's early. But what I found most interesting among the many reactions was the declaration that what Schultz is selling, nobody wants. This was notable to me because what he's selling is, in at least some measure, what I am, too.
A key criticism against a Schultz candidacy is that he's a mainstream male billionaire at a time when a good portion of the electorate would be happy with precisely none of those things. I'm roughly two of those things, though that's not what concerns me. We should be glad to accept talent from wherever it comes. It always should have been that way. But it hasn't been, and still isn't; thus the reasonable emphasis on diversifying our leadership.
My point is more about ideology. What the "nobody wants" assertion means, and which there is a chart from the Voters Study Group of collaborative researchers (tinyurl.com/vote-quad) to demonstrate, is that the bulk of the electorate (based on the 2016 election) fills three quadrants: (1) socially and fiscally liberal, (2) socially and fiscally conservative, and (3) socially conservative but fiscally liberal. That third quadrant, brimming with assertiveness, comprises the populists.
The fourth, sparsely populated quadrant — where Schultz is said to reside, is socially liberal and fiscally conservative, which is said to be centrist.