Howard Schultz, the Starbucks billionaire and aspiring independent presidential candidate, tweeted a link to a column describing Democrat candidates Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris as "fauxcahontas" and "shrill" respectively. Then he deleted the tweet.
"Thank you @Rogerlsimon for a thoughtful analysis of what's possible. #ReimagineUS," Schultz tweeted, along with a link to an article on PJ Media by Roger L. Simon titled "Howard Schultz Could Actually Win the Presidency."
"Current frontrunner Kamala Harris is far from reassuring," Simon writes in the column. "She's a shrill (see the Kavanaugh hearings) quasi-socialist promising pie in the sky — Medicare-for-all, debt-free college, guaranteed pre-K, minimum basic income, confiscatory taxes — and she's just getting started. Bernie [Sanders] and others will soon be following suit. Fauxcahontas already has, competing in a game of socialist one-upmanship."
I've been thinking a bit lately about how Schultz embodies the appeal of a centrist pro-business candidate to a media obsessed with narratives of partisan extremism and which habitually poses itself at an equidistant point between opposed sides, and how this affinity contrasts with the visceral revulsion almost everyone has for his candidacy and the limitless wealth that could sustain it to the bitter end.
Thing is, though, Schultz is a moron.