Recently, Jill Stein was on a national network and steadfastly refused to allow the interviewer to simply state the fact, the FACT, that her margin was larger than the margin of victory in several states.
There has always been a good government, purest strain in American liberalism. In many ways, this is admirable. This Adlai Stevenson wing of the Democratic Party has brought a lot of reforms over time that have been beneficial.
But this does not mean that liberals have to be politically clueless.
On social media this week, the comment about Howard Schultz that I have seen more than any other from progressives has been something to the effect of, “Don’t ask your barista about Howard Schultz. It’s not their fault.”
This is an absolutely apt demonstration of this political cluelessness.
My response, and to me the only sensible response politically, is to say, “Why on earth would you be in front of a “barista” when you know that Howard Schultz is the direct monetary beneficiary of that transaction?”
Michael Moore has now stated the obvious. We should not spend one dime at Starbucks until Howard Schultz announces that he is not running for president in the age of Donald Trump, when he might cause this erstwhile dictator to be reelected.
Boycott Schultz and Trump. Both clueless billionaires.
I think he’s just as likely to peel off votes from Trump given some of his fiscal policies. Also, I thought he was no longer CEO of Starbucks.
Schultz is a pro Trump billionaire tax cutter fraud posing as an independent ‘centrist’.
Don’t be fooled again by Third Party Steiners /Naderites.
Which is exactly why he might peel votes from Trump.
People don’t have to vote for President. If I weren’t able to support and vote for the person I wanted in the last election, my ballot would have been blank. I couldn’t vote for Trump or Clinton.
So who did you vote for?
Gary Johnson, who wasn’t allowed in the debates even though he was on the ballot in every state.
I’ve long thought that if you are on the ballot in enough states to add up to 270 electoral votes you should be invited to at least one debate.
Yet another case for Rank Choice Voting