Dems will soon purchase adult diapers over Howard Schultz's DOUBLE DIGIT numbers

Democrats are making cocky from the tooley in a panic over a potential third party presidential run in 2020 by former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz. It got so bad that Starbucks had to issue special guidelines to their baristas [fancy name for liberals who serve burnt coffee] on how to handle "aggressive" customers who freak out that Schultz will ruin the election for the Democrats and lead to yet another Trump victory.

Happily, they have good reason to be worried.

According to the first polls out on Schultz's campaign -- one internal and one Morning Consult/external -- Schultz is polling in the double digits against Democrats in a three-way challenge with President Donald Trump. This may have to do with the fact that Democrats such as Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Elizabeth Warren all have socialist plans that will make the country circle the bowl.

The Washington Examiner reports that the internal poll shows Schultz with a commanding 17 percent against Trump and either Sen. Elizabeth Warrren (D-MA) or Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), both among the top contenders for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

That definitely puts Schultz in the position of "spoiler" for both potential Democratic socialists. When Schultz is added to the lineup, Trump posts 33% compared to Warren and Harris, who post 32% and 31% respectively -- a situation that would likely lead to a narrow loss for either.

It's also good news for Schultz: in order to be on the ballot in most states, a third party candidate must command more than 15% of the vote in five key national polls. Schultz is within reach of that, particularly given that his own internal poll is tight, with a nice, low 2.5% margin of error.

An external poll from Morning Consult shows similar results -- and that Americans are increasingly open to the prospect of a third party candidate in the 2020 contest, like they were when Abraham Lincoln ran as the first Republican. [But CNN, had they been around then, would have probably called him a Democrat.]

Politico reports that at least 35% of voters would consider a third party candidate, and at least 12% believe they would cast a ballot for someone other than Trump or the generic Democratic candidate.

That still puts Schultz in a spoiler position, but he's polling better than most Democratic contenders and he's a year out of the Iowa caucuses, indicating that the Democratic Party has gone so far to the left that voters aren't taking them seriously.

One place where Schultz falls short is among potential third party voters who are looking more for a "moderate" alternative to either the President or the Democratic field. Although most third party voters assume third party candidates are moderate, that isn't necessarily the case with Schultz, who waffles between being socially progressive and a "pro-business" conservative, based on the day, which way the wind is blowing and the issue.

"There’s a common misperception that independents are moderate,” said a Republican strategist to Politico. “Most independents aren’t any more centrist than traditional partisans. Rather, they’ve made the decision to switch because of a hostility or disdain for the way politics is practiced.”

For now, it's clear that Schultz's potential candidacy represents a very serious threat to the Democrats, who aren't sending rational people to the 2020 contest.

But since when have Democrats been rational with Donald Trump as President?

I hope you'll follow Brain Flushings and have a few laughs while you get a conservative viewpoint. Politics is the new NFL without the mindless kneeling and this blog will both inform you and hopefully entertain you bigly.




Tweet