Howard Schultz
- Thread starter New Pal Boiler
- Start date
Idiocy has been engaging in wars we can’t pay for with half of our money while our people go without things the rest of the western world takes for granted.
Link to site with accurate information on percentage of funds going to military costs?
Nothing I'd love more than have a qualified independent run for president....other than getting rid of the orange menace. Bad timing, Schultz could get Trump re-elected. That cannot happen.
http://www.independent.org/news/article.asp?id=1941
That’s from 07. There used to be one that was easy to find from last year that showed all defense related costs at a trillion.
My apologies. I had our federal budget at 2.25 trillion, but it’s been a LONG time since I looked at it.
It’s one in every 3.6 dollars. Way too much. Of course, you’re aware mainstream sources are beginning to claim that there may be 21 trillion in unaccounted for pentagon spending. Of course, who would know? The pentagon has never been audited.
And who wants this? Nobody! 90% of Americans don’t want empire. A vast majority wants to end these wars today.
Its 15%. If you really want to address an egregious line item, look at eliminating the interest expense first.
Are you talking discretionary spending or all spending (discretionary and mandatory)?
As a percentage of revenue. One trillion is not 15% of any number I see.
What’s your overall point? You support the wars? You don’t think defense spending is way too high?
1) youre using an article that is 11 years old.
2) I think there is value in defensive spending. How many jobs does the spending create? I think there are other items in the budget (like the interest expense) that are a far bigger issue.
1) defense spending has increased markedly since then. So if anything it’s charitable.. feel free to add those departments up this year.
2) I think there would be far more value in rebuilding this country. That would also create jobs .. the American people don’t want what you want. 90% are against empire. I’d rather keep that school open in the town next to ours.. that teacher has a job and can spend that money locally.
So you’re cool with killing people in the poorest places on earth.
Hey, what does victory in Afghanistan look like? Iraq? Syria? Yemen?
Amazing the attitude of people. My son who is a Purdue grad and works for large defense contractor in Palmdale, CA for the last 8 years has this problem with people who when they ask who he works for, they say he kills people. I asked him how he deals with that. He says he looks at it as he is protecting his family and the people of the United States and other innocent people by providing defense.
In first election I voted in, voted for Perot. Hindsight being 20/20, he was the one that actually had a clue about what NAFTA and other trade agreements would do even though he was mocked hard by mainstream candidates. Voted Johnson last election as more an opt out of two choices. I think Schultz would be a better candidate but would have to look into him a bit more.
Maybe. I think Dems need to concentrate on getting a half decent candidate the nomination.
The quickest thing to get Trump re-elected will be another shoddy candidate from the Dems.
Noticed this in other posts when you talk about Trump’s base, revoking ACA, the wall, etc. His base is also motivated by the democrats nominees. Talking about eliminating an industry, a radical green deal, 70% tax rates even if just on rich are just non starters.
I think Hickenlooper would have an ok/decent chance.
a larger issue though
--that contribution $ for said defense, is involuntary
--protection is also desired internally from that same domestic entity/government
Last edited:
Right .. cause it’s hard to raise your hand and say yes I like our foreign policy lol
Parts i like, parts i dont. Its never black and white.
Jumping from my thoughts on defense spending and making an asinine assumption about my feelings on foreign wars is a conversation killer. Kudos.
Lol. Because you want the sterile feeling of liking “defense spending” without having to look at what it is that you’re liking. But that IS what it is. You don’t get to like it without saying you’re liking that. It just comes as such a shock to you because the corporate media never frames it that way
Still not answering the question... a question I can tell no one has been informed enough to ask you. There’s no way to maintain your bullshit stance without saying “yes, I’m cool with that.” This is what it would be like if they let non corporatists on the debate stage
Are you some flavor of an anarchist? Like an ancap? An extreme little "L"? Just wondering because you throw around involuntary with regard to taxation and consider it a "large issue".
No more billionaires running for office, no more running government like business. I’m so sick and tired of this philosophy towards government.
I think in a representative democracy, a republic, our representatives should resemble the people they represent.
I think in a representative democracy, a republic, our representatives should resemble the people they represent.
its just representative of the larger/broader issues.
i don't prefer people/entities who initiate or threaten force in order to obtain goals.
i guess id start by leaning toward a category of voluntarism.
Last edited:
He will get the trump voters who voted trump as the lesser of two evils. And I think he could get democrat voters who don’t like how far left the party is going.
He could win as an independent.
If Schultz is polling well and siphoning off Dem votes, a contrarian thought would be to intentionally nominate a hard core socialist that forces all moderate Dems to vote for Schultz. That allows Schultz to maybe move to the center right and pick off all the Kasich/Rubio/Cruz primary voters, of which there are a ton.
oh.
i had thought anarchism rejected all forms of government. and capitalism.
I suppose there are various categories with aspects I agree/disagree with.
SO is there a prototype American who resembles and represents all Americans? Ted Cruz? Kamala Harris? Spartacus? Fauxcahontas? Jeb Bush? Beto O'Rourke? LMAO
He doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected. And he will draw more libs than Trump voters because he's much more lefty than conservative.
I know a third party candidate will have a tall hill to climb. I think you underestimate how many republicans are fed up with trumps behavior. With who the dems are putting up it would be another lesser of two evils vote for trump. With Schultz thrown in it could get interesting.
Like I said, not a snowball's chance in hell.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/schultz-faces-hometown-protests-eyes-194914118.html
Long way to go. Not likely but he has more than a snowballs chance.
Trump didn’t have a snowballs chance either this far out from the election.
Trumps boorish behavior won’t drive republicans to vote for a democrat candidate. I could see them vote independent, especially if he selects a center right running mate. For many republicans it would be a lot easier to pull that lever for I instead of D.
As far as the article, the protests are by far left nuts. Not exactly who he his going to be targeting. Center left and center right is his target. I think that is a pretty large, largely quiet, group.
Not true at all. Much of the D party "leadership" is already revolting against Schultz.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democrats-to-howard-schultz-dont-do-it/
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ocrats-starbucks-presidential-bid/2697023002/
https://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-threaten-starbucks-boycott-howard-schultz-campaign-2019-1
Well the D party leadership is also not his target. It’s pretty obvious they wouldn’t want him to run as an independent. You expect them to in any way support his candidacy?
I think there are many in both parties willing to vote for an independent...just needs to be a good one. We’ll just have to see it play out. Hell, he may not even run.
