While many Democrats have declared their candidacy for president in the upcoming 2020 election, one man has caused the greatest uproar on the left by simply considering to run as an independent. That man is Howard Schultz.

Looking through the uproar, we see that Schultz is no extremist, for either side. He has supported Democrat policies such as “Obamacare”, promised to hire refugees globally as a response to the 2017 travel ban, and even criticized the Trump administration’s removal of the United States from the Paris climate agreement. He was also a first-generation college graduate after growing up in housing projects. By these accords, one could reason that he could be the poster candidate for the Democratic party to win over Trump.

Where Schultz loses today’s progressives is through his economic status. The fact that he is a billionaire who has earned his money fairly — by providing products and services that people want — infuriates the modern left.

This paradigm in the Democratic party could spell the end of any efforts to “mend the gap” in today’s political atmosphere.

With high Democrat figures such as Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris already entering the race, they have brought with them a theme; one of staunch acceptance of far-left Progressive ideas. Liberalism was created as a way to make the capitalist system fairer, gentler and more inclusive.

Holman, Tanner

Holman is a political science junior and Community Voices columnist for The Shorthorn.

Today, if you ask Elizabeth Warren, the purpose of Liberalism is for defaming capitalism as a “rigged system.” Or look at Kamala Harris’ proposal to eliminate an entire industry (private health insurance) within capitalism, or those (like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) who demonize and punish people who do exceptionally well at it, or those who want to wage class warfare.

The result of this ever leftward-creeping ideology is that if any of those progressive candidates receive the Democratic nomination, the same people who were reluctantly turned to Trump in 2016 because of their alienation by Hillary Clinton will be quick to do the same in 2020.

What myself and many other voters felt during the 2016 election was that two loud extremes were all that was being heard by the media and pollsters, leading to two candidates whose only similarity was knowing how to disenfranchise voters. This ultimately required voters to “choose a side.”

If we ever wish to see the return to a time where Americans were able to have discourse without being put down, debate without personal attacks and agreement on the basics, we should look to those at the center of the political spectrum.

The progression toward this current state appears to have happened quickly. It correlates strongly with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Perhaps, as we no longer have an international example of the dangers of extremism, Americans are more likely to view extremes as possibilities.

Ultimately, the Democrats’ best chance for not completely throwing the next election to Trump is to stop screaming. Stop pushing their policies farther to the left in response to Trump. If Democrats want any hope at reclaiming the White House in 2020, they need to revive the centrists.



Like our work? Don’t steal it! Share the link or email us for information on how to get permission to use our content. Click here to report an accessibility issue or call (817) 272-3188.
Load comments