No wonder the Left-o-crats are freaking out at the prospect of this guy running; he makes MORE SENSE, and is more REASONABLE than the entire field of Democrat Presidential hopefuls look like petulant, little children....
Just watched his Town Hall from KC on FOX....
Here's a "snippet" :
Schultz: I've been a lifelong Democrat, but the party left me
Pretty sharp guy...although we disagree on numerous points, he outline some we agree on....
I watched some of it, I was very impressed. 12% of independents voted third party in 2016, for candidates with no money, no media coverage, no name recognition, no way to get their message out, no debates, no nothing. 12% who really, really disliked both major party candidates that they were willing to vote for anyone who's last names weren't Trump or Clinton even though whom they voted for had no chance to win.
I can see Schultz attracting those same independents plus double or even triple the among that went third party in 2016. Especially if the Democrats nominate another Hillary Clinton or some wacko extremist leftist. In 1992, Perot won 30% of independents, 17% of Republicans, and 13% of Democrats. This after he withdrew and reentered the race. I think if Schultz ran as an independent, he could improve a lot on those numbers.
He certainly would be a much more credible wildcard than Perot was. The big question is could Schultz, unlike Perot win some states? I think he could. Especially if the Democrats nominate another bum candidate that only caters to the extreme far left. That totally ignores independents as Hillary did. If no candidate receives 270 electoral votes, then the house chooses the president.
Now that would be interesting. The house is currently controlled by Democrats 235-200. But that's not how the vote or how the house decides who will become the next president. The vote is taken by states, each state has one vote. Article II, section 1 and the 12th Amendment. Currently the Republicans control 26 states to the democrats 22 with two states tied in the number of representatives.
I can hear the hollering now. The Democrats winning the popular vote, but losing in the electoral college in 2016. Then perhaps losing again in the house in spite of having the controlling majority in overall numbers, but not in states. Yep, very interesting indeed.
One last thought, in a three way race, Democratic candidate, Trump, Schultz, what if Trump received the most popular votes, say 40% with the remainding 60% divided between the Democratic candidate and Schultz. Would those 10 states give Trump all their electoral votes as their compact states? I seriously doubt it.
