At this point in the 1992 election cycle, George H.W. Bush’s approval rating was over 80 percent. A little more than a year later, he trailed the independent candidate Ross Perot in national polls.
So it is probably premature to confidently assess whether there’s an opening for Howard Schultz, a prospective third-party presidential candidate and the former chief executive of Starbucks. Well-funded, vigorous third-party candidates don’t come around often, and sometimes it’s not evident that electoral systems are vulnerable until someone tries to break them.
But at least for now, there is little reason to think a Schultz bid would end differently from the other independent or minor-party bids of the last 150 years (none won).
And there is at least some reason to think it could help President Trump’s uncertain path to re-election.
Since 1860, only four minor-party candidates have won at least 10 percent of the vote: Ross Perot, George Wallace, Robert La Follette and Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt had the highest percentage, 27.4, in 1912 (he had the benefit of having already been president).
What is most notable about the present case is that the conditions for even those modest successes are not in place.
Although the details vary, Wallace, La Follette and Roosevelt all represented a minority wing of an overly broad majority party that fractured, usually after a prolonged period in power.
Today’s parties are diverse, but they’re not large enough or divided enough to manage a clear split, like the departure of the Southern Democrats in the 1960s or the periodic revolts of progressive Republicans during the early decades of the 20th century.
And while dividing a party is an easy route to 10 percent of the vote, it is not a great path to victory. The other, more unified party typically has the edge.
In early interviews, Mr. Schultz has positioned himself as a centrist who could win voters who are dissatisfied with both parties. This is somewhat more like Mr. Perot, who capitalized on populist dissatisfaction in 1992. Perhaps a Schultz bid could even be thought of as the reverse of Mr. Perot’s bid: a revolt of pragmatic, centrist voters against newly resurgent populism.
Dissatisfied centrists are well represented in the American elite, but not across the American electorate. According to a Pew Research survey of more than 5,000 Americans in 2017, 78 percent of registered voters have a favorable view of at least one major party, and only 18 percent have an unfavorable view of both. Similarly, only 16 percent say both parties are “too extreme,” according to the survey.
These dissatisfied centrist voters fit the profile of affluent, socially moderate and fiscally conservative suburban voters. They are twice as likely to make more than 0,000 per year than voters who have a favorable view of a party, and 78 percent of these voters say Democrats “too often see government as the only way to solve problems.”
Like Mr. Schultz, who built up Starbucks starting in Seattle, these affluent voters also tend to be men and are overrepresented in the West. On balance, it is a group with libertarian instincts and corporate sympathies.
Mr. Schultz could certainly play to these voters, but it is not a particularly electorally fruitful group. In an analysis of the Voter Study Group, Lee Drutman, a political scientist, found that just 4 percent of voters were conservative on economic issues and liberal on cultural issues. In comparison, populists represented 29 percent of the 2018 electorate. Mr. Schultz’s candidacy might be the reverse of Mr. Perot’s, but Mr. Perot’s pitch probably had broader appeal.
During parts of the 1992 campaign, Mr. Perot also had the benefit of a president with an approval rating in the low 30s and upper 20s. In theory, that was low enough to create an opening for a centrist independent candidate who could win with as little as 35 percent of the vote if he drew evenly from both parties. In the end, Mr. Perot won 19 percent, though at times he held significantly more support in the polls.
Today, President Trump’s approval rating is around 40 percent, and it was in the mid-40s among likely voters fairly recently. In the Pew study, 39 percent of voters who had an unfavorable opinion of both parties approved of Mr. Trump’s performance, about the same as among other registered voters. So long as that’s true, it would be hard for Mr. Schultz to find a path to victory.
It is too early to say which issues Mr. Schultz might emphasize on the campaign trail. It is also far too early to forecast the winner of the Democratic nomination. But if Mr. Schultz runs, it is easier to imagine how he could draw more votes from the Democratic candidate than from the president.
In principle, a strong centrist presidential bid shouldn’t draw more from Democrats than Republicans. And polls showed that Mr. Perot drew fairly evenly from Bill Clinton and Mr. Bush.
But Mr. Schultz said he had been “a lifelong Democrat.” Most of his views are aligned with the Democratic Party. More generally, fiscally moderate and centrist voters have trended toward Democrats during the Trump era. They represent a natural opportunity for the party in 2020. But it is a distinct possibility that Democrats will nominate a progressive candidate who isn’t well suited to winning voters from this group, and Mr. Schultz would be fairly well positioned to capitalize on their dissatisfaction.
Democrats also appear to have an opportunity among voters who backed a third-party candidate in 2016, and Mr. Schultz could presumably appeal to those voters as well. A Pew Research study in August found that voters who supported Gary Johnson or Jill Stein in 2016 had “cold” feelings toward President Trump by a margin of 84 percent to 12 percent. The exit polls found that self-reported 2016 minor-party voters supported Democrats in 2018 House races, 54 percent to 41 percent.
But Mr. Schultz could adopt a more conservative message focused on entitlements, the deficit or even political correctness. His most natural supporters would be underrepresented in many of the most important battleground states, like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Florida. And it is possible that Mr. Schultz’s presence in the race could make it easier for certain Democrats to run as populists; he could offer a more useful foil than the president.
All of this supposes that Mr. Schultz would manage to claim a significant share of the vote. This is certainly possible, given the resources at his disposal, but it’s not inevitable either. He enters with very little support or even name recognition, and deep opposition to the president will make many voters reluctant to support someone who isn’t thought to have a serious chance to win, particularly if the Democrats nominate a broadly acceptable candidate.
For now, it’s hard to imagine him helping Democrats consolidate voters who disapprove of President Trump. He seems likelier to divide them.B:
微微个人心水8码中特【圣】【灵】【教】【的】【警】【告】，【钟】【离】【的】【警】【告】，【镜】【红】【尘】【在】【乎】【吗】？ 【呵】【呵】…… 【他】【丝】【毫】【不】【在】【乎】，【因】【为】【他】【是】【镜】【红】【尘】，【是】【整】【个】【日】【月】【帝】【国】【之】【内】【最】【重】【要】【的】【人】【之】【一】！ 【而】【明】【德】【堂】【呢】？【怕】【圣】【灵】【教】【吗】？ 【呵】【呵】…… 【不】【怕】！ 【明】【德】【堂】【在】【日】【月】【帝】【国】【的】【地】【位】，【无】【论】【圣】【灵】【教】【在】【怎】【么】【对】【日】【月】【帝】【国】【今】【后】【的】【战】【争】【作】【用】【非】【凡】，【那】【也】【比】【不】【上】【明】【德】【堂】【在】【日】【月】【帝】【国】【的】【地】
【乌】【云】【仙】【笑】【道】：“【我】【会】【再】【教】【学】【宫】【弟】【子】【们】【一】【张】【符】【咒】，【也】【就】【是】【我】【之】【前】【使】【用】【过】【的】【龙】【象】【符】。【然】【后】【我】【就】【闭】【关】，【冲】【击】【元】【婴】【境】【界】。【等】【我】【成】【功】【冲】【到】【了】【元】【婴】【境】【界】【之】【后】，【我】【就】【会】【考】【虑】【教】【授】【弟】【子】【了】。” 【邹】【进】【点】【头】：“【期】【待】【子】【玄】【公】【龙】【象】【符】【的】【威】【力】，【那】【一】【日】【子】【玄】【公】【用】【龙】【象】【符】，【直】【接】【重】【伤】【元】【婴】【境】【界】【的】【开】【方】，【当】【真】【很】【是】【震】【撼】。” 【乌】【云】【仙】【开】【始】【了】【第】【三】【次】
“【雨】【烟】。？”【门】【外】【忽】【然】【又】【响】【起】【杜】【世】【夜】【着】【急】【的】【声】【音】。 “【你】【乖】【一】【点】，【保】【证】【你】【没】【事】。”【这】【是】【杜】【世】【玉】【的】【声】【音】。 【不】【要】！【雨】【烟】【痛】【苦】【的】【摇】【头】，【心】【底】【涌】【上】【一】【股】【浓】【烈】【的】【愤】【怒】，【她】【埋】【下】【头】【在】【他】【的】【手】【上】【狠】【狠】【的】【咬】【了】【一】【口】，【然】【后】【伸】【手】【去】【拉】【门】【把】【手】，【因】【为】【手】【没】【力】【气】【她】【拉】【了】【半】【天】【也】【没】【拉】【开】，【杜】【世】【玉】【捂】【着】【手】，【杜】【眼】【看】【着】【她】，【他】【倒】【是】【想】【看】【看】【这】【个】【女】【人】
【推】【进】【装】【置】【启】【动】，【汉】【墨】【往】【城】【市】【外】【跑】【去】。 【他】【进】【入】【战】【场】【的】【主】【要】【目】【的】，【是】【为】【了】【试】【验】【煌】【天】【装】【甲】【的】【作】【战】【能】【力】。【如】【果】【不】【是】【后】【来】，【那】【个】【少】【女】【傻】【傻】【地】【来】【救】【他】，【他】【也】【不】【会】【去】【专】【门】【地】【剿】【灭】【光】【线】【级】。 【用】【更】【冷】【酷】【无】【情】【地】【说】【法】，【他】【来】【到】【这】【个】【世】【界】，【从】【一】【开】【始】【就】【是】【来】【进】【行】【一】【场】【试】【验】。 【如】【果】【这】【个】【世】【界】【的】【进】【程】【没】【有】【其】【他】【外】【来】【者】【干】【扰】，【在】【十】【年】【后】，【人】微微个人心水8码中特【感】【受】【到】【陆】【宇】【的】【隐】【隐】【提】【防】，【披】【着】【斗】【篷】【的】【人】【影】【没】【好】【气】【开】【口】：“【我】【请】【你】【来】，【自】【然】【是】【做】【出】【了】【决】【定】。” 【如】【果】【陆】【宇】【没】【有】【出】【现】，【或】【者】【陆】【宇】【的】【表】【现】【不】【那】【么】【尽】【如】【人】【意】，【那】【尼】【德】【霍】【格】【绝】【不】【会】【对】【皎】【月】【动】【手】。 【但】【现】【在】，【陆】【宇】【既】【然】【表】【现】【出】【了】【超】【强】【的】【潜】【力】，【不】【妨】【让】【皎】【月】【多】【沉】【睡】【一】【段】【时】【间】。 【如】【果】【陆】【宇】【能】【够】【成】【功】，【尤】【古】【多】【拉】【希】【尔】【也】【不】【需】【要】【使】【用】【这】
【董】【锵】【锵】【从】【街】【边】【马】【上】【要】【打】【烊】【的】【冰】【淇】【淋】【店】【里】“【抢】【出】”【两】【个】【圆】【筒】，【递】【给】【老】【白】【一】【个】，【同】【时】【略】【带】【紧】【张】【地】【环】【顾】【四】【周】，【用】【焦】【虑】【的】【语】【气】【问】【道】：“【哪】【两】【个】？” “【这】【也】【是】【我】【刚】【才】【才】【想】【起】【来】【的】，”【老】【白】【指】【了】【指】【自】【己】【的】【墨】【镜】【和】【帽】【子】，“【如】【果】【那】【人】【像】【咱】【们】【一】【样】【戴】【了】【这】【些】，【你】【怎】【么】【办】？” 【这】【个】【问】【题】【董】【锵】【锵】【确】【实】【没】【想】【过】，【但】【他】【马】【上】【猜】【到】【老】【白】【可】【能】【已】
【正】【在】【挑】【选】【时】，【田】【公】【公】【飞】【快】【的】【跑】【进】【暖】【阁】，【因】【为】【一】【时】【情】【急】，【还】【被】【那】【门】【槛】【儿】【给】【绊】【倒】【了】，【一】【下】【子】【摔】【了】【个】【狗】【吃】【屎】，【直】【接】【跪】【在】【宁】【妃】【的】【面】【前】。 **【宫】【见】【了】【这】【一】【幕】，【捂】【着】【嘴】，【默】【默】【地】【笑】【了】【起】【来】。 【宁】【妃】【眉】【头】【一】【皱】，【训】【斥】【道】，“【别】【告】【诉】【我】，【你】【这】【么】【做】【是】【为】【了】【逗】【本】【宫】【开】【心】？” 【田】【公】【公】【喘】【着】【粗】【气】，【慌】【张】【的】【跪】【好】，【低】【着】【头】【说】，“【回】【娘】【娘】【的】
【许】【游】【光】【再】【次】【醒】【了】【过】【来】，【仍】【然】【在】【最】【初】【的】【那】【个】【六】【角】【形】【房】【间】【中】。 【就】【在】【这】【时】，【他】【看】【到】【了】【一】【个】【虚】【影】，【那】【个】【虚】【影】【打】【开】【了】【门】【进】【入】【了】【第】【二】【个】【房】【间】，【接】【着】【被】【一】【道】【光】【击】【中】【消】【失】。 “【那】【道】【虚】【影】【就】【是】【之】【前】【的】【我】？【如】【果】【是】【这】【样】，【现】【在】【的】【我】【还】【是】【我】【吗】？” 【抱】【着】【疑】【问】【的】【许】【游】【光】【绕】【过】【之】【前】【的】【位】【置】，【准】【备】【从】【另】【一】【边】【进】【入】，【然】【而】，【到】【达】【某】【个】【位】【置】【时】，