By Quentin Langley
While Starbucks feels rather ubiquitous, it is a predominantly urban chain. Its clientele skew younger than average. The company makes a lot of its environmental and fair trade commitments . Founder, Howard Schultz, used to talk about the "third space" - somewhere that was neither home nor office. The focus on liberal values probably allows customers to feel more comfortable there. It is not Whole Foods, but its customers are likely to skew to the liberal side of the bell curve.
But, of course, Starbucks is a huge global business. Mr Schultz, no longer running the company, is a billionaire. A lifelong Democrat, he feels his party has left him. Still committed to liberal values, he is not happy at the Party's tilt on the economy. He also fears that by choosing a left-leaning candidate the party risks losing again and, worse, losing to Donald Trump.
So, Howard Schultz is thinking of making an independent run for President. It seems likely that he would stake out a middle-ground based on liberal social values while not demonizing business and wealth. In general, that's a position which polls fairly well, but would be unlikely to succeed in the Democratic primaries and even less likely to succeed among Republicans.
The risk, for Starbucks, is that the company's high profile founder could be a complicating factor for any Democrat running for President. What if Schultz undercuts the Democratic vote and helps Donald Trump to re-election? That won't play well with a significant number of Starbucks customers.
The management of the company could not distance itself from Schultz if it wanted to. He remains a significant shareholder and his name is intimately connected with the brand. But it cannot afford to embrace him either, if people see him as denying the Democrats a chance at unseating the President.
Polling from Michigan by Emerson Polling suggests that Schultz would draw voters fairly evenly from both sides, but it is very early days. We don't yet know the identity of the Democratic candidate. If the party chooses someone that the public sees has being outside the mainstream, Schultz could pick up more votes from the Democratic side. And then there is the desire to have someone to blame. If Schultz were to pick up support evenly from both sides and Trump were to win, Democrats would want to believe that it was the fault of Mr Schultz, because the alternative would be admitting that they lost to Donald Trump in a fair fight, and that's emotionally tough.
So, there's a fair chance people will be blaming Schultz for risking, and then, perhaps, producing, a Trump victory. And that is a risk that Starbucks is going to have to manage. Something which taints the company's brand with liberals could be very damaging.
Comments