Reading through business news this morning, I noted that Howard Schultz is stepping down from the Starbucks CEO job (he's been with them in some capacity since the early 1980s).
The goal of the guy now? The news media says that he wants to run for President in 2020....as an independent.
The gimmick? Well....it's a Ross Perot-like situation. You go into fifty states as a third-party guy, and pretend it's all serious....but your job is to confuse enough people that maybe in two or three states....you flip the outcome from Trump to the Democratic contender. Maybe along the way, you actually do win two states in terms of electoral votes, and all of this would be just enough to toss out the Electoral College end-result because they can't reach the 270-level.
Adding to this....eleven states (oddly, all blue-vote states)....are saying they've got the laws in place to only award their votes to the highest vote-achiever in the election.
So at that point, the situation moves onto the House of Representatives and a fifty-state block of votes, but ONLY with the top two candidates in terms of votes. At that point, Schultz would be left out. But the question is....could the Democratic contender then win 26 states? The last time I did the numbers was 2016, with Trump-Clinton, and Trump would clear 33 states. There is some suggestion that some additional House seats will be won for the Democrats this fall, and maybe the intention is that they'd control another five state legislative groups and affect this outcome. Course, if they only get more seats in Democratic-majority states....then it's all just a waste of time (winning eight more GOP controlled seats in California would not change much of anything in terms of that state).
Then you come to the final detail of this election run.....money. To make a national run....you need to figure on $250-million minimum. If this were an effort to only go into ten states? You might be able to trim this down to a quarter of the normal cost.