Until the last presidential election, seeing a billionaire in the US presidential race used to be a rarity, until Trump changed that. The presidency was always kind of seen like a demotion compared to the billionaire's life, and now Trump's using it for self-legitimation before the public, one that money alone can't buy. Problem is, billionaires such as Bloomber and Schultz have always been lone wolves of sorts, isolated and detached from the base, lacking a notable political platform. And this could harm the Dems in the long run.

Trump's victory creates the illusion that any billionaire could line up at the next primaries, and have a real shot at the presidency. Many experts believe only a billionaire, an outsider to the system who's prepared to play the populist card like Trump does, could truly beat Trump himself in 2020. The though surely tickles the ego of lots of them, no doubt.

The list of potential billionaire candidates is growing. Bloomberg and Schultz have both announced exploratoray committees, Oprah, Zuckerberg, Sandberg, Eiger are often mentioned too. Most of these probably won't run, but some have already publicly flirted with the idea, and used it to earn public support and legitimation as "folks who could stop Trump". The idea is appealing to many, granted.

The thing is, most of these guys don't seem to have a real political idea, vision, or a set of political principles. When Trump was elected, he had strong messages, populist yes, but he did mobilize the base even though he often contradicted himself. And what about Bloomberg? He seems totally detached from the Democrat base. Also, he's not a complete outsider to politics, having been NYC mayor and all that. Just like any other billionaire politician, he's convinced his business success should easily translate into political prowess, but is that really the case?

Howard Schultz, in turn, is aiming at a target base that doesn't exist. He wants to lead a moderate compaign and attract voters from both sides of the aisle who disapprove of their respective parties' methods. While targeting the fence-sitters is nothing new, Schultz is betting on a horse that isn't even sure to run. Question is, is there really a strong base of people in the perfect center who want a moderate candidate? The Dems are turning to the left these days (Bernie, Cortez are the big stars now), and Trump is doubling down on the protectionist right. Schultz may believe he could be a pro-business Democrat, but the polls suggest that the main thing that defines independents is a disgust of the political system as a whole, not the moderateness of their principles (if any at all). The independents usually tend to gravitate toward one party or the other, they'd always lean to the left or right eventually, but they keep trying to convince people that they represent a change to the rotten, stagnated political system. And so they fail.

In addition, both Schultz and Bloomberg represent a threat to the mainstream Democrats, especially the former, who said he wouldn't mind running as Independent. The GOP are much more disciplined in this respect, they're more ready to support their party's candidate, even if they hate him in their guts. The Dems tend to flirt with "Third" candidates more often, or vote in protest rather than on principles, especially when they're discontent with their own party.

All of this means that a potential Schultz ticket could steal vital votes away from the Dems. While no independent candidate has ever earned more than 2.7% of the popular vote for the last two decades, the current situation full of billionaire candidates flooding the media with their presence could lead to a much higher share under their tally, come 2020. And the polls indicate that the bulk of those "stolen" votes will come from the Dem base. After he was bashed by the media, Schultz promised to wait for another 4 months with his candidacy, so he wouldn't aid Trump. But we'll see if he'll keep that promise.

The billionaires' fixation also leads to another problem. If the political debate is dominated by billionaires with vague messages who are used in running things like a private business, the whole race could boil down to a referendum on whose wealth is greater, who's more successful, more aggressive, louder in their attacks on their opponents, more outrageous, etc. And we already know Trump flourishes in such environment. He may not be among the most successful billionaires, but he has already proven he's unbeatable in a mud fight.