With Trump in White House, Some Executives Ask, Why Not Me?

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/business/bloomberg-iger-business-executives-president.html

Version 0 of 1.

Having reached the top of a major corporation and amassed a fortune, chief executives often wonder: What’s next?

After Donald J. Trump, the answer may well be a run for the White House.

Mr. Trump had no political or military experience, the traditional routes to high political office. Virtually his only qualification was his business career, and a checkered one at that, considering his own brush with personal bankruptcy.

“There is this sense that if Trump got it, why shouldn’t they?” said David Gergen, co-director of the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard Kennedy School and an adviser to four presidents. “They’ve been more successful, they have more experience, and they’ve run a public company, which is more equivalent to what a president does than a private company” like the Trump Organization.

Stu Loeser, once the press secretary for Michael R. Bloomberg, the former New York mayor who considered a presidential run last year, concurred. “If you run a company that has employed tens of thousands of people, and generated lots of profit and been undeniably successful, and you look at a sitting president who, to be honest, a lot of business people don’t have much respect for, you think, why not me?” he said.

Mr. Loeser now runs his own strategic consulting firm, and told me he has clients who are business executives considering a run for high public office. “I can’t tell you their names, obviously,” he said.

Boldface corporate names widely discussed as contenders for the next Democratic presidential nomination include chief executives like Howard Schultz of Starbucks, Robert A. Iger of Disney and Marc Benioff of Salesforce.com, along with Sheryl Sandberg, the Facebook chief operating officer, and Oprah Winfrey, chairwoman and chief executive of Harpo Inc., which owns half of the Oprah Winfrey Network.

All deny they’re running, or even seriously considering it. But everyone demurs so far ahead of the first primaries, as did Hillary Clinton four years ago, and it hasn’t stopped anyone from speculating. That’s especially the case for people who, appalled by the Trump administration, can hardly wait for the next campaign.

“I feel many of these chief executives are responding to a public longing for a strongman, or woman, a strong leader,” Mr. Gergen said. “There’s a sense that’s why Trump got elected. You’re seeing the same thing in Europe, in Asia, in a long list of countries. People are dissatisfied with standard politicians. Military types and business people with a strong track record offer an attractive alternative.”

Apart from proven business experience, they have widespread name recognition or identification with major consumer brands. And they have enough money to finance their own campaigns.

I’ve spoken this week to multiple people who have at least discussed the possibility of running for office with Mr. Schultz and Mr. Iger. (All declined to be named discussing what were private conversations.)

Mr. Schultz, 63, with a fortune estimated by Forbes at $3 billion, came close to making a bid last year, but backed out after concluding it would be very difficult to defeat Mrs. Clinton, who seemed to have the Democratic nomination all but locked up and at the time seemed likely to win the presidency.

Those circumstances have obviously changed drastically. With Mr. Trump in office, the next Democratic race appears wide open, and many friends and potential donors are urging Mr. Schultz to run.

Mr. Schultz seemed to pave the way in December, when he announced he’d step down as Starbucks’ chief executive this April. But he continues to be actively involved in the expansion of the company’s high-end “roasteries” as well as its social-impact initiatives.

“Howard Schultz is definitely being pursued,” Mr. Gergen said. “He has a powerful social conscience. He comes from a very different place than the kind of chief executive with a big ego who wants the trappings of presidential power.”

Mr. Schultz declined to comment.

Last year Mr. Iger, 66, told The Hollywood Reporter that “a lot of people — a lot — have urged me to seek political office,” and last week the entertainment publication fueled renewed speculation when it reported that Mr. Iger had discussed the possibility with Mr. Bloomberg.

People who have discussed a possible presidential run with Mr. Iger told me that his discussion with Mr. Bloomberg, some years ago, focused more on a possible run for mayor of New York City, where Mr. Iger has an apartment. New York has long welcomed nonresident candidates like Mrs. Clinton, so Mr. Iger’s California residency isn’t seen as an obstacle.

Both Mr. Iger and Mr. Bloomberg declined to comment.

Whether any of those jobs, including the presidency, would actually be better than being chief executive of Disney remains an open question. After earlier announcing his retirement, Mr. Iger recently said he was willing to extend his contract, which would eliminate the need for any high-profile exit strategy, at least for the next few years.

Campaign buttons emblazoned with “Vote for Benioff” and “Marc Benioff for President” circulated two years ago at Salesforce’s annual Dreamforce conference in San Francisco, which draws hundreds of thousands of participants and has been viewed by some as a likely launching pad for any Benioff campaign.

Like Mr. Schultz, Mr. Benioff has pursued an ambitious social and philanthropic agenda. He started “Pledge 1%,” the Salesforce model of donating 1 percent of their product, 1 percent of their equity and 1 percent of employees’ time to help nonprofits achieve their missions — a practice that Salesforce says is now followed by 1,400 companies. Mr. Benioff was an outspoken defender of gay and lesbian rights and helped create a network of corporate leaders to oppose bills limiting L.G.B.T. rights in states like Indiana, Georgia and North Carolina.

Mr. Benioff, 52, whose stake in Salesforce alone is worth over $3 billion and who has a net worth estimated by Forbes at over $4 billion, has also written three books, including the best-selling “Behind the Cloud.” Still, he’s hardly a household name, and is best known in business and technology circles.

Asked for comment, Mr. Benioff said, “Business is the greatest platform for change.”

Ms. Sandberg’s coming nationwide tour to promote the new book she co-authored, “Option B,” which describes coming to terms with her husband’s sudden death in 2015 and other stories of coping with adversity, has fueled speculation (and possible wishful thinking) that the book could be a springboard for a presidential campaign.

As a billionaire ($1.47 billion, Forbes estimates) and a key executive of the hugely successful Facebook, Ms. Sandberg already has enormous name recognition. Her previous book, “Lean In,” was a best-seller and inspired a rallying cry for women. She has worked in politics before, as an assistant to the former Treasury secretary Lawrence H. Summers, and was a donor to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign. She was considered a candidate for a top post in any Clinton administration.

Ms. Sandberg has denied any immediate presidential ambitions, insisting that she loves her job at Facebook. At age 47, she’s under no pressure to run this election cycle.

(Widespread reports that the Facebook founder and chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, would run for president seem even more far-fetched. The speculation appears to have been set off by a Bloomberg News report that Mr. Zuckerberg would retain voting control of Facebook even if he sold his shares and served in a government position for up to two years. Mr. Zuckerberg has denied any interest in running.)

Then there’s Ms. Winfrey, 63, who for many Democrats might amount to the dream candidate: She has unrivaled star power, is an African-American woman, has run a successful business, and has a fortune estimated by Forbes at $3 billion.

In an interview broadcast last week on Bloomberg Television but taped in December, the host, David Rubenstein, brought up the idea: “It’s clear that you don’t need government experience to be elected president of the United States, right?”

“That’s what I thought,” Ms. Winfrey replied. “I thought, ‘Oh gee, I don’t have the experience, I don’t know enough.’ And now I’m thinking, ‘Oh! Oh.’”

But when Mr. Rubenstein began to ask, “As you consider whether you are going to run for president of the United States or not. ..,” she interjected, “No, that won’t be happening.”

While some may disparage Mr. Trump’s credentials for the presidency, he did bring to his campaign a level of recognition that will be hard for other executives to replicate, with the possible exception of Ms. Winfrey.

“Trump spent decades building his brand and his image as a successful businessman,” Mr. Loeser said. “He was the star of one of the most-watched television shows in America. If you landed at La Guardia, you saw the Trump jet. If you went to Las Vegas, the tallest building in town has Trump’s name emblazoned on it.”

Mr. Gergen agreed. “Trump has been a performer for years,” he said. “Most chief executives aren’t performers.”

And chief executives “aren’t prepared for the scrutiny,” Mr. Gergen said. “It’s especially tough to work with the press. They’re used to having layers of people around them, but in politics you’re out there dealing with reporters every day.”

“Look at Rex Tillerson,” he added, referring to the Exxon chief turned secretary of state. “He’s extremely well regarded in corporate circles, but he’s having trouble with the press.”

Mr. Loeser said he was helping clients assess the kind of attacks they could expect in a hard-fought campaign.

“You have to anticipate how they’ll come after you, because they will,” Mr. Loeser said. “Oprah is one of the most beloved people in America. But has anyone gone through every minute and every hour of every show she’s ever done to see if there’s anything controversial? Because someone will.”

Mr. Gergen suggested that some chief executives might want to lower their sights. “I think business chief executives tend to make better governors or mayors,” he said. “They can be more pragmatic and less ideological. Some of the names you’re hearing, I have trouble picturing them with the Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders wing of the party. I wouldn’t call that a match made in heaven.”