Starbucks Exploits Muslim Restrictions Controversy in Blatant PR move

Today, Starbucks pledged to hire 10,000 refugees in response to Trump's "Muslim Ban" (really it's temporary restrictions) and (temporary) ban on refugees until better vetting procedures are developed. Immediately after this announcement, the trending hashtag popped up on Facebook #BoycottStarbucks. Apparently "Trump supporters" said they would boycott Starbucks because they think veterans should be given the jobs, or blacks, minorities, poor people etc. Of course, the insinuation I've seen with the trending hashtag is that Trump supporters want to boycott Starbucks because they don't like or support refugees.

As for me? Well, let me first just say that I wouldn't call myself a Trump supporter or an anti-Trumper; I would say I'm a not-yet-sure-what-to-think-about Trump as president guy. I'm a let's-give-him-a-chance guy, a this-could-go-very-well-or-horribly-wrong guy. I'm also a Trump's-not-as-bad-as-the-media's-making-him-out-to-be guy.

And, as far as Starbucks goes, I certainly don't want to boycott Starbucks (I love their coffee) but I am offended by their move. What offends me is that they clearly exploited the trending "Muslim Ban" controversy to appeal to its large demographic of liberals and leftists. This is similar to their "let's talk about race" campaign during the time of Ferguson riots. They seem to latch onto every fashionable trend in the liberal culture and turn it into a PR campaign. They don't care about refugees. They care about good PR.