Support NeoGAF

[soul creator]

I don't think Oprah's issue is her lack of "experience" per se (and I agree that people sometimes fetishize "experience" a little bit too much without taking into account what that so-called experience has actually led them to do), but the fact that I simply don't know what most of her political/policy views actually are. And the few that we do know about (mentioned in this thread) aren't that great...

For example, I could see myself in theory being totally fine with a political activist who has actually organized around/accomplished specific policy goals, and has clearly stated political views, even if they don't have formal governing experience, but a general "oh she gave a good speech about certain topics and donated to/endorsed certain people I like" doesn't really count.

 

[David___]

Just because famous people can win a popularity contest doesn't mean they'll be good at a job in which they know nothing about. That's insane that people think otherwise.

 

[WhiskeyDiver]

President Comacho may be closer than the 500 years away we initially predicted...

We're closer to Comacho than we are to a politician that's at least 60% not influenced by money.

 

[SMOK3Y]

Wow who can become a president in America is REALLY becoming a bad joke

 

[Mahadev]

She'll be buried before she even gets "in the running."

But the democrats are hopelessly desperate right now, and bank on the first two traits the OP mentioned for a candidate "Black, Woman." The battle between the Republicans and Hollywood would be intense though.

It's not the Democrats that are desperate it's the DNC, they're desperate to find someone that isn't Sanders because the rich that have bought the party really, really , really don't want him to lead.

 

[J-Rzez]

It's not the Democrats that are desperate it's the DNC, they're desperate to find someone that isn't Sanders because the rich that have bought the party really, really , really don't want him to lead.

That's certainly true. Sanders has some issues, but he's one of the few I can tolerate.

 

[luxsol]

Oprah does not have a blank slate at all. She has a horrible pseudo-science record and put the anti-vaxxer movement where it is today.

Welp, i know who I'm not voting for in 2020.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Oprah is not an anti-vaxxer herself, but I did just read up on the history and came away surprised to say the least.

 

[Rocket Number 22]

So are we to believe she knew about his ways before?

Time will tell but if you lay down with dogs you get fleas....

 

[Rookje]

I feel bad for Oprah.

She gave one of the most moving, inspiring, and well orated speeches in recent memory and all the media can talk about is how ridiculous a President she'd be.

 

[DiscoJer]

I thought her speech was kinda infuriating, actually. It made Hollywood seem like it was the victim, not the culprit. She should have apologized for being one of those people who seemingly worked with Weinstein for years and never acknowledged his behavior. I don't even know why she was giving the speech, it should have been a victim. But they weren't even invited. Rose McGowan should have given a speech.

But anyway, I think one of the things is not so much the experience itself, but in actually running a campaign you often get a lot of the cobwebs out from the closet. In Oprah's case, while her life story she probably is qualified to be president (having worked her way up), at the same time, she pushed a lot of bullshit on her show, the least of which is Dr. Phil.

 

[Mohonky]

She'd run and she would win to be honest.

Anyone who would vote Democrat and argued Trump could never win is eating 4 years worth of crow.
Anyone who would vote Republican that thinks Oprah doesn't have the credentials would be a hypocrite having voted Trump.

Said back when Trump was running for Republican nominee he'd end up President, as an outsider it was like watching a train pick up momentum and just waiting for it to completely derail despite assurances Hilary had it in the bag. Look at how that turned out.

Oprah would have the Democratic nominee and Presidency almost guaranteed.

 

[tkscz]

She'd run and she would win to be honest.

Anyone who would vote Democrat and argued Trump could never win is eating 4 years worth of crow.
Anyone who would vote Republican that thinks Oprah doesn't have the credentials would be a hypocrite having voted Trump.

Said back when Trump was running for Republican nominee he'd end up President, as an outsider it was like watching a train pick up momentum and just waiting for it to completely derail despite assurances Hilary had it in the bag. Look at how that turned out.

Oprah would have the Democratic nominee and Presidency almost guaranteed.

Hell, I can see Oprah turning a lot of Red states Blue. Do not underestimate what kind of popularity this woman has.

Hell, if she really wanted to run, she could run for the senator of Illinois right now, and win.

 

[Relativ9]

Hell, I can see Oprah turning a lot of Red states Blue. Do not underestimate what kind of popularity this woman has.

Hell, if she really wanted to run, she could run for the senator of Illinois right now, and win.

See if she did this first, got some political experience in a more "relatively" relaxed setting with lower stakes, I'd be more inclined to think she was a reasonable choice. Of course, she'd have to cut all ties to any and all the sketchy pseudo "new age" science she's been a part of or promoted and formally apologize for the deception that's been allowed to run rampant either on her show from guests, or from her show itself (car giveaway). But yeah, if she got some political experience she might be okey, all things considered, the skeletons in her closet (so far) are nothing in comparison to what some of the other candidates the US has had have.

 

[TheLaughingStock]

Just because famous people can win a popularity contest doesn't mean they'll be good at a job in which they know nothing about. That's insane that people think otherwise.

I don't think anyone suggested Oprah would be good at the job simply because she's famous. Rather it's the why behind her rise that's relevant. I think she has what it takes and has the ability to win as a Democrat. Moreover, political experience is not a reliable predictor of success. The strong correlation or causal relationship that some of you think exists isn't supported. This absurd fixation is made even more ridiculous by the fact Americans have put up memorials in remembrance of white men who had more political experience than Oprah does but were under-qualified for POTUS by any reasonable measure of that standard.

Also, I've seen this picture below posted here and elsewhere but don't understand it:

The job requirements for flying a plane in the US and gaining political power aren't remotely comparable. If you compare the competency of most politicians to pilots, they would be the person who's crashed the plane dozens of times and is still managing to find work.

In America, you can be a dropout working retail, a person working your way up the chain with just BA in political science or have a JD and all of these people could be a great political leader if they want to be. All they need to do formally is meet the government's requirements at the local, state or federal level plus find enough support i.e. from party middleman and the public alike.

 

[Alx]

The job requirements for flying a plane in the US and gaining political power aren't remotely comparable. If you compare the competency of most politicians to pilots, they would be the person who's crashed the plane dozens of times and is still managing to find work.

​

​

That's why there is a selection process (either internally or through the elections), so that all the "plane crashers" are filtered out, and only select those who have a good flight record. Hence why experience is valued : it's a proof that you already flew many planes without crashing once.​

​

In America, you can be a dropout working retail, a person working your way up the chain with just BA in political science or have a JD and all of these people could be a great political leader if they want to be. All they need to do formally is meet the government's requirements at the local, state or federal level plus find enough support i.e. from party middleman and the public alike.

It only means that anybody is allowed to be a political leader, not that anybody can be a good one.

 

[tkscz]

See if she did this first, got some political experience in a more "relatively" relaxed setting with lower stakes, I'd be more inclined to think she was a reasonable choice. Of course, she'd have to cut all ties to any and all the sketchy pseudo "new age" science she's been a part of or promoted and formally apologize for the deception that's been allowed to run rampant either on her show from guests, or from her show itself (car giveaway). But yeah, if she got some political experience she might be okey, all things considered, the skeletons in her closet (so far) are nothing in comparison to what some of the other candidates the US has had have.

I don't keep up with stuff like that when it comes to celebrities, I'm only recently finding out about the bullshit Bill Nye tried to pull off when it comes to Nuclear energy, but what psudo-science has Oprah been supporting?

 

[highrider]

I like Oprah, and it’s certainly no more bizarre than Ronald Reagan or Donald Trump. That being said, would prefer more of an Elon Musk kind of direction. Innovative thinking and experience bringing those ideas to life.

 

[Mohonky]

I don't keep up with stuff like that when it comes to celebrities, I'm only recently finding out about the bullshit Bill Nye tried to pull off when it comes to Nuclear energy, but what psudo-science has Oprah been supporting?

Self help books, dietitians, doctors who were just promoting whatever drug companies were paying them to shill.

Definitely been some psuedo science stuff on the show but not what I would consider a detriment to her going for Pres.

 

[Zoe]

I don't keep up with stuff like that when it comes to celebrities, I'm only recently finding out about the bullshit Bill Nye tried to pull off when it comes to Nuclear energy, but what psudo-science has Oprah been supporting?

She's responsible for Jenny McCarthy and Dr Oz.

 

[tkscz]

Self help books, dietitians, doctors who were just promoting whatever drug companies were paying them to shill.

Definitely been some psuedo science stuff on the show but not what I would consider a detriment to her going for Pres.

She's responsible for Jenny McCarthy and Dr Oz.

Ok yeah I get it now. Is she also responsible for that awful "The Doctors" show? The one that will suggest plastic surgery at the drop of a dime?

 

[Relativ9]

Well I wouldn't go so far as to say that she's responsible for any of these people. But she's certainly more than willingly helped and profited from their rise.

She also basically made Deepak Chopra, an incredibly popular "guru" and alternative medicine evangelist who regularly tells sick people that he can cure their chronic illnesses with "spirit training". She's also a business partner with him, and they've launched several meditation books/audio books together.

 

[Robot Carnival]

yeah, as much as I think she's a great person, I'm not really interested in having Oprah as the POTUS. I want someone with a good record of political career who knows the ins and outs of things in the field. working in the government is no different as in working in any other job, in that you need to know how things function in order to make everything work smoothly. Oprah may have the experience and knowledge on how to run a big company, but at the end of the day, like it or not, the orange turd in the White House right now also has these experience, and look how we are doing. when your decisions would affect millions of people's lives, you can't just say "oh, he/she can get people's support and that's good enough."

now, here's an interesting little "what if" I'm kinda entertaining. how about getting Oprah to be the VP to an actually decent politician? she would handle most of the PR stuff and can get great result. as long as the actual candidate is competent (and no big skeletons in the closet), I think this can work out great.

 

[caffeware]

FUCK OPRAH

 

[Rocket Number 22]

Obama and Oprah would run in vastly different working circles, I highly doubt Weinstein is a blip on Obamas radar where as Oprah is in showbusiness and has more interaction with who is doing what in television world.

I suspect that photo was posted in bad faith

lol

edit - Oprah not Opera

 

[FF:Enhanced_Reality]

Are you saying Oprah hasn't built an empire of her own? She is worth way more then trump and she can speak in coherent sentences to boot. Kinda makes you wonder why you question her intelligence yet are fine with trump. Who again can't speak better then my 6 year old....wonder why...

Not at all. But I personally feel as though Trump, though most Americans hate him, would be the more qualified between the two. That being said, I don't know a great deal about other candidates because we only hear about the two main ones in the UK. Which were Hillary and Trump this time round I believe. Bernie Sanders was mentioned a lot though?

 

[Battlechili]

If someone doesn't have any political experience, its harder to trust that they'd know what they're doing when they sign bills or support or oppose a political viewpoint and work towards whatever view they push. Its harder to tell if they know the consequences of whatever path they take should they be in office, and its harder to trust that they'd actually do anything positive for the country. Political experience helps show competency in action (for example a governor or a lawyer show that they've studied the law and their results can be actually seen in action).

 

[Rocket Number 22]

Seal, 54, shared a couple of these pictures with his 106,000 Instagram followers on his official account, accompanied by the text: “When you’ve been part of the problem for decades but suddenly they all think you are the solution.”

Seal appeared to address Winfrey directly in his accompanying caption.

“Oh I forgot, that’s right ... you’d heard the rumours but you had no idea he was actually serially assaulting young starry-eyed actresses who in turn had no idea what they were getting into. My bad. #SanctimoniousHollywood,” he wrote.

http://www.news.com.au/entertainmen...s/news-story/db3972a731bb93a67f0f0996cff5d40a

 

[Crayon Shinchan]

If she runs and wins... it's gonna be weird to hear her been called 'President Winfrey'. That just sounds like the name of a different person entirely TBH... Oprah is like Madonna (Ciccone - see how weird that is) in terms of first name ubiquity.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I know some people who are very passionate about clean energy, local leaders who are well known and have done a lot for their local community. But I wouldn't let this couple run a power plant.

Where would Oprah even start? Nobody can take anything away from her achievement, but seriously, President? She'd need at least two years to catch up on everything she needs to properly do the job.

Quite honestly, it's a difficult one. Like or hate Trump, his business empire gives his a wealth of experience that's led to him making some monumental decisions, but possibly more because he's understood the financial implications of his decisions. The economy in the US is looking great at the moment and really this is what the US needs. Wasn't it on the verge of defaulting under Obama?

Oprah is a wonderful person but a politician she is not.

I don't like the fact that most of our politicians in the UK are making a career of it. However, to be a successful politician, you really do need to understand a lot of things that I can't even begin to comprehend. Law, national infrastructure, powers of Parliament, taxation, state funding, international matters etc. She would need to campaign for herself, not follow the beat of someone else's drum.

The problem we have is that politics is now fought on a social scale, social media and the media themselves have more influence than ever and it's getting out of hand. Rather than do what's best for America, you have people wanting your country to make choices based on being politically correct and not the best thing for the country. It's happening here too and quite honestly. it's pissing me off. People looking to boost their own agenda whilst we pretend like we're making progress.

It's a scary world. And again, Oprah is an amazing woman, but not a President or Politician.

The country was not on the verge of defaulting under Obama, no. The country was consistently improving in most facets. I will not claim that Trump has no influence over the economic strength of the nation in 2017, but it is typical for the effects of the old Presidency to linger - hence why Obama started off on a low note thanks to the economic collapse and Trump on a high note thanks to the recovery efforts.

 

[LizardSnob]

That's a big reason why voters have turned to outsiders like Pres. Trump. People who have been in office for years have let their constituents down.

And look how well that's turned out for them. Trump's own base is the one getting screwed by the new tax laws and their attempts to gut the healthcare system. If you think the fact that Oprah has real money and that'll keep her safe from the spending against her, think again. I hope I'm wrong, but it'll probably be at least another decade or two before we have another person of color in the white house :/.

 

[LizardSnob]

I'd vote for her.

In the Democratic primaries...I'd see who she's up against and likely lean with a person who's held some public office, but if Oprah were on the general election ballot, I'd absolutely vote for her over Trump. Then again, I'd vote for a burning bag of shit over Trump on the general ballot.

 

[FF:Enhanced_Reality]

The country was not on the verge of defaulting under Obama, no. The country was consistently improving in most facets. I will not claim that Trump has no influence over the economic strength of the nation in 2017, but it is typical for the effects of the old Presidency to linger - hence why Obama started off on a low note thanks to the economic collapse and Trump on a high note thanks to the recovery efforts.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm not an American and I don't know as much about US affairs than most on GAF. But this was all over the TV in the UK. The BBC reported on it consistently.

US avoids default as Obama signs debt bill into law

President Barack Obama has signed legislation to increase the US debt ceiling and avert a financial default, after Congress voted in favour of a bipartisan compromise deal.

The bill cleared its final hurdle in the Senate by 74 votes to 26, after negotiations went down to the wire.

It raises the debt limit by up to $2.4tn (£1.5tn) from $14.3tn, and makes savings of at least $2.1tn in 10 years.

But the bill's passage failed to lift financial markets.

On Wall Street stocks ended Tuesday down by more than 2%, amid poor consumer spending data for June.

Japan's Nikkei index followed suit, finishing Wednesday morning down by about the same amount.

Moody's rating agency reacted to the bill by placing Washington's AAA credit score under a "negative outlook". Chinese credit agency Dagong downgraded its rating of the US from A+ to A, Xinhua news agency reported.

The bill's signing came just 10 hours before the expiry of a deadline for Washington to raise its borrowing limit, after drawn-out talks between Republicans, Democrats and the White House.

I was lead to believe that had Obama not changed the laws of borrowing the US would have defaulted on it's debt in 2011. Am I wrong in my understanding on that topic?

 

[BANGS]

I was lead to believe that had Obama not changed the laws of borrowing the US would have defaulted on it's debt in 2011. Am I wrong in my understanding on that topic?

I am pretty sure you are correct here. Obama raised the debt ceiling and it was a shitshow at the time. How time makes fools of us all...

 

[Super Mario]

"Political experience" is the most overrated part of the presidency. Who is honesty ready to perform the tasks of the president?

Most don't realize just how much of the work is done for the president. It's mostly a matter of yes/no with a combination of sticking with party/staying popular.

With that said, I don't want Oprah. We don't need more policy structured on feelings.

 

[TheLaughingStock]

And look how well that's turned out for them. Trump's own base is the one getting screwed by the new tax laws and their attempts to gut the healthcare system. If you think the fact that Oprah has real money and that'll keep her safe from the spending against her, think again. I hope I'm wrong, but it'll probably be at least another decade or two before we have another person of color in the white house :/.

Look at how they turned out under the leadership of people some of you prefer.

Many Democrats and Republicans used legislation to exacerbate and self-perpetuate income inequality for 30-40 years before Trump came along and governed as a standard Republican. The biggest thing screwing a lot of Americans is how things are initially distributed. If you think prioritizing corporate tax cuts is the key reason Americans are falling behind, then you'll be in for a rude awakening when Democrats take over and you still aren't keeping up.

Plus, your health care system needs to be broken down and built back up....or gutted as you put it. The US has one of most inefficient health care systems worldwide providing poor outcomes. Nevertheless, certain people are being paid top dollar globally as if the US is #1 in the world.

The reality is America is withering under the leadership of traditional politicians. Trending in the wrong direction after following the lead of dummies with degrees. Certain groups have made money hand over fist and lived comfortably. On the other hand, countless Americans have experienced financial hardship and died. That's how things were looking before Pres. Trump arrived on the scene and told people he was going to make America great again.

Sticking with the people who go out of their way to ruin your life and enrich themselves isn't particularly bright. Whether it's Oprah, Trump or The Rock, Americans need to keep taking risks for a better life instead of settling for what's unacceptable. People like Bernie and Warren are right that the system is rigged. And the people who rigged it can't fix it plain and simple. That's why outsiders have an incentive to run and more importantly they can win.

 

[StrikeNinja24]

Look at how they turned out under the leadership of people some of you prefer.

Many Democrats and Republicans used legislation to exacerbate and self-perpetuate income inequality for 30-40 years before Trump came along and governed as a standard Republican. The biggest thing screwing a lot of Americans is how things are initially distributed. If you think prioritizing corporate tax cuts is the key reason Americans are falling behind, then you'll be in for a rude awakening when Democrats take over and you still aren't keeping up.

Plus, your health care system needs to be broken down and built back up....or gutted as you put it. The US has one of most inefficient health care systems worldwide providing poor outcomes. Nevertheless, certain people are being paid top dollar globally as if the US is #1 in the world.

The reality is America is withering under the leadership of traditional politicians. Trending in the wrong direction after following the lead of dummies with degrees. Certain groups have made money hand over fist and lived comfortably. On the other hand, countless Americans have experienced financial hardship and died. That's how things were looking before Pres. Trump arrived on the scene and told people he was going to make America great again.

Sticking with the people who go out of their way to ruin your life and enrich themselves isn't particularly bright. Whether it's Oprah, Trump or The Rock, Americans need to keep taking risks for a better life instead of settling for what's unacceptable. People like Bernie and Warren are right that the system is rigged. And the people who rigged it can't fix it plain and simple. That's why outsiders have an incentive to run and more importantly they can win.

Oh yeah, Trump's doing a bang up job fixing the broken system. We haven't been withering under traditional politicians, we are withering under politicians bought off by corporations to get what they want. Every single action this past year has been influenced by a corporate decision. That's why the young left have been pushing hard for true progressives.

Trump doesn't have a clue what's going on. He's only signing whatever is literally put in front of him and doesn't understand a damn thing that's in them.

Yeah, people voted for Trump hoping for something new. And they got it. Now we are flirting with war via twitter, have leadership that's almost nonexistent, and currently losing both global and local respect. The only thing they can point to is the stock market, which has been manipulated in the past. Remember that whole issue with the banks that Obama bailed out? Yeah, that's because they were doing some shady shit.

And guess what? They are back at it again. Let's see how long they can keep this bubble up before it bursts and kills off another couple hundred thousand. Enjoy your extra 300 bucks come tax time.

 

[Autoignition]

Is this seriously a question? The Presidency is a job. Like any other job, you should be sufficiently qualified for it. You should have relevant experience and a proven track record that you understand the processes and procedures that comprise the position.

As a lifelong blue-blooded Democrat, I don't want Oprah to run. I don't want Dwayne Johnson to run. I want someone who actually knows what the fuck they're doing to run.

I want normalcy to return to the highest echelons of our government.

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

I can see it now, her entire campaign would just be "social justice this, social justice that, blah blah blah". It would be as shallow and unintellectual as it comes. The last thing the Dems need is some virtue signalling billionare telling half the country they are evil if they don't agree with everything she says and must vote for her. That's largely what got Trump to win this go around. Dems basically saying - "We are objectively correct about everything, and if you don't agree you are a deplorable". No, that isn't the way to win people over.

Dems need a likeable yet experienced politician, one who can provide a rational and reasonable alternative to the current government. Not some hipster celebrity trying to win votes based on shallow surface feelings. The top job in government requires more than that, or at least it should.

 

[FF:Enhanced_Reality]

Plus, your health care system needs to be broken down and built back up....or gutted as you put it. The US has one of most inefficient health care systems worldwide providing poor outcomes. Nevertheless, certain people are being paid top dollar globally as if the US is #1 in the world.

I don't really agree with this. It pisses all over the NHS, it takes a good shit from a large height all over our pitiful fucking excuse of a health service that my dad is a nurse for. Over worked, under paid, under appreciated. It's literally on the point of collapsing and we're still being too politically correct and turning away from the real issues killing the NHS.

At least in the US, there is a desire to be a nurse, there is prestige in being a doctor. Those people are looked after, very well paid and receive incredible benefits for saving lives and helping people day in, day out.

Our local A&E was closed, our hospital all but closed down, save for a maternity ward where my son was born in October whilst people from neighbouring towns died in ambulances that had to travel an addition 18+ miles to their nearest hospital.

 

[TheLaughingStock]

Oh yeah, Trump's doing a bang up job fixing the broken system. We haven't been withering under traditional politicians, we are withering under politicians bought off by corporations to get what they want. Every single action this past year has been influenced by a corporate decision. That's why the young left have been pushing hard for true progressives.

Trump doesn't have a clue what's going on. He's only signing whatever is literally put in front of him and doesn't understand a damn thing that's in them.

Yeah, people voted for Trump hoping for something new. And they got it. Now we are flirting with war via twitter, have leadership that's almost nonexistent, and currently losing both global and local respect. The only thing they can point to is the stock market, which has been manipulated in the past. Remember that whole issue with the banks that Obama bailed out? Yeah, that's because they were doing some shady shit.

And guess what? They are back at it again. Let's see how long they can keep this bubble up before it bursts and kills off another couple hundred thousand. Enjoy your extra 300 bucks come tax time.

Traditional politicians and folks who are influenced by corporate interests are the same. That's a key component of what makes them traditional. If you don't play ball and mingle at the expense of your other constituents' priorities then you're not apart of the club. In the US, you see Gresham's law where bad money/bad ethics pushes out people trying to good.

Additionally, Pres. Trump does have a clue. He knows why he's in the oval office. A big mess was left for him and future presidents by the people some of you prefer. He's in charge following the cumulative effects of their choices. Time will tell how Trump stacks up or if the next POTUS will try their hand too at the same major issues domestic and abroad plaguing the US for decades.

As far as the stocks, if Pres. Obama and his cronies secured convictions against major white-collar crimes, then you wouldn't have to worry about widespread fraud inflating the market so soon. Obama's team made a choice to look the other way and handle it the way they did. There are consequences.

Finally, my net windfall is going to be a lot more than $300 under Trump come tax time and beyond. Maybe it will be on par with what I experienced under Obama.

 

[Fnord]

Just because famous people can win a popularity contest doesn't mean they'll be good at a job in which they know nothing about. That's insane that people think otherwise.

That's my biggest fear if we end up with celebrities taking over politics. Currently, Trump is an outlier. One of those every now and again isn't a huge deal. But if big time politics somehow manages to become a celebrity popularity contest, we're probably screwed. I don't even think that a candidate requires much in the way of political experience, necessarily. I just shudder at the presidential race becoming the 90210 prom king/queen contest.

 

[Moon Patrol Pilot]

She loves chips?!
I love chips!!
OPRAH 2020!!!

Sadly this is the rationale for many American voters.

 

[Ri'Orius]

Now correct me if I'm wrong, because I'm not an American and I don't know as much about US affairs than most on GAF. But this was all over the TV in the UK. The BBC reported on it consistently.

US avoids default as Obama signs debt bill into law



I was lead to believe that had Obama not changed the laws of borrowing the US would have defaulted on it's debt in 2011. Am I wrong in my understanding on that topic?

The US has a debt ceiling, but since we never bother to eliminate the deficit we need to keep borrowing. So we also need to keep raising that debt ceiling. Normally that's fine and Congress behaves like adults, but while Obama was in office the GOP decided to try to use the need to pass a debt ceiling bill as a way to extract concessions from the Democrats. Basically playing chicken with the global economy.

So while in some senses it's technically correct that the US government "almost" defaulted under Obama, A) it was never actually close, since again it was just posturing, B) blaming said posturing on Obama is ludicrous.

 

[TheLaughingStock]

That's my biggest fear if we end up with celebrities taking over politics. Currently, Trump is an outlier. One of those every now and again isn't a huge deal. But if big time politics somehow manages to become a celebrity popularity contest, we're probably screwed. I don't even think that a candidate requires much in the way of political experience, necessarily. I just shudder at the presidential race becoming the 90210 prom king/queen contest.

Presidential hopefuls in America typically win elections by a small plurality of voters. Even Donald Trump was unable to change that as a big shot. Therefore, I don't think you have to worry any time soon about politics becoming any more of a popularity contest than it already is. Moreover, popularity is not what winning the presidency is ultimately about. It comes down to did you get the right amount of votes in the right places. It doesn't necessarily matter if a celebrity is more popular than their opponent.

 

[AcademicSaucer]

as a foreigner living far away from there I really hope Oprah becomes US president after Trump for the hilarity

 

[Ke0]

Ok. So being a good person doesn't automatically make you a great president. It helps a lot and is something we should expect: Being a good person should not be their primary qualification for presidency. And honestly, after watching her show a few times in the 90's and 00's, I'm not totally sure about her morale fiber; her show could be pretty trashy and exploitative. That, and Dr. Phil. And the secret, and so on.

As for building her empire; yeah, she is pretty talented in that respect and managed to take her talk show and turn herself into a major brand. Of course, a lot of that just rested on her day time popularity. Yes, she's done a fantastic job of leveraging her popularity and it's no mean feat, but I'm neither convinced that would make her a good president nor am I convinced she truly did it on her own with no help from anyone else. I'm bothered by the near Trumpian levels of worship she receives for basically being a daytime talk-show host that leveraged herself into a media brand.

Eitherway, your right, she would be a better president than Trump. Honestly though, so wouldn't most people; the man is deranged and malevolent, it's not a high bar to pass. Oprah Winfrey would probably be a better president than most regular people, but I think we can shoot better than that. Eitherway, electing a person simply because they're a popular actor and give nice interviews is a horrible way to elect a president. All because they pop on the cover of people magazine does not mean you really know them as a person, or their skills. Much of the reason why we like to elect politicians as president is because we can see their political history. They've been senators and governors and they've shown competence in national and international politics and policy making. Or they've been a secretary of state. Or so on. Oprah has some qualities desirable in a president, but we should expect more that just 'being a good person' and 'managing a business conglomerate.'

You've been praising Trump for these exact things (minus being a good person) while questioning Oprah.

Also your insinuation that Oprah has had an easier time building her empire than Trump by questioning it is crazy. Like really crazy.

 

[EventHorizon]

I don't think anyone suggested Oprah would be good at the job simply because she's famous. Rather it's the why behind her rise that's relevant. I think she has what it takes and has the ability to win as a Democrat. Moreover, political experience is not a reliable predictor of success. The strong correlation or causal relationship that some of you think exists isn't supported.

It's not political experience. It is governmental experience, which is a superset of political experience. Every single president prior to Trump has worked with the mechanisms of government in one way or another. There is simply no substitute for knowing about the issues and how government works. The one example we have of a total outsider, Trump, by all account doesn't/can't perform the job as president. That is an objective, not partisan, appraisal. He has taken vacations at a greater rate than any other president. Even republicans admit his meddling in legislative affairs makes things harder because he doesn't understand what's going on and says contradictory things. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Trump is holding up legislation because the GOP can't even "figure out what he is for". A record 34 percent of Trump's staff haveresigned, been reassigned or fired in his first year. On the world stage, Trump's interaction have been called "not helpful" numerous times. And so on. And so on.

This is what happens when a total neophyte tries to do a professional job. It is true that no one is totally qualified to become president, but there is a huge difference between starting you learning curve at zero verses somewhere above the fifty percent mark.

This absurd fixation is made even more ridiculous by the fact Americans have put up memorials in remembrance of white men who had more political experience than Oprah does but were under-qualified for POTUS by any reasonable measure of that standard.

As stated about, every, single, president, has had some form of prior governmental experience.

Also, I've seen this picture below posted here and elsewhere but don't understand it:

The job requirements for flying a plane in the US and gaining political power aren't remotely comparable. If you compare the competency of most politicians to pilots, they would be the person who's crashed the plane dozens of times and is still managing to find work.

In America, you can be a dropout working retail, a person working your way up the chain with just BA in political science or have a JD and all of these people could be a great political leader if they want to be. All they need to do formally is meet the government's requirements at the local, state or federal level plus find enough support i.e. from party middleman and the public alike.

You are missing the point. We are not talking about general politics. We are talking about the president of the United States. I agree that the barrier to entry for other political jobs like congress is much lower, but that doesn't apply to the president. A congressman is but one of many, and will take on a junior role while they learn how government works. The president starts out in charge on day one. He is given the nuclear launch codes. He speaks for the country on international issues. He is Commander in Chief of our entire military. That is not the place for someone who doesn't know what they are doing.

Finally, your idea that simply meeting the minimal technical qualification to be president means they could be a competent president is absurd. That makes as much sense as hiring a bum off the street to be the CEO of Apple. Yes, it is technically possible, but it is a really, really, really stupid idea.

 

[Vicetrailia]

The thing is that Oprah will have Obama, Bernie Sanders and more all around her. They are highly inteligent people with good intentions coaching her, where as Trump is in a sharks den filled with greedy ass highly intelligent fuckers, or incompetent ass loyalists. They create their own bed.

Paul Ryan was trying to go rogue smelling blood and push entitlement reform, but Mitch McConnell was like no, we're too unpopular right now. Sharks everywhere, and it has a big impact, especially before the shakeup.

 

[Grinchy]

The thing is that Oprah will have Obama, Bernie Sanders and more all around her.

I'm just curious - what is this based on? Have they actually said that they will spend their time coaching Oprah on how to be a president?