Oprah for president? Have we learned nothing? - LAT editorial
We dont know whether the idea of Oprah Winfrey for president, inspired by Winfreys eloquent speech Sunday at the Golden Globe Awards, will prove an ephemeral excitation or a movement with staying power. But we find it depressing.
We mean no disrespect to Winfrey, who strikes us as much better informed and more intellectually curious and presumably less reckless or dishonest than the incumbent president. But its bizarre that Americans who are appalled by Trumps oafish and ignorant conduct of the nations highest office would gravitate to another television star untested in politics.
Thats what many of them did Sunday evening. Twitter throbbed with speculation that Winfreys speech accepting the Cecil B. DeMille Award was the beginning of a presidential run. Winfreys friends didnt discourage the idea.
(snip)
Again, this may just be a passing, Golden-Globes-inspired moment of Twitter hype. But it is also a reminder that when the last out-of-the-blue celebrity candidate entered a presidential race, the media shrugged him off as a joke.
Winfrey is a skilled interviewer, a talented actress, a successful businesswoman and an inspiring orator... Also, as the first year of the Trump presidency demonstrated, there are colossal risks in electing a political neophyte to the most demanding public office in the world. Just because the Republicans were foolish enough to travel down this dangerous road in the process sacrificing many of their partys best qualities and most valuable principles in a desperate, craven hunt for votes doesnt mean the Democrats should follow suit.
Winfrey might possess a more stable temperament than Trump who doesnt? and her political positions would undoubtedly be more in line with those of liberals, Democrats and The Times editorial page, but she would face the same steep learning curve in dealing with foreign and domestic issues. What is there to suggest that she is any better prepared than Trump was to work productively with Congress or tackle international trade negotiations, the North Korean nuclear threat or the complexities of the Arab-Israeli conflict?
(snip)
But the United States doesnt need another TV star running the country even a talented and accomplished star such as Oprah Winfrey. What it needs is someone who has prepared for the job, who has made tough decisions, who is familiar with the issues, who has a history of public service. Not all senators or governors make good presidents, to be sure, but theyre a better bet, by and large, than the typical movie star or businessman.
More..
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-oprah-president-201801089-story.html
HopeAgain
(4,407 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)for president.
ollie10
(2,091 posts)Well, that is what a campaign is all about. She will make her case about why she should get our votes.
I say let the campaign begin! We should examine all candidates thoroughly. At the same time, we should not reject a candidate prematurely before she has had time to make her case.
longship
(40,416 posts)So what is it with all the Oprah 2020 brew-ha-ha?
Plus, she'd be an absolutely horrible candidate, due to her abysmal ignorance of medical science.
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2018/01/09/oprah-winfrey-president-anyone-remember-pseudoscience-quackery-shes-promoted/
ollie10
(2,091 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)And I don't want to see quack physicians like Dr. Oz as Surgeon General, or anti-vaccine idiots like Jenny McCarthy or (horrors) Andrew Wakefield as head of CDC.
Oprah's track record on health science is abysmal. She supports fucking John of God, the faith healer and psychic surgeon, who claims cancer cures!!!!
And yes, this matters.
ollie10
(2,091 posts)I am assuming she will have a transition team that will search for suitable people for jobs.
longship
(40,416 posts)I would prefer to put somebody into the office with education in such subjects. My strong position is that we don't need another president ignorant of science. And make no mistake, Oprah Winfrey is profoundly ignorant of science, especially medical science.
She has exhibited a unique incuriosity for the subject, bred on ignorance.
That's bad, very bad, as these things go.
There's no way I can support her nomination as POTUS.
question everything
(47,472 posts)but even that infamous tape from Access Hollywood did not make a difference. Thus, I can no longer take solace that past activities would take a candidate out of the race. No. Republicans can still hope for something like that. We, I hope learned hour lesson.
Pacifist Patriot
(24,653 posts)question everything
(47,472 posts)dlk
(11,560 posts)As a rule, billionaires are accustomed getting their way--when they say jump, they expect everyone around them to ask, "how high"? They tend not to do very well with the cooperation and compromise required to succeed in public service. We are all better off when they donate to worthy causes as opposed to becoming one.
Paladin
(28,254 posts)Since when do we allow trump to provide a template for future presidential qualifications? No more billionaire TV stars in the Oval Office---unless they're paying a visit to a genuinely qualified Democratic chief executive.
dalton99a
(81,455 posts)rtracey
(2,062 posts)I will not support actors, sports persons, media-ego driven people for office. I will only support public servants who are working diligently in front or behind the scenes to make this country better. Its time for this party to stop and get behind strong progressive community service candidate, not rich media, sports, musical people who think running this country is a 9-5 job, or sitting in a studio cutting tracks. We have that now and you can see....IT REALLY SUCKS
question everything
(47,472 posts)The Rock? A black actor who is all muscles.. and plays roles accordingly.
RussBLib
(9,006 posts)Those on the left are much nicer people. Let's get the celebrity BS out of the way. Go Oprah!