Democrats seem determined to get into the political fray with one hand tied behind their back.
The Presidency IS a contest of celebrity, an idea that the people have often reinforced...... and the GOP have given the people what they want; from the star power of victory with Eisenhower to the folksy B grade acting of Reagan and also fellow actors Fred Thompson, Sonny Bono, Arnold Schwarenegger. Factor in conservative mayors like Clint Eastwood and Jack Kelly, then throw up a maverick like Jess Ventura....The American Right knows how to harness star power .....The Dems?
Well they gave us Al Franken who disappointingly couldn't keep his hands to himself.
All America has to do is peruse the list above and ask:
'Would Oprah be better or worse than any or all of these?'
Oprah stirred our emotions, and gave us hope for a brighter future. She’s done that before and will do it again.
The rush to encourage her to run for President is commentary on a trend where we accept, unlike in other professions, not even an informal requirement for elected public service, other than age and/or place of birth.
We live in a complicated, dangerous world. We support extraordinary advances in medicine, science, technology, and the social sciences fueled by the best universities. When ill, we seek the best doctors. We applaud those in technology who create a once unimaginable future. Yet we demean those in public service who have honed skills in public policy, history, economics, constitutional law, and ethical leadership. We seem more concerned about gender, height, charisma, allegiance to an organized religion, provided it is the right one. I hope we can establish professional expectations for the most important job in our country. Minimally, how about asking those who run for Congress and the Presidency to pass the citizenship test that we require of our new citizens? How about requiring an understanding of public policy, geography and economics? Today, we no longer go to the local barber when we need surgery. How about requiring more of those who will impact all aspects of our lives and those of our children and grandchildren. At least establish an expectation! Now, that would be a revolution.
1
Oprah is an excellent entertainer and celebrity but ... if a nice and decent person without political experience is what the DEM is betting on as a candidate, I quite understand why it was possible to get DJ Trump as POTUS.
However much I like Oprah, I see her as unfit for presidency as Hillary Clinton was and is.
It must be possible to find someone fit for presidency among the 54 million democrat voters.
1
The amount of attention and speculation generated from her acceptance speech at the Golden Globes awards demonstrate just how much hunger there is for a united figure for the left.
If, assuming, that Donald Trump is the epitome of the right (which some might argue that he is not given he is not ideologically inclined), who is his counterpart in the Democrats? Is it Elizabeth Warren? Is it Kamala Harris? Is it Kristen Gillibrand? Is it some combination of the prominent elected Democrats mentioned?
We must ask ourselves why a speech at a Hollywood award ceremony on the forefront issue of sexual assault generated such resonance (to the degree of a potential 2020 run) across the national politics. There are many reasons. This is the most cutting edge cultural issue that has been growing for months. This is one of the most prominent entertainment/media figures delivering, and signaling that a new era is dawning on the silenced issue of sexual assault. Oprah delivered a speech that signaled across every spectrum, group, and identity, that a new time has come.
People are hungry for hope, for positive change. She tapped into a deep sentiment that was the resistance (the indivisible groups, the women's march). It is not that Oprah is some political Machiavellian, but that she maintains a high emotional quotient. She understood well what the general public desperately wanted, and she delivered. And the crowd went wild.
Oprah 2020 -- why not? She is smart and good at connecting with people. And she cares about the common good. Great foundation for a presidency.
This is indicative of how much we’ve declined as a society. Some celebrity gives an inspiring speech and they are immediately catapulted to being considered presidential. We live in a country that sneers at intellect and experience, primarily die to lies and smear campaigns. When you hire someone to do any job anywhere, do you hire someone with no relevant experience? No, you don’t. But it’s ok to select the leader of the free world based upon their celebrity appeal or lack of intellect and judgment that some contemptible, gullible, ill-informed people find appealing. Great. Never prouder to be an American.
Look I like Oprah. Buy we have someone who really has not been gromed for the job. If it were between Oprah and Trump. Hands down I'd vote for Oprah. In a field of Democrat Nominees I don't think so. Sorry Oprah just my opinion.
Oh, my gosh. We need someone with experience in government
To clean up the mess that Donald Trump will leave.
Seems to me that the media got a whole lot more giddy about Oprah than most of us average Democrats...
Seems to me that a more logical & realistic (& beneficial) thing would be for her to run for senate or congress. I have a feeling she could become a powerful force in either.
3
I would say to Oprah, Don't do it! The world loves Oprah for who she is, what she does and what she stands for. She can (now) freely do good for everyone. A run for presidency will bring out the fearful haters, who will bring out every smear they can find, true or false, and try to change the world's perception of Oprah who is now the icon everyone needs in the capacity she currently provides. (As a president her life and actions would be severly restricted).Don't take that away from us, we need you, just as you are now.
If the Democrats want to run a celebrity for President,
why not at least run one with some experience? That means
Kiefer Sutherland should be in the race.
2
A had to look up that name in Wikipedia, as I had never heard of him -- like, I mean, actually never even once.
It seems his full name is "Kiefer William Frederick Dempsey George Rufus Sutherland." As I live and breathe, I could not make that up. There is, however, a very minor character in Joyce's "Ulysses" with an even longer string of names. As I recall, that character only appears on one page, mumbling as he walks down the street, but his name takes up the space of a paragraph.
The one with the best experience lost to Donald Trump.
The vaccine against Trump is ONLY Oprah.
I expect that either ben Affleck or Matt Damon will run for president, in a decade. I'm quite serious. I think it will be Affleck. His films (the ones he directs) will get increasingly political.
1
If Ms. Winfrey runs for president, she will soon lose half of her audience due to right wing character assassination. That would be a shame, because she is the rare star that can draw support from an array of American demographic sectors.
Rather than ask her to run, Democrats should take note of the educational gift she has already given in the form of her speech at the Golden Globes. Without naming names or explicitly choosing sides, Ms. Winfrey set out a clear criticism of Trump and his agenda, while encouraging a very different set of values. She did it so smoothly that even Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, was moved to offer her praise and support of Ms. Winfrey's message.
This is a model of policy framing and communication that the Democrats should immediately emulate. Instead of dividing people and energizing the the opposition with rage and hysteria about all their grievances with all things Trumpian, Democrats should speak eloquently of their highest values and visions.
Hillary Clinton underscored the worthiness of the Oprah approach when she scorned the "basket of deplorables" and immediately brought together a powerful assortment of right wing fringe voters who are willing to vote for anyone who promises to punish "liberals." That was a terrible mistake that should not be repeated. Ms. Winfrey has set a much better example.
3
What are Opra’s qualifications? Promotion of junk science? Giving a stage to anti-vaxxers? Peddling New Age nonsense like “The Secret”? Even as an entertainer, she is mediocre; I tried to watch her show once and found it ridiculous, boring and pretentious. We already have a second-class entertainer and a science ignoramus in the White House; why to bother electing another one?
11
No. A thousand times NO. This is not a real "thing". So she gave a speech. Big deal. Seriously people, it's just A SPEECH.
The fact the NYT is even giving this any type of coverage truly reveals the need to make something out of nothing as a means to draw in readers (and advertising dollars) but even worse, creates a false legitimacy to this.
5
As for giving a speech, I think Trump's one line "Where's my Roy Cohn" is absolutely Shakespearian. I am trying to recall which of Shakespeare's villains said something almost similar to it.
I would be honored to support such a kind-hearted, empowering, inspirational woman as Oprah. She could not be more distinct from the current spite-filled divider-in-chief.
1
Casey: your "kind-hearted" hero said on a BBC interview, which is very easy to find on google, that all old white people have to die ASAP. She is clearly full of hate, and NOT kind in any way.
Oprah will be seen as Obama II. She is fantastic but Democrats need to be steering this ship, not other way around. And just how did #MeToo campaign turned into #TimeIsUp. Male ideology. It's threatening and women know collaboration is better than threatening. Seems a little backwards for women..................
2
Sadly to me, Oprah with her speech made a similar mistake that Hillary did in her campaign: alienating the 95+% of ordinary, decent men who do not want to be tarred and feathered for the unacceptable behavior of a few. Barrack Obama explained so eloquently a few years ago what it was like to be an ordinary, decent black man walking down the street and hearing car doors locking when walking past. Ironically, this is how many good-hearted, respectful men are beginning to feel. It goes with Seth Myers joke: you shouldn’t be afraid on Golden Globes night to hear your name mentioned in public. Golden Globes night was group-think at its worst. Not a single note of nuance, subtlety or sophisticated thinking to be heard from any of the political speeches. Just men bad; women infallible. I am an admirer of Oprah for her intelligence, success and dignity. But she will never get a vote from me if it simply is about gender wars.
6
As much as I love Oprah, just no.
2
I happen to be black, and basked in a tremendous amount of pride in Obama's presidency. But this Oprah thing, I don't even want to hear about it! I want the next president of the United States to negate everything the Trump presidency has been, and not seal the circus nature of it into mainstream politics! What the heck does Oprah know about Pakistan more than Trump?! Nothing! I also think that she is a little full of herself, maybe not as much as Trump, but enough for my taste to make me cringe at this crazy talk of an Oprah presidency, however remote.
The whole discussion is absurd! Just think about it. If your personal physician disappoints you deeply, would you run to some random successful business man/woman who happened to say something "smart"? Of course, not! So, why the heck should the presidency be different?! Is it because less would be at stake in the selection of the next leader of the free world? For God's sake, have you not been following what our "genius" Trump has been doing lately?! Enough already! I don't want to hear any of it! Period!
3
I am a Democrat and I find this hoopla about Oprah idiotic, and disturbing. I vote in every single election, and I am begging the Democratic Party to find a smart, young-ish and inspiring candidate with political experience for 2020. I am wholly against Oprah or any other celebrity - or other "outsiders" with no familiarity with elected office - running for president.
3
None of the Weinstein accusers were invited to the Globes: https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/01/09/kendall-jenner-got-a-golden-globe...
Oprah is a fraud.
3
She is great, we love her but please NO!!!!!!!!! Can we have someone qualified??? Can we not have Trump as an example for unqualified people to run for office???
1
Just like the NYT's loved Donald Trump as a way to drive page views during the primaries not too long ago, they love Oprah for the same reason. I expect to see an UpShot piece soon telling us that Oprah has a 100% chance of winning come 2020.
2
Why not Oprah?
Unlike the Predator in Chief we currently have, she actually worked hard and earned her place. Her father didn't drop millions on her, he owns a barber shop.
2
Dumbest idea I ever heard. Who started this idea? Some flake from Hollywood or a 3rd rate journalist because Winfrey gave a good speech at the Golden Globes? Don't further inflate her already inflated ego. Why are we wasting newsprint on this stupid nonsense? We need an experienced, strong candidate like Joe Biden or Andrew Cuomo to beat the Trump in 2020.
2
Please god, no.
2
From the same people that thought liberals/dems/progressives, fresh off the OCCUPY movement, would rally behind a Goldwater Girl from the Board of Wallmart who'd spent the last several years taking millions from Wall Street. Genius!!!
3
Those who are giddy at the prospect of her running are trying to portray her speech to an invitation-only bunch of Hollywood elites to Obama's keynote speech at the Democratic national convention in 2004. The differences are so obvious it isn't necessary to list them all, but it all boils down to one thing--she's not new. I also don't believe she's ready for the vetting process. It's hell. She owes what she is mostly to middle class stay-at-home moms--mostly white, I would say, who needed to see someone relatable on the tube that they could reliably tune in on as a break from the kids and the household chores. Sure, it was only a persona that she developed, and there is more to her than that, but, if she runs, she will no longer be in her familiar element but will be exposed to all the dangers and pitfalls of the political arena. Many have tried, but all have gone down leaving only the likes of Trump standing. I don't believe she's ready for it, but I do believe she knows that much about herself already.
3
With all these stupid talks about Oprah being a potential American presidential candidate, you'd think that anyone can be a good president. With all due respect to Oprah and her talents, she should remain in the media world. Why can't we elect presidents based on their CVs--you know, the way that regular managers hire regular people every day in America? Are they qualified? Do they have sufficient experience that is relevant to the job that they are applying for? How is their judgement, negotiation, decision-making, and management skills? Can they lead a large group of people effectively? If Americans vote for presidents the way they would hire employees, we wouldn't be stuck with a mess called Trump.
3
to all the Oprah naysayers: yeah, that's what the worls needs, more politicians.
1
Dems didn’t learn any lessons from the Hillary debacle? Afe there no decent Democrat candidates left? Obama triggered the anti-black faction; Hillary triggers the anti-women faction. And now someone is considering a black female candidate? Really?!
2
Just what the country needs, an eating disordered racist!
3
Also ageist.
Don't. Just don't. Please don't.
1
Celebrity is a poor substitute for relevant education, a demonstrated commitment to public service, actual experience with the machinery and norms of government, and exposure to domestic and international politics when it comes to being the leader of a country.
I far prefer my accountant, lawyer, doctor, surgeon, plumber, electrician, mechanic, teacher and my banker to be properly trained and experienced.
Why should we suspend this rationality for the biggest job in the world ?
If Oprah is serious then she should run for Congress or Senate and earn the credentials to run for the highest elected office by serving an apprenticeship that shows real respect for the people.
4
As a Democrat, let me say this: if the party nominates her in 2020, I will not vote at all. No more entertainers playing politicians.
5
NO! But please: help us elect someone with real qualifications for the job, experience in government, knowledge of the law, etc. Oprah could be of enormous service to the country, not as president, but by putting her great talents to work making sure we elect not only a better senate and house in '18, but also a great president in '20.
2
Oprah Winfrey is no more qualified to be president than was Pat Paulsen. The last thing this country needs is another "virgin politician" in charge.
If the House Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi truly believes that because “Oprah has read books" and "knows how to identify talent" she is qualified to be president, then the entire Democratic Party is in worse shape than I thought.
Seriously, another TV personality is even being considered for the job? Has not a single lesson been learned from the election of Donald Trump? I don't know how the Democrats can utter one complaint or criticism of Trump for his inexperience when they are discussing the remote possibility of Ms. Winfrey running for office when she too has no experience or qualifications herself. Have they all gone mad?
3
Though I have great respect and admiration for Oprah and think she might well be a fine president, I believe the country has learned its lesson regarding hiring someone with no legislative or political experience for the biggest job in the world. (at least it WAS the biggest job in the world) I'm looking for an experienced legislator or Governor who is smart, creative and progressive. Someone -- male or female -- who is of the coming generation. (maybe 40 to 55 years old) Relevant experience is the key here. President of the United States is not a job one trains "on the job" for.
2
Even setting aside her lack of actual political qualifications, given some of the questionable people and ideas she has championed or shilled for (Dr. Phil, the "Secret," other "new-age-y" bunk), I could never vote for her.
2
Exactly, Why not Oprah? Wasn't Trump elected because he was such a "great businessman"?
Wait - this is real? I guess it's not that surprising. The Democrats don't even have a mission statement. They might as well support a TV host. It'd be nice to have someone with experience, but this Country is based on viewership not leadership, apparently. What a travesty.
We deserve better. Her entire persona is consumed by the same delusions of grandeur and magical thinking that has infected the right. Ideas and values from the left have always had a friend in Oprah, but her part in the numbing of American intellect can not be ignored or fully forgiven, ever. She, like Trump, relies on pseudoscience, guru patronage and priestcraft to drive value to brand. Maybe that’s a bad thing?
Ok. I'm really conflicted about this. On one hand, yes, she is a celebrity, with no political experience. However, comparing her to Donald Trump is like comparing coal to solar power. She is smart, savvy, well read, articulate, and most importantly, she has compassion as opposed to that narcissistic blowhard manbaby of our current groper in chief. I think Oprah can do anything she sets her mind to.
On the second hand, am I just so tired and numb from REACTING to this disasterous clown car that is the current administration that I reach for the first "shiny and popular" personality that comes around? Every day we get news of this congress not serving ordinary people like me and beholden to big business lobby. Am I just like Trump supporters in 2016 then, that I would gamble on a politically inexperienced candidate just to make a "change" in Washington? Am I falling into the same trap of "personality cult"?
(Sigh) - What a weird time we live in. . .
Dems will never win another presidential election with a progressive candidate. If I was a Republican (thank God I'm not), I'd be promoting Warren or the old socialist to ensure a Republican victory in 2020. Progressivism is a dead letter in America. Obama took care of that, and gave the nation Trump!!!
Michelle has seen it, and she does not want it. She is as grateful as can be with some private life. She has also seen that the broadness of the scope of detailed, grey mass grinding policy wonkiness required for the job is over her head. (Yep, way more over Trump's, but he doesn't care, she does.) Her husband has said to his own surprise he turned out to be good in killing. Maybe Michelle figured out she will in no case have that part of the job, and since it comes with the job, she respectfully declines: thanks, but no, thanks.
Now Oprah: nobody beats her experience, brilliance and rapid-responsive presence in communicating. Michelle did a couple of heavily prepared speeches. Oprah, in contrast, was in the lion's den all her life, having to make up her wonderful responses from scratch in challenging talks practically all her professional life and she came out on top, unparalleled and got to know Americans from all scars and stripes and corners.
America needs exactly what Oprah offers: on-air, live, off-the-cuff, unscripted brightness, responsiveness, thereness, confidence, generosity, grace and compassion, to show it the vast right wing conspiracy media complex. I know Sanders and Warren have the keener insights into the policy steps needed. Oprah will probably rely heavily on Barack for advice, which means Goldman Sachs and the MIC are in business with her. But she by far outdoes them in the scope and sparkling versatility of her inspiration and magnetism. I'm with her.
1
Just being a celebrity does not qualify someone to run for the presidency, as we now realize.
If Oprah wants to run for president who about gaining some governmental experience by winning a seat in the House of Senate. Then, after a few years, we'll talk presidency.
1
Please. There is no doubt she is a thoughtful person and interested in improving things for others as opposed to being interested in affirming her ego as is he case with "Donald McDonald."
But we don't need another entertainer who has name recognition. We need a professional who has experience in government and understands the process of governing.
To urge consideration of Oprah is simply looking for someone with name recognition not qualifications. We've been there (at least some have) and look what it got us.
1
Oprah's team sometimes blindsided people invited to her old talk show. The guests were told one topic would be discussed only to have it morph into something much more confrontational as soon as the lights went up. I know this from one group of people and from one individual who appeared on her show. I understand--while unfair, the practice drove ratings and isn't any different from what goes on with many talk shows.
My point concerns controlling the narrative. It's a lot easier to control the narrative when you own it completely. Oprah is an infinitely better leader, person, etc., than Trump. But her career doesn't qualify her to be president. Ronald Reagan was head of the actor's union and then governor of California before he became president.
Oprah generously funded a model girls' school in Africa, but it quickly encountered problems with reports of abuse. You could say she learned from her experience, but you could also say it was very naïve that a brilliant, savvy woman believed she could go to the developing world and start a school so quickly.
If Oprah wants to run for president, I'd be more impressed if she ran for Congress or the Senate.
Oprah is also extremely private about aspects of her persona life. The White House is a goldfish bowl. If I were Oprah, I would run for Congress and see how I liked it before
1
Seeing how poorly prepared one television entertainer is for the highest office in the land, why should we take another? The thought is preposterous. Ms. Winfrey's fine sentiments and good deeds aside, she has absolutely no preparation for the political tasks involved. If she wants to run for Congress or some responsible local or state office by way of preparation, fine. Then she'll have some idea how government works. But the old saying—"fine words butter no parsnips"—certainly holds true in this case.
Some of you will ask: "What qualified Ronald Reagan." He had served as a union president, then as governor. I didn't like what he did, but he had experience in politics. Ms. Winfrey has none.
1
Democrats needs to stand for the proposition that knowledge, expertise, and experience, are the minimum qualifications for the presidency. Simply put, nominating a popular figure, no matter how good a person or eloquent a speaker, on the belief that they will inspire voters on election day, is not only misguided, but also ensures the further degradation of the presidency, which demands professionalism to lead the a modern administrative state and act as commander-in-chief. At a minimum, that demands deep military experience or legal-policy experience with some previously high-level public service. Ms. Winfrey lacks that background, and being a good person and successful entertainer, is not qualifying for the presidency.
2
I only wish George Carlin had lived long enough to see this. The material would pretty much write itself.
In many ways, Oprah would have the same problem that Trump has - that nobody has said "no" to this person in a very, very long time. And people like Oprah and Trump are not held accountable in their businesses in the same way that a congressman, senator, or even a member of a school board is held accountable to the public. Elected officials have a responsibility that is unique.
No. It is time to take celebrities out of politics. Thank you for your work and I hope she and others continue to do their civic duty for their communities and their country. But,you don’t get to be in charge of us just because you are rich and famous.
As an amazing woman as Oprah is, I believe the right person for the job needs to have experience. Oprah is great at what she does now. But does she have the knowledge that's needed to be President. I don't think so.
1
The Democrats could hire consultants who could teach them how to run for office and win but they've opted for hiring consultants who teach them how to run for office and get rich in the process. Winning isn't necessary, it seems.
What difference would it make? Wilson didn't have much experience. Neither did TR. Our politics have become nothing but a fight. An argument. The idea of collecting taxes and actually doing something for the citizenry is lost. The idea of lifting the downtrodden, even worse; only something to talk about. With TODAY'S Republicans not just blaming the poor for their plight; but trying to CRIMINALIZE them! The idea of MANAGING the nation for maximum outcome for the maximum amount of citizens is non-existent. Our government's existence now seem solely to make sure rich people and corporations don't pay any taxes. And give away massive amounts of money to the military. Unfortunately, this idea, accelerated greatly by Reagan, has spread the world over; with the well to do infusing every government on the planet. Money for bombs? No problem. Money to spy on your own citizenry as if they are "the enemy? No problem. A few bucks to get a person very sick with a highly contagious disease off the streets? That should come form "charity".
1
The thought of a president who created a magazine bearing her name and whose cover bears her and only her image every single month and of the kind of follower who finds that kind of totalizing narcissism compelling makes my blood run only slightly less cold than the thought of our current president.
We’ve descended into full banana republic mode; and this “speculation” by otherwise serious people (at least many with influential positions) reinforces the republic’s current status.
Yes, let’s replace one media industry-created celebrity billionaire with zero governmental experience with another. For both of these individuals have the qualifications and life experience necessary for the presidency - right?
Yes, their respective day-to-day lives enable them to truly understand how most of the citizenry lives. Doesn’t everyone have a place on Fisher Island or their name on buildings throughout the world?
The late Susan Sontag’s controversial observation post-9-11 concerning the inability of Americans to grapple with issues as mature adults is fitting here.
Why not SpongeBob SquarePants for president? He likely has cross-over appeal.
Sorry, Mr. Franklin, we weren’t able to keep the Republic that you helped create.
Oprah or Tom Hanks. I'd trust either one of these celebrities to do the best and smart things for our country. I mean, having human empathy and understanding of ALL Americans, not just rich ones, is the most important ingredient. Mr. Trump has broken it. It'll take Oprah to fix it. (Maybe Tom would be her VP).
1
If Oprah Winfrey wants the job of president, I have no doubt that she can do it. She created a $3 billion media empire based upon her personality, intelligence, drive, savvy, capacity to learn and connection to real people. In fact, she's demonstrated more empathy and interest in citizens and their needs than anyone in the current administration has or ever will. If she wants the gig, she has possibly the best chance of being a forerunner of Democratic background. Who else is a contender?
1
I'm certainly no Oprah supporter. I think she's arrogant and entitled and a phony. That being said, Oprah came from nothing and has run a wildly successful business for decades. Compared to Trump, she's a decent human being. I believe that she has a conscience, has a pretty good relationship with the truth and will listen to people who know more about a subject than she does. On the Democratic side, if it came down to a choice between Oprah and Bernie Sanders, she'd win my vote hands down. I have respect for experience and success. Sanders was a total failure at everything he did before getting involved in extreme left-wing politics and, judging from his legislative record, has not been much more effective as a politician.
The opposition party running Oprah Winfrey or some other entertainment celebrity would transform what is still an aberration into a fundamental change in the character of our electoral politics. It would be a change for the worse.
While one could argue that the changes in the character of the country that Mr. Trump and Ms. Winfrey represent happened decades ago and were part and parcel with their personal success and that politics is only now just catching up, that hardly means that they were changes for the good and that we should not resist their deleterious effects on the nature of government and public service.
The modern Republican party has succeeded in throwing a monkey wrench into the workings of the liberal state again and again by appealing to its lowest common denominator. The Democrats should not follow suit. They should rather realize that there are worse things than loosing an election. There is loosing the republic.
I've never seen more than a few snippets of Oprah's television show, but if she runs for President I am sure we will all see Oprah's show ad nauseum in commercials and advertisements.
1
She's got the personality, she's got the personal appeal, but is she the right pick for this day and age? The Democratic party is moving left. Is she "left" enough? At this point we don't even know where she would be on the political spectrum, but she's probably somewhere in the warm cuddly middle, or just left of it. One thing Trump knew is that you have to keep your message clear and simple and then run it to death. What would her message be to those who abandoned the Democratic party for Trump? Can she be more Trump than Trump? Her strength will be with the traditional voting blocs in the big cities and all those housewives who watched her on TV and remain her faithful fans, but is the DNC suddenly ready to correct its course and lurch to the center again? What an anticlimax that would be. I think it would be a great betrayal and a bait and switch that would alienate the left and only help Trump.
1
The Democrats do not need another celebrity or a tired old face and what they need is 30 years younger Joe Biden- blue color and clean with political experience.
I've never watched the Oprah show, but I would happily support her in a run for President. Only thing is could an intelligent, rational, informed person win the office? Much less a moderately liberal African American woman?
I'm with ya O!
With no disrespect to Oprah Winfrey who is a very accomplished person, I have about as much chance of voting for her as I did for Donald Trump.
I'm not yet convinced that Oprah would make a good president, but I'd love to see the way she handles Trump when he tries to pull the stalking routine on the debate stage. My guess is that Oprah would turn and say, "Back off, creep!" The entire nation would erupt in cheers from coast to coast, a catharsis four years in the making. I don't think anyone other than Oprah could provide such a moment.
1
No way! No more non political / personality people. I think Oprah has done a lot of good in her life and does want to help people, but not as President of the US. I am an older Democrat who is left of center, but it is time to give some of the younger people a chance, but not Gillibrand - I think she raised heck about Senator Franken to eliminate competition f0r 2020. I would like to have heasrd the results from the senate ethics committee.Two of Franken's accuser were anonymous. Senator Klobuchar, Adam Schiff, J. Castro (D-TX) are some of my picks - maybe they would not make the cut this time, but I hope someone of their ilk does.
The surest way to prevent a second term of Trump is Oprah.The Trump massive ego would pull him out of the race.He will not run the risk of an humiliating loss to Oprah.Just watch.
"There are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die."
That's what Oprah said on BBC a few years ago. Can't imagine it would help her with the white senior vote.
1
If Oprah and Bloomfield run on the same ticket we might have something. The combo of skills from the two might work.
I’d vote for Satan before I’d vote for Trump. The devil is better at making deals than Trump. Of course Ryan would be his VP.
1
Why not Ellen Degeneres or Jon Stewart?
2
Gayle for VP?
1
Our political system has become largely a farce - electing Presidents with little or no experience at all and dominated by big donors. Meanwhile, we try to influence most every other government or election, and whine when Russia does likewise.
5
Oprah could have helped Hillary against Trump with this speech with all the accusations against him if not for Her husband Bill and his philandering ways. If she had divorced Bill, I think she would be President. Him and Trump are birds of a feather.
1
Warriors are always fighting the last war. Engineers are always fixing the last product errors. Parents seem determined to give their children the ideal childhood the parents always wanted to have.
And political parties seem to chase the candidates that won the last election--no matter why they won, no matter how suited to the job they are once elected.
In 2020, the Democratic candidate would be a charismatic woman of color with a strong background in media, a positive reputation among voters of all incomes especially working women and she has managed successful businesses which apparently have not chosen bankruptcy many times. What is not to like?
At the very least the inarticulate elected officials who claim the least offensive positions possible will be challenged to step up their games to meet Ms. Winfrey's challenge.
3
No. Don't want Oprah or any other celebrity so removed from daily life, though she does have some experience with a broader understanding of the electorate and not just the influential and ruling class. But she too is embedded too deeply in her perverse medium; TV.
And that's just it, any Democratic candidate should chiefly focus on one over-arching issue: great wealth disparity tearing our country apart from the inside out. Compromising our sense of fairness and decency in order to make the preposterously wealthy more powerful.
All of our other problems are ancillary to this one. I doubt Oprah viscerally understands this.
Too many Democrats don't. This is why Bernie Sanders, not even a Democrat, is the default leader of the party. He would have won. He had the correct message.
The glass ceiling argument is stupid and the reason Hillary lost. We don't want more cutthroat CEOs and political operatives giving highly paid speeches to Wall Street, regardless of whether they are women or black.
Even if you win the Rat Race, you are still a rat.
7
“Oprah has read books. She knows how to identify talent.”
In some cases, clearly yes; in others, clearly no. She has promoted many good writers, classic and modern, and given them a much wider readership than they otherwise would have, thereby helping to create a literate audience, and certainly distinguishing her from Trump. For that she deserves a lot of credit. However, she has also repeatedly promoted junk science proponents. That may not distinguish her from Trump, but it displays bad judgement in her case as much as in Trump's.
6
There’s a world of difference between Donald trump who strikes me as a flim flam man and Oprah who has done her best to make life better for millions. I’ll bet she would show us her taxes too. I’ll vote for her, I’m eighty three and always vote.
10
Many commenters saying NO WAY to Oprah.
(Or to any woman?)
Some excuse their prejudice by saying Oprah should seek a lower position to gain experience, but Hillary Clinton had experience galore, and it wasn't enough to satisfy women haters.
I think Oprah scares them. They know she wouldn't let a "man" like Trump stalk her on stage at a debate. Nor would she worry about asking the moderators of the debate to do some moderating.
Nor would she hesitate to speak plainly about the elephant in the living room -- the Republican Party.
We need someone like Harry Truman. Oprah has a LOT in common with him. With Joe Kennedy III as her running mate, there might be chance to Make America Decent Again.
5
Dear Pecan,
It's not prejudice, Oprah Winfrey is simply as unsuitable for office as Trump, although she isn't stupid, racist, belligerent, and all the other bad qualities he has.
She has no experience in governing, has no stated policy objectives, has never campaigned for anything, and is known for TV shows and movies.
It's not prejudicial to want a qualified person to run for office. Oprah has great qualifications for a talk show or movie role, and no qualifications for president.
I like Oprah and she would without a doubt be a better President than Trump. The country just isn't ready for her. Even if she was elected , she would be treated worse than Obama and the racist would go crazy again.
If it was Oprah V/S Trump, Oprah all the way!
But it would be very divisive,
2
I too, would like to see the most qualified people in government rather than the most popular celebrity. But the reality is that it takes a lot of popularity to get people into voting booths. I do think Oprah would be pretty shrewd at picking out highly qualified advisors and talent to help her run the country, and actually listen to them, unlike Trump, whose only criteria is that they kiss and save his ass enough, and who is still far behind at filling crucial government posts left vacant after having purged all the Obama-era people. Maybe Oprah's biggest handicap though, is that a Winfrey presidency would be almost as divisive and intolerable to republicans as Trump's is to democrats. She would be better off using her influence and money to support a well-qualified candidate.
1
So because someone who has been on TV for decades and is a pro at reading a TelePromter, gave a moving, planned speech at a Hollywood awards show, she is competent to be POTUS. What I want to know is who is pushing this narrative and why? It is downright irresponsible.
9
No. More. Reality-TV. Hosts. Running. For. President.
AGAIN
Let's not make fools of ourselves, please. Whatever Ms. Winfrey's accomplishments may be in the field of entertainment, they don't apply to the Oval Office.
Right? President Trump?
8
you have to wonder what we are devolving to in our politics....
In 1980 you got a movie star.
In 1988 you got a plutocrat, although Bush 1 was a fine individual who served
his country in many ways before becoming president.
in 1992 -- a governor of a small state but who had a lot of charisma and a
vague Kennedy like flair
2000 -- plutocrat who flirted with politics as governor
2008 -- a community organizer, 1 term senator who exerted charm and more
than that, offered a nonthreatening Blackness that could redeem the souls
of guilt ridden libs
2016 -- billionaire show biz guy
Not all were horrible presidents, and your approval of them may depend on your partisan views. But none came to office as particularly qualified for running the country. None of them served much of an apprenticeship (other than Bush 1). We seen to be voting from the gut for glitz and glamour, celebrity or identity. Not a good sign for the electorate.
6
Since they turned their backs on the working people of the United States and sold their souls to Wall Street and the Global Economy, Democrats have resembled George C. Scott's gum chewing, moronically grinning General "Buck" Turgidson listening to Peter Bull's Russian ambassador Alexi de Sadesky in the war room in 'Dr. Strangelove',
"Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines."
Or, perhaps more accurately, the dreaded "Crack Suicide Squad" of the "Judean People's Front" (not to be confused with the People's Front of Judea) arrive at the foot of Brian's crucifixion in that classic Monty Python movie.
They haven't had an original idea since the 60s and most of those were abject failures in practice. Now all they can do is slobber over their prospects of securing their own vacuous celebrity TV "anti-Trump" to run against him?
The Democrats are a reactionary party. Their only interest is in band-aids for the poor and carte blanche for the YUPies who do no worse under Republicans than they do under Democrats. Better even. It is a party of white upper class (used to be middle class but that's gone now) guilt, all form, no substance, full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
6
With all respect to Ms. Winfrey and her achievements, the last thing we need is to follow a junk-TV star from the lunatic fringe is a celebrity from the left -- even the common-sensical one she appears to be. To restore the government's lost expertise, the nation's lost respect and its corupted sense of self, we'll need a practiced hand who neither learns on the job nor defies the job entirely -- ideally, a centrist who will work at the same time to diminish the divisions that may yet destroy us.
6
(My point being that if we set the pendulum swinnging in ever-widening arcs, it's going to get harder and harder to slow it.)
1
Who needs experience when Oprah can have the best advisers. There's Obama, Hillary, Warren, Bernie, Biden, Al Gore, Bill Gates and more.
Put them in her cabinet and what more do you need.
5
Don’t forget Dr Oz and Dr Phil.
1
Youth. No Old Bernie.
These are desperate times, Oprah in wishful thinking terms is an obvious no-brainer, especially after that stump speech she gave the other night. It's really hard to take politics seriously anymore.
2
Wonderful, respected Oprah. What a voice! However, I would like to see Oprah in an appropriate Cabinet post, concentrating on one important issue. I think she would be most effective that way.
2
After four years of Trump - it is imperative that the next president be experienced! This IS NOT and SHOULD NOT be an entry level position!
8
Hillary had experience, more than anyone who has ever run. Sec. of State, Senator, etc. But women haters, led by Trump, defeated her.
The US must act to live up to its expectations as a force in world affairs.
The damage done by the present clown will take some time to repair.
Show business celebrities are not the answer.
If you think you need someone who is famous for being famous as president.
Cut to the chase.
Run the mouse.
Awaiting word from:
* Sen Elizabeth Warren
* Sen Kristen Gillibrand
* Sen Kamela Harris
Are they having 'I'M WITH OPRAH' bumper stickers printed? Or, are they following in Hillary's footsteps and hiring operations research firms to dig up dirt on Oprah?
This will be MOST INTERESTING!
4
Heck, I'm waiting for word from Hillary herself. Either supporting Oprah, or hiring people to dig up dirt on Oprah.
1
No way. Enough with the celebrities.
3
Oprah is smart enough to not run. But if she decides to run, I would hope that she would leave Dr. Phil, Dr. Oz and her other friends at home.
3
When will the mainstream Democrats learn to shy away from Hollywood, tech- billionaires, and the coastal elite class that speaks little to the aspirations of common people? The educated twitter-verse and "chattering classes" are filling up the political conversation (and the NYT) with endless talk of Trump gossip, celebrity obsessions (such as this Oprah for president thing), and empty horse-race political speculation. It's all about as spiritual and substantive as artisan bottled water. The Democratic party has stomped all over the working class. Look what it's gotten them: Donald Trump. Umm. . .Oprah 2020!!!
2
The Democrats cant seem to articulate a resonant message for the nation as a whole and are as good at advancing party-line opportunists as the Republicans (Kristen Gillibrand). All of America seems unaware that the child's ploy of "divide and conquer" isn't working. (Any one who thinks Donald J Barnum and the FU Caucus is changing that isn't paying attention or lacks reasoning skills.) Perhaps Oprah Winfrey, who really has built an empire from nothing, who really does have a heart for the poor and disadvantaged, who contributes to charity instead of only claiming she does, and who has surrounded herself with smart, forward-thinking people is a good answer.
I left the Republican Party when James Dobson started waging his daily and destructive "spiritual warfare" campaign back in the 1980's. The unholy marriage of church and the Republican Party has given us Trump (the antichrist) and Pence (the false prophet) and will give us armageddon if we are not careful (N Korea or the Middle East?). Armageddon won't end as the religionists think it will and will do no good for the United States. Our current behavior is antithetical to who we have always been as a nation.
I wonder now, will I have to leave the Democratic Party because they have no message of hope or unity? Don't laugh at Oprah or someone like her. She has integrity and her spirituality is real, unlike most of the elected gangsters in DC and the white-washed sepulchers surrounding them.
2
Keep in mind Oprah Winfrey has no message either, no policy objectives, no political platform, no experience. If the next presidential election is between her and Trump, two narcissistic billionaires with no governing experience (Trump still isn't acquiring any) then I'll give up on this dumb country for good.
1
Ophrah fo President!!! Yes! 2020!!!
Will this affect Kanye 2020?
8
Oprah is a fine human BUT her candidacy is a Band-Aid upon the head-wound of disconnection between we Democrats & real American lives. There's a GULF between OUR good intentions / lofty ideals & what middle-America / salt of the Earth folks need to aid THEIR dreams & aspirations. Had our failed Democratic dogma a catchphrase, it just might be "You get a car ... and YOU get a car and YOU get a car!" Trump was partly elected by blow-back to THIS folly.
3
We need a statesman/stateswoman as president, someone who knows the ropes of governing, policy, and relationship-building within the country and across the globe. A certain degree of charisma and humility helps to get important messages across. Oprah is an incredible speaker. Passionate, intelligent, on-message. She could be helpful in any number of ways, rallying the base, messaging key points,leading the charge. But I would not vote for her as president. I was also troubled by the amount of air time she gave to the anti-vaccination movement that tied vaccines to autism, a position not supported by the science.
5
If the Democrats have a chance to run Oprah Winfrey and sniff at that chance because they think she lacks political experience, this life-long Democrat would have a hard time forgiving them. Donald Trump will be president for 8 years if the Dems run anyone who can't match him in charismatic appeal, insane as that sounds. Voters don't care about policy experience. (Hillary Clinton was the most experienced and qualified person ever to run.) The Dems need someone who will appeal to states that can tip the Electoral College, and Oprah could do that in a way that others can't. She's obviously smart, she's well-informed, and she's a quick study. In other words, vastly better-qualified than 45, and likely better-qualified than a lot of people with governing experience. If she's willing to run, it would be folly to get in her way.
4
"Hillary Clinton was the most experienced and qualified person ever to run" (on her morality-challenged, accused rapist husband's coat tails)
Oh for God's sake. The GOP has lost whatever limited mind, and less honor, it once had; there is no need for the Democrats to follow the GOP example. It's the Dems' own fault that they have no bench strength--and it's their fault they blew the 2016 election. The recent stupidity of running Al Franken out of the Senate before the investigation was complete is an indication of how very limited, and inclined to run after baubles, the Dem "leadership" is now. Cut it out please. Ms. Winfrey may if she wishes do quite a lot to bring this country back together but not from the White House.
8
Another celebrity with zero government experience for President? Uh, Noprah.
5
Alixandria Lapp nailed it. “... our party tends to respect government and governing experience.”
THAT is the long term hope for the country, not Oprah.
19
Stop, please just stop with this.
No, we do not need any more "Front Runners" proclaimed way ahead of time. The New York Times among others endorsed Hillary before Iowa and we all know how well that worked out.
How about the media types sit back, let the voters decide who they want before coronating someone and stop all this political gossip? Most of what passes for Political Reporting is little more than Beltway Water Cooler Gossip written by people who should know better.
There are lots of well qualified, smart and capable people serving as elected officials in America who thankfully are not named Hillary Rodham Clinton or Oprah Winfrey. Representative Tulsi Gabbard, for example, has already served in local (Honolulu City Council) , state (Hawaii Legislature) and Federal elective office (US Representative) and as a Senate Aide for Daniel Akaka. She also has served 2 tours (Iraq and Kuwait) in the Hawaii National Guard first as an enlisted Media and later as a Commissioned Officer of Military Police and is a Major in the Army National Guard of Hawaii.
There are many other people who could use some time in the sun so that they can grow into national leaders before the voters who will select the President. Stunt casting gets you Donald Trump.
4
I'm just your typical guy so I really don't follow Orpah and I've never watched her show. But, she's black, smart and a woman and I believe the time is right for someone with these qualities to lead us into a new era.
2
For real?
2
If she runs, I will vote for Trump over her. As a leftist. Take heed Democrats.
2
Why don't the commenters opposed to Oprah suggest alternatives?
2
If we must have a female candidate, Kamala Harris is a better choice, though still not a good one. Sally Yates and her quiet style of strength and strong leadership would be a better choice yet; at least of the "type" of person required to fairly lead and inspire our confused nation.
But apparently unlike many others here, I don't believe we MUST have a woman in high office. There is no glass ceiling. Lisa Murkowski or Susan Collins or even that bowl of mixed nuts, Sarah Palin, would be strongly embraced by their Republican constituencies.
Just being a woman is the shallowest determinant of all time: You want Margie Thatcher? Kelly Anne Conway? From a gender only measurement they are half-way toward acceptance.
Hillary was buddies with Kissinger. She was buddies with Rupe the Murdoch. She was in the pocket of Oligarchs. Though highly qualified and vastly intelligent, she too was caught up in the world of wealthy insubstantiality and flexible ethics.
Many wealthy people are. It's an effect of their arrested development brought on by their lifelong chase for vast dollars as a way to measure oneself.
Would you even vote for a County Councilor with such distractions? I wouldn't.
That is up to the democratic party. They should be searching out candidates not having celebs drop in their lap or buy their way in. The party needs to build momentum behind likely possibilities, based on criteria such as related experience, effectiveness. They build the platform and values. Having we had enough experience with inexperienced Presidents? They can’t work the govt system, don’t have the network, can’t legislate.
I’m all in for Oprah in 20 but if Dr Phil gets in the race all bets are off.
The presidency is not a tv show - regardless of the glasses worn by the billionaire celebrity du jour.
3
"With no obvious front-runner for the 2020 campaign, Democrats appear likely to spend the next few years grinding through internal disagreements over policy and identity in a long contest for the nomination …"
The term "despicable" was used repeatedly in Comment to article above re removal of Salvadorans from US. But for so much as I'd like to cheer ANY Democratic Party initiative on ANY issue, I like many maybe find Dem management, Dem Nomenklatura, Dem self-appointed and self-anointed leaders, Dem royalty, etc. DESPICABLE as profiled again here perfectly willing to dither and dally their way into already losing another election which should be theirs by a landslide..
In this article the reigning Dem poobahs are saying, "Oprah might be fine, she might even win, but she's not - ahem - one of us."
I'd prefer that Oprah endorse Michelle O. for the highest office in the land, but that's perhaps a dream too far …
Just what our Republic needs. A "Liberal" billionaire who won't be affected and has no interest in, although she should, equality of opportunity. Certain words jump off the page of literary expression.
Glittering generalities, grandiloquent speech.
Just one question for the warriors of the left... Where were you when it mattered? You disgust us all when you follow the herd and it is convenient and risk free.
1
This article is grossly irresponsible.
In 2015, free advertising and front-page coverage framed the primary around a stunt candidate and relegated everyone qualified to second and third tiers. We can't have fair primaries if the media forces all mainstream candidates to campaign in the shadow of a celebrity.
Learn. From. your. Mistakes!
4
Speeches....Good! Keep making them.
Political candidacy....Bad! Stop the madness.
4
I'm not even reading this article before I comment, with good reason. This woman is just as much a snake oil salesman as #45. She peddles false information and legitimizes unqualified people. If you want somewhere to point your finger of blame for all these "alternative facts," it's time Pope-rah got her fair share. It may not be her turn of phrase, but it's certainly her bread and butter. Just ask "Drs" Phil and Oz.
So she's a black woman that reads. Big whoop. There are millions more like her out there that are better qualified. Just because she's black and female does not make her more capable than anyone else, and the fact that she reads does not make her intelligent or well educated. In fact, if you look at her bookclub list, many are of dimestore quality. We should see reading and lifelong learning as a bare minimum standard for public service, not the only qualifying trait.
And yes, America is sick of the celebrity turned policy-maker. But I guess you can't blame Hollywood for thinking we wanted them to rule us. We sure do blindly give them a lot of power over our culture...
3
Oprah for President? Is the Democratic Party so bereft of solid prospects that they would “get giddy over Oprah’s candidacy? Ugh.
4
The last thing this country needs now is yet another celebrity with no political experience in the White House.
6
If Trump had a magazine, he'd put his face on the cover every month. Like Oprah does.
6
Relax...Oprah will not run for President. People are just excited to see someone, anyone, give an emotional response to the idiocy in the oval office. It does underline what everyone should be looking for in a candidate, passion for the goodness and inclusiveness of people, and a strong personality who can go nose-to-nose with a creep like Trump. My dark horse for the Democrats is Gavin Newsome, the next governor of California.
1
She is smart, thoughtful, female, knows everyone and is everywhere respected, well-educated, self-made, accomplished, powerful, articulate, honest, what a remarkable collection of talents. Who better to break with the old, dinosaur mold that has gotten the country into so much trouble. It's the best and worst of jobs, but if she is willing to commit to it, she has the hearts and minds of a hundred million American voters. Go for it.
1
As an actor, I do admire Oprah. That however has nothing to do with Oprah as a political leader. The absence of political experience makes me completely uninterested.
4
Feudalism is back. Pick a billionaire you like and vote!
8
If an entertainer wants run for public office, fine, but they do not need to start as president. We already elected one without any experience and this country cannot afford another..no matter his or her politics.
This country does need to be turned into a celebritacracy.
7
One celebrity billionaire in the WH in my life time is enough thank you.
8
Celebrity Commander in Chief hasn't worked out very well so far. I'm hoping it gets canceled after this first run.
6
Oprah has a long history of supporting and promoting pseudoscience. With all of the problems our nation and world are facing, it is vitally important to have someone in the White House who can tell pseudoscience from the real thing.
7
The enthusiasm for Oprah to run in 2020 is a symptom of having elected an individual who represents all the qualities our parents taught us not to embrace. Out sized ego, pettiness, mean spirited, divisive, uninformed and many more characteristics that disqualify people from being your friend let alone leader of the free world. Oprah represents almost all "the better angels of our nature" and nearly everyone would gladly count her as a friend. That does not mean she would be a great leader. Let's set the bar a bit higher and look for someone who actually has successfully performed in public service.
7
I really hope I don't look under my chair and find a ballot.
9
As Rome became more decadent, its emperors became more incompetent. As its borders (sphere of influence) expanded, it became unable to bear the financial burden of defending them. Sound familiar?
The presidency is not a celebrity position. You see now the consequences of an unprepared Executive. Oprah is no more fit to be president than Trump is, because she has no knowledge of how to conduct the office, foreign affairs, or political savvy.
Turning over the presidency to celebrities and grandstanders sounds a death knell for a state that leads the world. We don't need political dynasties and we can't abide the ignorant who simply entertain us.
American's have become phobic about knowledge and expertise. That is rapidly turning us into a decadent oligarchy.
4
There is much to admire about Oprah Winfrey, and she stands vastly taller than Trump by every measure. She certainly wouldn't be the embarrassing disaster that Trump has been. Nevertheless, haven't we already learned our lesson about choosing a president who is not equipped for the hard work of being a global leader? Let Oprah continue to be a powerhouse in business and entertainment. President?? No.
2
Granted, it is rare for an elected president to have any experience at the highest levels of government – Nixon and George H.W. Bush being notable exceptions. But given that - there isn't any remotely plausible fine line between a "celebrity" and "statesman." And if it should come to that (one cringes) - then we might as well admit that American Idol and the Electoral College are, in essence, one and the same.
1
Public office is not a lifetime achievement award. It is a sacred trust that requires a level of competence that comes only from direct experience in serving the public. nobody starts at the top.
Oprah would not hire a CEO with no experience to run her company. Neither should we.
3
A reality check, please. Oprah's optimism, spirit, positions and positive direction: yes. Oprah for president: no. A charismatic and knowledgeable politician with Oprah's attributes: definitely! But first, let's beat back the despicable Republican party in toto - every possible candidate - as we figure out who our 2020 candidate will really be. This strikes me as the best way to make America America again.
Of course, she should do it. And bring on Hillary to manage the office while she travels the length and breadth of the land wowing her customers.
3
Only in America could the solution to the Trump travesty be perceived as replacing one celebrity presidency with another. "Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business" by the late Neil Postman of N.Y.U. obviously hasn't been read by nearly enough people.
4
The Democratic front runner is of course Senator Sanders. He is consistently far ahead of all the other contenders in the polls.
But the TIMES will do everything they can to ignore his movement. They are already repeating the same disappearing act they gave the campaign of the Socialist candidate last time.The rank and file Democratic readers should not let them get away with this blatant bias for yet another election cycle.
4
Oprah running for president will guarantee a Republican victory.
Consider that in the 2016 election, a huge number of less educated white men and women voted for Trump because, among other reasons, they could not tolerate the idea of a successful woman winning the election.
And now those same voters will not only be unable to tolerate a successful woman but also - horrors - a black woman. Trump will have the votes from the bigots and the ignorant all tied up in a bundle.
11
It agonizes me to agree with you.
I believe most people didn't vote for Hillary because she was unable to speak effectively to blue collar, uneducated voters. Oprah does not have that problem, plus she has a sincere, overt compassion for people of all backgrounds. Oprah has the intelligence to hire the most qualified people and she has a fairly good background in business due to her own financial holdings. Oprah is not the candidate with the most political experience, but she can beat Trump.
One very good speech does not make a President. How about a statesman for a nice change. Oprah is great ambassador for almost anything and perhaps she is better suited for that. Our country cannot afford another President who is on the "learn as you go" method. Look at the results now. A clueless pretender to the office and his petty, feckless hostile government.
2
What all of these "never a celebrity" comments fail to get is that not all celebrities are in ANY way shape or form, the same. Oprah is TRULY unique. As a woman she HAS been a political operator for years. I believe she helped Obama win. and there is evidence to support that. By all accounts, she is an expert at management, as seen by the success of running an entire Network, not just being a reality star with a grotesque track record of bankruptcy abuse. People are mentioning Al Franken casually with the caveat in their "never a celebrity" comments , as the one exception, the "good" example, but let's be honest, (allegations aside) he was a GREAT senator! One of our very best during this Trumpstag era. So do not paint all with the same brush. Trump is a delusional narcissistic who doesn't represent almost any other human on the planet and certainly not all other celebrities. If Oprah's star power and gift of oration can get the first Black woman into the white house and be what Dems need to win in 2020 DO NOT Dismiss this prospect.
4
She has never displayed knowledge beyond the superficial. And she has ever been responsible for anything beyond her self-interest. She's a variation of Trump. Not interested.
4
Seriously? What is it with reality TV stars and other mega-billionaires like the Kochs, Adelson, Mercers etc thinking the country is their personal fiefdom?
"Ms. Winfrey’s longtime partner, Stedman Graham, stoked the mood in a newspaper interview, suggesting to The Los Angeles Times that she would “absolutely do it” — with the caveat that such matters are “up to the people.”
Dear Oprah, here's one of the people saying, "No Thank You." Do your "do-gooding" from outside the Government, please. There are plenty of opportunities with all your money to burn. Do a lot of non-profits, add your name to it a la Trump so you feel noticed and wanted if that is your thing or do it anonymously. Please, do not run for the Presidency and diverting all the attention from other worthy contenders.
3
What a mess.
Most people apparently don’t want to have anything to do with politics. People don’t vote. People don’t know the issues.
Trump doesn’t care about the people or the country. He’s in it for himself, and doing quite well on that front.
And now it’s becoming a popularity contest between narcissists.
We definitely end up with the government that we deserve.
3
As much contempt as I have for the current resident of 1600 Penn. Ave. I would actually consider giving him another four years rather than training another entertainer for this, the most important job in the planet. And, shame on all Dems for even contemplating the idea. I guess the horrible experiment that this nation is going through in not enough. Remember when politicians were elected on past public service and their record?
1
Really, Serg, you'd actually even for a second consider re-electing the disgrace of the Oval Office? There is no shame in contemplating Oprah as president, but after we finish contemplating, let's find an experienced politician embodying her best attributes and personality, and elect him or her. In the meanwhile, if Oprah is politically serious, let her run for the senate or the house and get some seasoning. Marching orders for the rest of us: this November (and before, if available) let's elect every Democrat possible, from local school board to senator, and stop this Republican insanity in its tracks.
Reality check why do people complain about those who represent us deplorables who have zero respect for those represent us. Amazing how words can be taken out contex like lets come together as women an men . Maybe begins in our school system we should devide our public schools so boys an girls arent allowed to flirt. Lets teach our boys respect there sisters .Present system wont work will never come together .Doomed by those who think by keeping things way it is will make it work.
God forbid - she is not qualified - period -- and never will be. We just got out of 8 years with obama -- who was also not qualified. He split this country right down the middle and created animosity in this country that we never experienced before - not to mention is bringing this country to bankruptcy with his social programs that were outrageous.
Trump has managed to get us on the right path - oprah should stick to her diet commercials - she is good at that.
by the way, she made her billions because of us 'white folks' -- let us not forget that!
5
Please, Pmac, go back to Faux Noise which is obviously where your alternative facts originate.
1
Hopefully she and the democrats have more sense.
5
Ms. Winfrey is bright and I would not hesitate to vote for her, however I continue to hope Ms. Michele Obama will surface as the Democratic nominee. She is not only bright, she is a well educated attorney. She has real life experience with the Washington cesspool and is genuinely likeable.
I'd vote for her
1
The desperation of the democrats. They have no one to run. Every democrat out there is tax and spend with emphasis on illegal aliens and not the citizens of our country. The democrat party of just twenty years ago no longer exists.
2
Go Oprah! :-)
1
A black woman for President? Obviously, Democrats don't understand the importance of racism in a presidential election, and are not aware there is an electoral college that strongly favors the least educated, most racist states. Democrats can't possibly hope to attract the white rabble vote, which is absolutely essential for winning a presidential election, with a black candidate, let alone a woman.
Democrats should learn what ignorant whites, who thanks to the bias in the electoral college will be (again) the deciding factor in 2020, had to say about Michelle Obama - that is what they are up against. If Democrats can't find a charming white Christian conservative male, with a full head of hair, a white wife, two children and limited education to be their candidate, they might as well accept they are not part of the New United States.
1
At last the Democrats have come to their senses. There is no need to actually articulate a set of visionary programs to address the calamities facing the middle class and risk alienating their donor base. In the absence of a plan, no one is better qualified to win back those disenfranchised white-working voters than Oprah! The money, both media and dark is on Ms. Winfrey and the argument will go, if anyone doesn't like her it's because they are both a racist and a misogynist. At least if you didn't like Hillary, you were just a misogynist. Oprah is Trump 2.0, brought to you by the same friendly people. Meanwhile us suckers just gawk and watch TMZ for the latest news.
1
At least we know she can read.
2
Elizabeth Warren must be having a conniption.
3
Is it too soon to suggest Beyonce for VP?
2
Perhaps we should be asking "what is the job description for POTUS?" before we throw all these names around.
23
Isn't it tweeting, playing golf and watching Cable News? Am I missing something?
1
You left out grabbing women by their privates because they just let you when you’re a star.
Precisely!
I love her but we need an experienced lawmaker to cleanup what's left of the White House after 45 departs (whether of his own accord or not).
Put her on the VP ticket - it's always been a mildly PR position recently anyways - and watch the African American community come out in a way they never even did for Obama - 2020 in-the-bag.
1
I’m thinking maybe start small.......senator?
1
No. Please no.
1
I wouldn't vote for her in the primaries but if it was between here and Trump, I'm with Her (again).
The Democratic party can't withstand more half-hearted support. We need a standard-bearer who is an experienced and knowledgeable politician who can plough their way through the mountains of garbage (figurative and literal) that the Republicans will have left in their wake. An inexperienced celebrity, no matter how well-meaning, isn't it.
We need scientists and economists with proven interdisciplinary competence in government. Contrary to what we are experiencing right now, government is NOT a reality show. It has never been more serious than these days with overpopulation, dwindling resources, global warming and environmental deterioration. We need people in government who are capable of thinking rationally and who are not afraid to tackle unpopular problems. That, almost by definition, excludes most Hollywood or TV actors, with very few exceptions (Arnold has proven me wrong, he was an excellent governor. He would also be an excellent President, if he only could have run!).
But that only shows that there is nothing like experience on the state level to prime and recommend someone for the White House. Trump had nothing to show, not even experience as a city councilman.
And that DEFINITELY shows now.
So, in short, Oprah should first run for mayor or governor in LA or CA. If she does a good job there, shows that she is unwavering in appointing competent and accomplished people to the relevant administrative positions and - importantly - that she listens to them and follows rational advice, then we can talk, but not before.
3
I like Oprah. But I think one of the lessons we should have learned by now with Trump, is that true political leadership cannot be fobbed off as merely a popularity contest. No, political leadership at the highest level is a skill derived from diligent effort, not bestowed magically on election night. Our current president has so many leadership faults that by comparison Oprah would be a breath of fresh air, but with no political experience, her contribution would be one of a figure head, unprepared to accomplish her goals with a deft political hand honed by years of experience.
3
I have always admired Oprah Winfrey--for her intelligence, for her wellspring of empathy, for her ability to reach out to people of many backgrounds. However, I do not want to see another TV/film personality in the White House, regardless of party. It is time to elect someone with governing and policy experience. As the current resident of the White House has found it, governing is complicated. I'd like to see Ms. Winfrey engage voters with her passion, talk about critical ideas, and get voters to the polls. One sad fact in this country is the low turnout.
1
Democrats have mixed emotions? None here.
Oprah is extraordinary. Her speech gave me the chills.
It's time, though, that we fully appreciate our society's predictable vulnerability to the politics of momentary frenzy. We find ourselves in a period of anxiety and uncertainty and -- poof! -- an individual appears who seems to instantly clear a path through the muck. Desperate for clarity, we all are vulnerable to starting down the path.
Unfortunately, we just as quickly discover that, while we heard our momentary savior say things, it was our desperation and and hope that led us to imagine them doing things.
Oprah HAS done much. She has inspired me and entertained me. But I'm pretty much fed up with the recklessness and impulsiveness that leads many of us, after hearing one speech, ready to turn over the keys to the kingdom.
5
The world has gone crazy. When I heard that Ms Winfrey might consider running for President, I felt embarrassed for her. Embarrassed because although she is a very intelligent, successful person - she has no idea how our government works and she does not have the years of experience behind her to lead our government forward.
Oprah Winfrey like Donald Trump is a "brand". A brand they both worked very hard to create.
Unfortunately, we already have a "celebrity entertainer" in the White House, and we're sinking fast.
Let's elect individuals who are qualified to run for President. Not show boaters like Trump - or TV talk show host like Ms. Winfrey. Both rich, powerful and isolated by their wealth, from understanding what the average American endures daily to stay afloat.
If you want to pull talent outside the normal political parties, then how about an economics professor? Someone at least, who understands how the economy works.
I admire Oprah Winfrey - but I hope she comes back to reality and concentrates on managing her billions of dollars, multiple residences and companies that she is overseeing.
2
An economics professor? Name one who would stand a chance. What would be her platform?
Although I think she is brilliant, I am still bothered by her general lack of action re Hillary Clinton's campaign. Oprah was very focused when Obama ran -- and was instrumental to helping him excite the electorate. Re Hillary, there was a definite chill in the air. I guess I am at this point cynical enough to perhaps think - given her huge ego -- that perhaps she wanted to be the first female president -- and not have Hillary usurp that honor? Thus my enthusiasm for her is dampened as I feel she let us down when we needed her most.
No, Nope, Nada, can't do it.
Start smaller.
We've just seen how putting a newbie in the position works. Not well.
Now, would Oprah do a better job, feel less entitled and stay off twitter, probably , but again, let's get some experience first.
The current speculation is fueled because there are so few other qualified candidates.
Who actually is the Democratic front runner for example. I have no idea.
GOP alternatives.
Marco - not really
It only gets worse from there anyway.
At least the current occupant is entertaining, if nothing else (there is nothing else btw)
She is worth way more that the POTUS and earned it without a silver spoon.
Maybe I should reconsider.
The fact that some Democrats are keen to see Oprah Winfrey run is a sign of a couple of things: first, desperation, but also the lack of direction and cohesion that the party so desperately needs. It would be a mistake for the Democrats to try to return to the so-called golden past, and it would be a mistake to look for a rich celebrity to get rid of Trump. What is called for, I think, is a highly progressive platform, and someone who can articulate it. That someone is not Oprah Winfrey.
4
I think Oprah is a very intelligent woman whose effectiveness would be really felts at the UN. I am still hoping that a woman who spent 8 years in the White House and knows Washington and how it works very well and is respected worldwide will run. Michelle Obama would be my choice for President.
2
In bringing together brains and charisma, Oprah's great for responding to Mr. Trump who, hopefully, will be out of the picture soon enough. In the interim, we Democrats have to focus on our vision, detailed programs, and congressional candidates. This to respond to the Republicans riding on the brute's coat tails!
I could accept her as a candidate if she first got her feet wet as a governor, senator, or house member. Even a mayoral position would get her in the door. But simply as a personality? Not a chance.
1
I love Oprah, but noprah! This country doesn't have the time for another inexperienced TV celebrity to learn about how government works and how Washington really operates. Oprah can best serve the country by openly supporting candidates that espouse the beliefs she so beautifully expressed at the Golden Globe Awards.
4
This Democratic is horrified, not giddy! Have we learned nothing? Can we somehow learn to separate entertainment and government? This is a symptom of a society that is dysfunctional and lazy.
There are qualified African American women I would whole heartedly encourage and support in a run for the White House. Oprah Winfrey as articulate and well-intentioned as she is, is not one of them.
This is ridiculous.
3
>There are qualified African American women I would whole heartedly encourage and support in a run for the White House.
For example, Barbara Lee would be great. Donna Edwards would be fine too.
1
You it the nail on the head with one sentence -- "This is a symptom of a society that is dysfunctional and lazy."
So she stands up and beats her chest with a war cry to her beloved. We've just seen that with Trump and look at what we've got. "A little man needs a big man" so said Sherlock Holmes and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was right. We need world leaders not TV stars who can say a few tough words to an adoring crowd. She wouldn't stand a chance debating the ever skillful President Chi or sly Putin.
Please no more reality stars in the Oval Office. Are there no other more deserving candidates that the Dems will put forth before her? This is madness. We already have enough problems with another narcissist in chief who is way out of his league. Just because you make a good speech does not entitle you to Presidency.
1
The last thing this country needs is a woman who cannot even discipline her self control or her diet.
True. We already have a man who isn't able to do that.
You sound like Trump. On that note, since Trump has a habit to belittling women on the basis of how they would fare in a beauty contest, I am eagerly awaiting his frank assessment of Rebekah Mercer. I doubt, however, that a Trumpian appraisal of his chief benefactor will be forthcoming. While I do not believe in vampires, I think Ms. Mercer's smile is rather chilling.
I really think you should elect Mickey Mouse as president. He definitely has good family values. Your ruling class can just spend some money on some animators if they want him to say something else. Everyone in the country knows who he is so maybe you can reduce the amount of advertising during the campaign. Alternatively you could become a serious member of the international community again. Your choice of course.
3
While she lacks Trump's malevolence she is no more qualified to be President than he is.
More significantly, Winfrey's "avatar of optimism" persona, while popular with many, is pathological when it comes to creating a more egalitarian society. The approach she pushes is to demand nothing from our political system or from powerful people and institutions. That's poison. Her approach is that we make demands only of ourselves. While we should make of ourselves, we must make demands of the system. Failure to do so is to elevate the desire for social comfort over the need for social justice.
As Nicole Aschoff wrote in The Guardian yesterday: "Oprah's stories, and others like them, are able to 'manage our desires' only because they appeal to deep fantasies about how we want to live our lives." In contrast to the stories Winfrey passes off, a better politics requires that "new stories must feature collective demands that provide a critical perspective on the real limits to success in our society [as well as fostering] a vision of life that does fulfill the desire for self-actualization." Winfrey is not up to that task.
2
I really hope this foolish speculation dies down soon, maybe when the next mass shooting takes over the headlines in a week or two. I like Oprah Winfrey a lot, but she has absolutely no experience governing, and we can see right now what that leads to. Sure, she's about a thousand times more intelligent than Trump, and more compassionate, educated, capable, competent, and so on. But that lack of experience can be crippling.
We should be focusing on taking over Congress in 2018. When we've gotten that done, we should be looking for presidential candidates for 2020 from among governors, senators, and possibly even mayors (not de Blasio).
We should not have Oprah Winfrey, Dwayne Johnson, Beyoncé, Snoop Doggy Dog, and a dozen other celebrities running for president. They're all fine people but they would have no idea what to do once in office.
If that winds up happening, as it well might because I know America is very, very dumb, then I will be convinced that democracy in America is basically over, and our empire has fallen for good.
1
Between the cable-news futile (but self-serving) hyperventilation over Trump's mental state and the sudden outbreak of Winfrey fever, Monday, Jan. 8, may go down as one of the silliest days in American political history.
Being an arrogant, idiotic narcissist is not grounds for Amendment 25 removal from office, much less impeachment. Sorry to say, but there it is.
A rousing speech to a roomful of showbiz elites does not qualify a person for president. Is the Democrats' answer to the GOP's TV personality their own TV personality? (Remember that this is the person who gave us Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz.)
I suppose that if the choice must be either DJT or OW (unfortunate initials), well then, Oprah it is. But is this the best we can do? Is our political system and common culture so bankrupt that we can see only entertainers?
Neil Postman wrote a classic media criticism book years ago -- in the Reagan years -- called "Amusing Ourselves to Death." This isn't what Postman had in mind, but this political moment gives his title a whole new meaning.
Yesterday wasn't just one of the silliest days in US politics. Maybe it was also one of the saddest.
6
Oprah would be miles ahead of last movie star who had Alzheimers, President Reagan, who is the Republican hero! But of course, she is a woman so her talents are discredited.
1
This is completely nuts. Have these people learned nothing from the Hillary debacle? Believe me, up here in Bernie land we will not be supporting another celebrity with no political connections, skills or coattails for president. Had enough of that.
5
This topic will last one more day. Taking bets.
4
If Jessie Ventura & Schwarzenegger could be effective governors........why couldn't Oprah be an effective President? I forgot to mention Sony Bono as mayor of Palm Springs & member of Congress.
1
Oprah is a self-made entertainment billionaire. Self-made. Billionaire. Unlike Trump. Kudoes to her in that role.
However, she's the queen of pseudo-science. An intellectual lightweight. Not a credible candidate for the presidency in my mind. Unlike Trump, she would likely surround herself with the best advice, but what happens when the old "autism-vaccine" canard comes up? She's on the record for many of these issues and on the wrong side to boot.
6
0prah is a self-made entertainment billionaire. Self-made. Billionaire."
Why is this wealth metric even a positive when considering a candidate? They have wasted their lives chasing a surplus of dollars they don't need for reasons usually deep and dark.
The acquisition of vast sums of money isn't a positive, it is a negative illustrating insubstantial ideals and petty selfish concerns. Many are barking up the wrong tree and you'd think we would have learned this by now.
As much as I admired Ms. Winfrey's statement at the Golden Globes, it was about a single issue. We would have to know much more about her political views to make an effective judgement.
As much as I admire Ms. Winfrey's story - truly one of self-made business success - it is no more of a qualification to be President than Mr. Trump's wildly false belief that he is a self-made business success.
Finally, I wholeheartedly agree with former OGE Director Walter Shaub, who said, "May I suggest respectfully to any billionaires considering a 2020 run–whether as an R, a D or otherwise–that you do some soul searching to make sure you are willing to divest your financial interests and make that commitment in advance? Otherwise, you’ll be part of the problem."
I believe we need voices like Ms. Winfrey's in 2018 and beyond. I believe we need the resources she can contribute. But we don't need more celebrity Presidential candidates.
4
It amazes me the level of rancor and almost condescension aimed at Oprah, and by democrats. Since when did "legislative experience" count for anything? Maybe Nancy Pelosi needs to revisit the survey numbers showing existing politicians at record lows. As for Rebecca Katz the strategist admonishing us to hash out a compelling agenda, how about "Register Now To Vote In November"? Or, "Beat Trump". Or "Take Back The House Of Representatives". With her strategy we will lose again. Wake up, and have a strategy to register people every week, every month, don't wait and forget a compelling agenda. We cannot enact any agenda without the votes. Compassion, empathy, an interest in reading and learning, these are leadership qualities we badly as a nation need. Oprah has my vote anytime. If she does not want to run, okay. But maybe her network could produce a weekly show on registering to vote and using her Twitter handle to reinforce the need to register.
"With no obvious front-runner for the 2020 campaign, Democrats appear likely to spend the next few years grinding through internal disagreements over policy and identity in a long contest for the nomination."
Why do the Democrats not have a front-runner for 2020? Why can they not resolve any internal disagreements and unite to regain control of the House, Senate, and the presidency? Given the current disaster of our government, this should be a no-brainer. They simply have to come up with candidates who: are experienced in governing, have a clear plan for improving the lives of Americans, have a solid grasp of global issues, understand and appreciate the checks and balances of our government, have an understanding of and respect for the US Constitution, would work with and be respected by our allies, and are sane. In other words, anyone who is the exact opposite of the current president. There are numerous people who could fulfill these requirements in the Democratic party, yet we are talking about Oprah Winfrey as a potential candidate? This is a very sad time for the United States.
2
Please, please, please, no more "Celebrity Presidents"- or Senators, for that matter! Have we learned nothing from the past few years?
Yes, Oprah could probably win any election she entered, because we're all so star-struck, and far too many of us are not smart enough to make the distinction between what makes a successful entertainer and an effective governor.
It chills me to read things like, "She started with nothing, and now she's a billionaire, running an entertainment empire", or, "She may not know anything about the job, but she'll surround herself with smart people who do".
Sorry about the caps, but, THESE ARE NOT QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE JOB OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!
We need a canny, experienced and respected man or woman in this, most critical, job, not a talk show hostess, for God's sake. Get the stars out of your eyes, and let's start talking about some of the people who can walk into that office and pick up the pieces, without having to have the Constitution read to them.
Thank you.
4
No. Just no. If Ms. Winfrey is interested in politics, she should use her considerable wealth and influence to assist with campaigns for candidates she believes in. If she really wants to roll up her sleeves, she should run for lower office, not the presidency.
5
In this climate, anyone who can put together a complete sentence that's not about their own ego is on the "plausible" list. Ms. Winfrey is inspiring, but she has surrounded herself with snake-oil salesmen (almost literally), so my vote would be "no". There are plenty of democrat lawmakers who could develop their skill set and resume in two years' time.
1
Leaves it to the NYTimes and most other media to make this a story. The media cares about the "story" above all else.
But they do do some excellent investigative reporting, and they are all we have, so we have to support them anyways.
2
I'm a Democrat, and I keep hitting the snooze button on most of the leading contenders for 2020. Love Joe Biden, but will he be too old? Only he knows. It's time to find a rallying figure that can push this country forward, not with hairy socialist prescriptions or aging machine Dems, but with somebody who can articulate who we are, where we are going, and how we're going to get there -- and how we're going to get the votes to get there. Otherwise, none of it matters.
3
The real question is what kind of leadership the nation will need to repair itself after four years of a morally corrupt, myopic, isolationist administration. The domestic and foreign harm that has already been done, violating every goal in the preamble to the Constitution, will take political will to repair. But it will also take an extremely strong moral leader who garners widespread support. Few of the potential politicians mentioned as candidates have the ability to speak to what is good in people and to rally a majority to a cause. While Oprah does, she may not have the deep knowledge to run a large organization, to deal skillfully with foreign policy and foreign leaders, to master tough relations with Congress. The prospect of Oprah is only a message that there might be someone out there who, like her, has the ability to call Americans to a higher purpose. God knows, after four years of government by thugs, we will need it.
2
My reaction: I fear our problem is a tendency to rush to judgment through soundbites. Oprah may be an “avatar of optimism” while Trump is a “pompous pugilist.” Neither assessment does a president make. If I had to choose between the two tomorrow, I’d pick Oprah in a heartbeat. But I don’t have to choose tomorrow. And would I reject Oprah just because she’s an entertainer? Absolutely not. To do so would be as foolish as a reader’s comment here today, “Actors pretend and fake it for a living.” I’d prefer Oprah in the White House over a voter who thinks at that level in the voting booth. It’s a long road to 2020 and, indeed, Oprah would have to prove her policy chops to us. In the meantime, she at least has the Democratic Party starting to think seriously and talk about what kind of candidate we would like for 2020. That is a good thing if that is all she does. Meanwhile, let’s not rule out anyone who reads books, is actually smart, cares deeply about people, and has a moral compass.
1
All empires have their shelf life. It is becoming more and more clear that the US empire is on its way out. In a country whose major export is information and research I find it abhorrent that they cannot find good statesmen to run their country. There is a clown in there now, and now they want to bring this person who cannot get past her obsession with controlling her weight: today she is this weight and tomorrow she is that.
Ronald Reagan was an entertainer and became president after having run the State of California for two terms: it gave him some sense of what it is to run a government.
USA needs some good statesmen and not entertainers to run the country. Entertainers have their place and let's keep them where they belong. Trump should serve as a warning.
4
The Democrat bench of potential Presidential candidates is so weak the Democrats are falling all over themselves to latch onto a non-politician because someone wrote her a good speech to read. And she can read.
2
She is perfect, it could be a landslide, let's do it.
1
She has no experience in governing, and thus it would be one inexperienced celebrity against another. What with racism and sexism being prevalent in America, she would lose to the white guy. Let's not do it.
Electing a no-experience TV star to the highest office in the land, sounds like a great idea, what could go wrong?
3
The job of President of the United States of America, and the qualifications required to be one, start from a very simple premise:
We all came to America,
We formed States,
and,
We must be United.
The candidate who demonstrates they understand this, and can live and act by it, gets my serious consideration.
Americans never cease to amaze me, always looking for simplistic solutions to complex problems and the pre-occupation with the "cult of personality". I might suggest, before one considers another television personality as the leader of the country, fight to remove the enormous amount of money and its influence out of American politics and you will start to get quality candidates running for office, not actors who just happen to have a name that everyone recognizes.
There are many out there who don't consider running because of the enormous amount of money required and the influence it demands, just to get into the game. Start with that, the other stuff is getting ridiculous.
2
Why not? At least she is not afraid to question things. The Democrats still has not put together a message and though they wrap themselves around the recent victory. They threw me under the bus 2xs and forgot about us hardworking americans. I consider myself and independent now and the D's has no message to excite me. Go Oprah and when Donald talks about locker room talk remind him that he didn't run for high school President and a true leader would not bad mouth everyone how questions him.
1
As much as I like and admire Oprah, I hope she does NOT run. If it comes to it, I would vote for her (over any Republican).
But the truth is, we need people with goverment (and governing) experience. No more famous celebrities please !
13
Oprah is fabulous and a magnificent cultural icon, her heart and mind are in the right place, but I want the Democratic party to field professional candidates qualified to be President when they arrive in office, not novice celebrities. Obama was the right candidate for the times, but though I supported him vigorously I was concerned he was a little green for the job. But, we needed a serious thoughtful person who could build bridges; the opposite of Bush - a "not Bush". Now, I believe as great as Oprah would be were she to rise through a few ranks and gain experience in government function, I believe we need a "not Trump" in that we must have a full re-set in insisting the candidates for President are seasoned veterans of governing, with advanced experience and working knowledge of political systems of leadership, coalition building, responsibility in legislative function, world geopolitical savvy -
so many things that holding at least a few high levels of public office would be the only way to train for. Oprah, we love you and we need you; how about a state-level run for something interesting? I am not ready for a big headed sports star or posturing musician to be the next great idea unwitting voters saddle either party with as candidates; this must end.
4
The idea of Opera Winfrey as the Democratic candidate in the 2020 Presidential Election needs to be quashed before it gains traction. Oh, she certainly seems like a nice lady, and we would hardly begrudge her the pecuniary benefits of the celebrity status she has achieved in the insipid universe of Daytime Television. One could speculate as to her possible Vice Presidential pick -- Judge Judy? I do not wish to suffer through another Celebrity candidate -- not even if it is Al Franken. It is time to get serious.
6
Her name is Oprah, not Opera.
1
Al Franken was a serious senator who was thrown under the bus by well-meaning but overly zealous co-senators. Based on his record, he could be an excellent President if he could survive the campaign. But no thanks to Kristen Gillibrand and company, he couldn't. (Who else will the Democratic party pre-sacrifice on an altar of smug moral superiority? Once again the supposed good guys take out one of our own while the bad guys are standing on the sidelines laughing. )
2
OMG, I misspelled her first name. It was not intentional. It may well have been sub-conscious, however, as Opera is important to me and television isn't. But as I would not want to see Oprah Winfrey leading the Democratic ticket in 2020, neither would I want to see Renee Fleming running for President.
We have, as a nation, a major problem insofar as we seem to rely on "Celebrity" surrogates to mediate between ourselves and serious public issues. Pop Culture is an example of what sober Marxism would call "False Consciousness," or what the hardly-sober Marxist Guy Debord would call "living vicariously." If a Presidential election is reduced to choosing our preference between two celebrities, Democracy is doomed.
The issue isn't "could she beat trump", as she certainly would. The issue is whether the cult of personality should "trump" experience in basic governance. Having PAs cater to your every whim is not governing, no matter how "nice" and introspective the "queen bee" may be. Plus, the Oprah push this early undermines the possible candidacy of women who have paid their dues serving Americans through the trials of actual governance. I've never bought into "Hollywood elite" as a pejorative, but after this week, I just may.
4
Personally, I'm against a prescriptive Democratic Party that decides from the top who can run. Or a party where a self-appointed faction becomes the moderator of party orthodoxy. I think it's fine if Oprah wants to throw her hat in the political ring. She's smart, sane, and accomplished. Also, the bar set by Republicans for political office, administration jobs, and judicial appointments is incredibly low, so it's almost impossible to do worse.
I also think Oprah might be better served by running for a lesser office to demonstrate her competence as a politician. She might do very well. She might even the best candidate in any given race. But successful business people or reality TV stars don't automatically make effective politicians. The crucible of a campaign and some time in office can be far more telling.
The one, absolute, most important Democratic imperative is for the party to close ranks after the primary process and wholeheartedly support our ultimate candidates. There are no rewards for second place, or for petulant protest votes, or for disengagement because polls suggest a forgone conclusion. Such thinking probably gave us Bush Jr in 2000 and DEFINITELY contributed to Trump in 2016.
Never again!
6
She gave a sharp truth speech. She's a remarkable person, a cultural force and leader. But one thing the country is learning is that experience in government is good. You say, what about Obama, the brief Senator? Well, yes, but he had years in local and state politics before that and came to wealth writing a couple of books, not selling products on TV. Not trashing Oprah at all, she's an extraordinary fine person, telling the truth wonderfully in film and in person. But another celebrity candidate would maintain the distance between presenting leadership and the scut work of long efforted relationships and negotiations and listening listening listening that goes into real political leadership.
The value of women's leadership may be about to be appreciated. Millenia late. But there are many experienced, very smart and highly principled women in office now who could lead the country with the breadth and depth of knowledge, experience and character we desperately need.. Amy Klobuchar leads my list, followed closely by Claire McCaskill, Debbie Stabenow, Elizabeth Warren. I hold back on Kirsten Gillibrand and Kemala Harris, waiting to get a measure of opportunism in their current prominance.
Who knows? Oprah may be the future? And she might well arrest the current race to the bottom by character alone. It may be unfair and even misjudgment to shrink from the celebrity door to the presidency. But media success is not a proven training for world leadership.
3
At least you suggest some alternatives to the candidate you oppose.
Not one of them could win. I like Claire and Debbie, but neither would survive the trashing and bashing. I don't like Elizabeth or Kirsten, and neither would survive the trashing and bashing. Amy and Kemala? No chance.
Oprah is a survivor. She has a chance.
1
...and I wholeheartedly agree with your list, pro and con.
All Oprah can do is muddy the Democratic waters and insure that Trump is reelected in 2020 in the same way that voters for Sanders put The Donald into the White House last year.
Sure, she can give a good speech as well as Obama (or, for that matter, Reagan) could, but so what?
Demos need a candidate who has experience in office and who can actually appeal to the entire country. I'm thinking of Biden, or better still, John Hickenlooper, Governor of Colorado. Besides being a successful businessman before entering politics (Hickenlooper pretty well pioneered craft beers in Denver) Hickenlooper has been a great politician who is able to work across the aisle with hard-rock conservatives from Colorado Springs and eastern Colorado. He is progressive, charismatic...and young enough that he won't die in the Oval Office of old age or dementia.
Democrats laughed when Trump announced his candidacy. They should not make that mistake again with another entertainer.
2
So Reagan went from actor to President. Trump from charlatan to President. Could a black woman, self-made, beloved and a bigger brand, do the same? Not sure. She's smarter than Reagan and Trump combined, but we also generally like her. Why ruin a great success story with the stench of American politics?
What would really happen is the true misogyny and racism in America would rear it's head even though Oprah appears to be above it right now. Why would we want to do that to a true American success story. Today she unites people. She has amassed her wealth without getting a head start as Trump did. Why tear all that down?
3
Reagan went from actor to governor to president - you missed a few years in there
Actually it’s possible we should be talking about electing Oprah’s speechwriter.
6
"Hey, the Republicans did something incredibly destructive and stupid, showing how they have no idea that serving in office or familiarity with the constitution and how government works. They have made a complete shambles of domestic and international policy, and in one short year have destroyed America's standing in the world... let's do it, too!" No. Please god, no. I love Oprah. I love her values, I love her story, I would love to be her bffl. But please, no more celebrities. Even Reagan served as governor (and before that, union officer hard as that is to believe now). No Cuban, no Winfrey, no Rock (The, or Kid). As we're seeing from the daily/hourly disasters in the WH, you have to know what you're doing. You have to know national and geo politics. Again, Oprah, if you're reading this, please be my friend. But please do NOT run. It's just not enough to be a stable genius (for real).
5
It's funny, but she actually fits the GOP "bill" of "successful business person" far more so than Trump. However, her main image is as a celebrity. She would need to do a lot of stump speeches and interviews in which she transition out of that role into a policy maker. I'm against a "celebrity" candidate. We already have an absolute failure "celebrity" in the White House now. But I'm not against a person shedding their "celebrity" persona and demonstrating they can be a strong policy expert if the person can do it. The current "celebrity" in the White House has proven a total failure at that.
2
Here are a few names for the next President - not particularly glamorous, charismatic, or wealthy, but smart, progressive, experienced: either of the two Senators from Oregon - Ron Wyden, Jeff Merkley - Sherrod Brown, maybe even Hickenlooper from Colorado, then there's Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand - although I'm a bit disappointed in Harris and Gillibrand for their treatment of Franken. I'm definitely NOT interested in a celebrity with no political experience.
6
There is no question that Oprah Winfrey would bring an enormous and broad appeal to a Democratic Party that she herself realizes should be deeper than a female demographic and broader than conventional feminism. I remain very skeptical of her own candidacy for reasons that remain controversial among some Democrats, namely, that the party desperately needs to re-develop a very broad appeal to its historic base among working people of all backgrounds--and especially to re-acquaint itself with men. A minority candidate can fill this bill and that includes my favorites, Javier Becerra and the Castro brothers. But that needs to be done, as I see it.
Ms. Winfrey may be a good human being with the right heart but that still does not make her qualified to lead the most powerful nation on the planet. Our problems are complex and many, and as such require someone with a lot of experience in governance and/or global affairs. I am sorry but I just don't see that in Oprah.
1
When did presidential candidates become figures of change? I was born in 1969, and I recall that we assessed candidates mostly on ability and character. Of course, we assessed their political platforms as well.
I am not sure that the country is that much worse than it was in the 80's. I do think it is more twittered. Social media makes every day feel like a crisis.
When I was in college, we asked ourselves, 'who is the best person to lead this nation?" We did not ask, "who is the best person to CHANGE this nation?"
I don't know what "change" is. I do know what socialist revolution is. I am not a revolutionary. I am in the 1% and happily so. But I fear the word "change" more than the word "revolution," because to my mind, change is just about social media addiction.
Huh? Well, as long as YOU don’t run for president...
I was a functioning adult in the '80s. Trust me, please, this IS worse.
The presidency is a daunting combination of challenges in the best of times. Whoever follows Trump will also be tasked with repairing the extensive damage to our democracy, our society, and our institutions that are being wrought by current POTUS. And with doing this amid an increasingly polarized political community. NOT the job for a political lightweight, with no political capital on either side of the aisle.
And let's not forget that through the years, Oprah has espoused, or allowed her surrogates to espouse, some very dodgy health supplements and regimens unsupported ( or even contradicted) by scientific evidence.
No. We will need a leader who is grounded in, and who can restore our respect for, objective truth and facts, all the while reminding us of the shared values that used to make America great.
3
If Oprah runs and wins, it will be because of the same reasons that Trump won, their "...preternatural ability to communicate powerfully and authentically..." whether or not the subject of their communication is valid or true. They are both good at firing up their base; as was another infamous leader in the recent past who shares only the speaking ability with Oprah and Trump. If Hillary had the public speaking ability that Oprah and Trump share, she would have won. If Oprah (or anyone else) wants the Presidency, they should start out lower on the ladder like all the others and get experience. Otherwise we get what we have now.
1
What we have in this country is a secret government run by oligarchs, corporations and big money. They probably will decide who runs, with the help of the evil force that is gripping us, the Republican Party. In addition, too many Americans lack an education, especially in history, and they have no capacity for critical thinking. There's the problem.
With Ms. Winfrey, most of the responses have been knee-jerk reactions against people going into politics from show business. I'm not endorsing her, but why not hear what she has to say first, before rejecting her.
This knee-jerk reaction to Ms. Winfrey shows a lack of critical thinking. In addition, if she becomes president, or anyone else, we forgot that we can steer that president by our votes, another fact Americans seemed to have forgotten about, the potential power they have. They seem to have given it away to opportunists, who they themselves vote for.
There is a grave problem in the land of "We the people."
2
Perfectly put ....... Simple straight well thought out opinion, I whole heartedly agree! You just left out one very powerful group. I know you know which group that IS!
how about NO.
Nothing against Ms. Winfrey, but I feel that the next election needs to be a full throated and unambiguous rejection of the Trump era, not an extension of it or even a "better version" of it. Despite the current occupant of the White House, the notion that "anyone can do this job" is a fallacy that is damaging our nation on an hourly basis.
12
Just what America needs; more personality and less policy. Not.
Very successful billionaire entertainer but what does she know and where does she stand on trade, the growth of the military and nuclear capability and use, military intervention around the world, single payer health care, immigration, taxation, and on and on.
5
This is all a quick reaction to the Golden Globes speech, sure to seem less exciting in coming days. But...
If she ran it would be another rich celebrity with little experience in government. Whether one likes or dislikes Trump, a large part of his problem is his lack of experience. Oprah would have the appearance of the same problems, unless she has good advisors all around her. It might work help if she would put together a short list of prospective nominees for each major post, before the campaign, so we can see what her administration would look like.
Then there's the issue of divestment of all her assets; she would have the appearance of the same Trump problems if she retained assets as Pres. And I can't imagine how one could separate her name, a large part of her brand, from Oprah the President.
I'd prefer someone who knows a lot about government, is not a lightening rod like Hillary, and is somewhere toward center on most things. I believe Oprah would add a great deal by supporting such a person.
Honestly is this whole Oprah 2020 thing something made up by Trump and company? It was a really good speech, who's message, I am afraid, is getting drowned out by this election talk. Deflect, deflect....
2
I cannot say for sure whether I believe Oprah as a person would be a good candidate for the presidency, but I do know this. It was so good to have someone I admire give a coherent positive speech that made me feel hopeful about the future. I used to feel that way all the time with Obama, I always felt his heart was in the right place and he had a positive vision for the average American. I do not feel that way these days.
2
I want the Democrats to choose someone who knows how to run a multi-trillion dollar organization like the federal government. Who knows about government and how it works. What it can do. Oprah, and many other high profile people, are, well, high profile. But that doesn't mean they can run the federal government.
3
Suggestions?
Oprah is not just a "TV star". She's brilliant, multi-faceted, a people person extraordinaire and politically astute. She's rich, powerful and ambitious and loves America, Americans and the spotlight. She's generous, and promotes the entrepreneurial spirit; she's a raging capitalist. She is fair and frank and loved by many. And, without mentioning the obvious attributes, she's essentially, the anti Trump. People are calling for a LEADER in the Democratic party- WHY not Her? Oh, because America is "not ready"....... I for one am ready for a strong intelligent leader who has the savvy, compassion and strength to pull off the presidency. Unless we welcome a parliamentary system in this country, we will continue to be plagued with celebrity presidents "The most powerful MAN in the world"
1
An inspiring speech does not a president make. Oprah Winfrey has built up her media empire successfully and relatively unrestrained, similar in a way to Donald Trump. It is obvious that Donald Trump chafes at the constraints imposed on him by our system of divided government, and the intense media scrutiny that comes with the job of president. There's no guarantee that Oprah Winfrey would not feel the same way. The President of the United States has far less personal freedom than a billionaire entrepreneur.
Also if she ran, Oprah Winfrey would encounter virulent racism and sexism. Our society allows African-American entertainers and athletes (if they keep their noses down and don't do or say anything controversial), but President of the United States is an entirely different matter. There was extreme resentment in some quarters that Barack Obama as an African-American was president, while most members of the Privileged White Christian Men would never achieve that status.
Democrats would do well to discard this fantasy and focus on a serious individual with government experience.
3
Considering Oprah is a reflection of what Democrats think about their current crop of possible candidates; a sign of desperation, the (lack of) importance of political experience, the attraction to wealth. Oprah is already living the life that Obama has been building for himself, and is enjoying.
1
Do we really want to live in a time where we, as a society, are so inept that we are only capable of electing people who are successful entertainers. Oprah is an extremely successful media personality and business woman but that shouldn't be the bar we are setting for president of this country. Surely there are still individuals who have worked in politics that are savvy enough to get our society of complacent TV zombies off the coach and to the polls. If not, our country is doomed to have TV stars for president and elections that are pre-determined by social media advertising.
3
If the thought of another celebrity being in office, without any real experience is unpleasing then why or how did Trump win? It appears he falls into that description.
Oprah Winfrey is a very talented women, people could learn a thing or two from her. she is an idol for women and representative for the voiceless. It's almost as if people are afraid of a female in power.
100% supporter
This article begins with a strong thumbs up for Oprah's candidacy from her longtime partner and ends with an all caps thumbs down from her best friend. Come 2020, who knows whether Trump will be in the Oval Office, which party will control Congress, where the stock markets will be and the level of civil unrest around the world. Add to all that a Democratic Party in disarray and any attempt at presidential prognostication seems silly at best.
I guess I'm old-fashioned, and I think Oprah is a lovely lady, but I would prefer to have somebody who knows something about government in the White House (for a change). Fighting one powder puff with another powder puff doesn't seem to me worthy of the Democratic Party. Let's nominate somebody with a more relevant resume and hope that Oprah is public-spirited enough to stump for him -- or her...
2
So Dems think Trump isn't qualified to be president but Oprah somehow is? That doesn't make sense to me.
5
Articles like these lead to the problem we have now. Please stop.
12
Cease and desist?
1
Another Ronald Reagan with a female dressing?
Dear Democratic Party -
please don't shoot yourself in the foot again. the key to victory is to STAY AWAY from abortion, gay rights, women's rights, and other hot button social issues. and STAY AWAY from the liberal Hollywood types.......EMBRACE the deplorables and ELIZABETH WARREN!
3
If Oprah runs will she give all Americans Oprah's Favorite Things?
2
The Peter Principle states that "in a hierarchy, an individual tends to rise to his or her level of incompetence".
Why doesn't she run for the Senate or the House, instead?
============================================
What's wrong with Oprah seeking public office at a lower level?
In the Senate or House she might shine, adding interest to govenrment.
I think the real problem for the Democrats is boredom. Obama was no drama. We can' have bored, any more. The media, including the NY Times will not allow boring leaders, to grab their attention, any long.
Now, we have US of T, United States of Trump. Let's learn from this to stop leaders from boredom. But ask Oprah to humbly seek a lesser position.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
Why should she "humbly seek a lesser position?"
Because she's a woman?
What position could be low enough for a woman, Harry?
Dear Pecan,
Oprah Winfrey has zero political experience. We put Trump in office with zero experience, and now, look what we got.
I suggest that Oprah might enter politics in Congress. Congress is not a lowly place to be. She might be able to increase interest in Congress, by her presence, there. Other stars might also consider Congress, to lift our interest in politics... Thanks
1
It hard to evaluate Oprah Winfrey as a candidate and potential president, when even George W. Bush looks pretty good right now.
6
Oprah would appoint qualified people to her Cabinet. She is not afraid of experts.
She would not be afraid to run on issues that scare the lily-livered: get rid of the Electoral College; get rid of gerrymandering; end the war on education and make America smart again.
8
How much does this "story" highlight the problems with our society? A celebrity that has never shown an interest in running has commanded a mountain of attention this week. (recognizing that I too clicked and commented).
7
Admittedly, this is a relatively new story. Still, I'm experiencing a cringe-inducing sense of deja vu. I see you've assigned Amy Chozick to cover a potential presidential candidate. Amy, who followed former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's every move from the time she left the State Department in 2013 until Election Day 2016. Does this mean we're going to have Oprah on the front pages of the Times for the next three years?
Does it also mean she'll be given hundreds of pages of free publicity, as both Clinton and Donald Trump were, while Bernie Sanders was largely ignored?
I will always believe that the intense coverage of Trump by the Times and other mainstream media gave him credibility he would have otherwise never enjoyed.
And this was at a time when the paper was cutting staff and closing bureaus.
The editors of the Times play a major role in setting the nation's electoral agenda.
Oprah is an exceptional woman with apparently good character and good intentions. I admire her immensely. However, she has no experience in government, not to mention foreign policy.
There are a number of good women and men with experience in these fields who are working now to save the country from the ignorant and impulsive Mr. Trump. I hope the Times will give these public servants the coverage we need and they deserve. And if Oprah does decide to run for office, I hope she will pay for her advertisements. I'm still grieving the loss of copy editors because of budget cuts.
7
Think of how potential candidates interact with the people working for them. Are they nice behind the screens? Are they high maintenance? Do they need to switch to nice-mode while campaigning or is it their nature? With simple interviews, we can weed out our Trumps ahead of time.
1
Liberals -- especially those in Hollywood -- who see Oprah as the perfect antidote to Trump are just proving once again that they don't "get" Trump and have no understanding of the powerful forces that swept him into office. They think he won because he's a glitzy TV personality. But only a relative minority of Trump supporters actually like his glitzy lifestyle, his reality-TV past, his snarling put-downs of those who oppose him, or his trigger-happy tweet fingers. They came to him on issues. To the apparent surprise of the liberal establishment, a lot of Americans actually *are* concerned about job loss, our disintegrating military, illegal immigration, deterioriation of traditional morality, and the threat of ISIS. As a lifelong liberal who is not a follower of all-things-New-York-City (yes the two things can co-exist), Trump had essentially no presence in my psychic universe for the first 64 years of my life. Then one day in 2016 I heard him speak about why he was running for President, and in that one speech he absolutely nailed 5 issues that had been bothering me about America's direction.
3
Just curious. Did you notice the con man aspects like Trump University, the fact that he had no realistic solutions, his many business failures, or his lack of any substance? I am concerned about those things, too, but Trump was never the guy who would do any thing about any of them, nor was he ever.
We certainly "get" trump, which is why he lost the popular vote. The trump has done nothing about job loss nor the threat of ISIS, although he claims to have made major accomplishments in both areas. And not all of us buy into the "traditional morality" philosophy which we see as primarily red meat for the base and a trampling on those things we perceive as rights--controlling our own reproductive destinies and forming loving adult relationships with those we choose. So he "nailed 5 things" for you? Much of his campaign rhetoric has turned out to be lies. Wait until his republican minions decimate social security and medicare for you. Give me a call in a few years when you can truly feel the repercussions of what you helped make possible.
Actually, there is a clear front-runner on the democratic side for the 2020 presidential election. It's Bernie Sanders. But, considering that Amy Chozick co-authored this piece, I'm not surprised by the mis-information. The Times has been and continues to be desperate to prevent the progressive revolution in this country. They don't even want Oprah. Not because she is a TV star, instead of a seasoned politician, but because she is too far to the left.
Oprah is the polar opposite of Trump and I expect that all of the corporate news media outlets will be terrified to support her because she will be a true threat to the entrenched interests that have been controlling American domestic and foreign policy for the past century, at least.
2
Old Bernie again? The red-faced, finger-jabbing, non-Democrat? The woman hater who's done nothing in his many years in Congress other than slurp at the public trough? Another Russia lover like Trump, with whom he's got a LOT in common: anger, a tendency to interrupt women, legal troubles, etc.
I like OprahWinfrey, and her speech at the Golden Globes.. but in the context of the 2020 election, she is really the next shiny object for the Dems. What about an already seasoned Democratic African American woman? Kamala Harris comes to mind.
5
@stbch,
You choose a candidate based on skin color and sex? Is this a great party or what?
2
Save us from Oprah Winfrey. We don't need another unqualified person in the White House. The Democratic Party needs to look into their own ranks and select someone with a proven political track record.
Yes, Ms. Winfrey is genuinely successful as a billlioniare two times over. But what does anyone know about her? Winfrey made her staff sign confidentiality agreements never to disclose anything about her.
Democrats should look at up-and-coming politicians such as Cory Booker or go into the vault and bring back Al Gore who will fight for the environment.
5
What a wonderful speech Oprah made!
“Oprah 2020” is an emotional reaction, soon to pass.
We need candidates from any parties which will be in existence at
that time, soon to be determined, the parties that is.
Then we need people who are knowledgeable of history, of economy,
who have had experience in government, who are logical, who are under seventy years of age, who are capable of civil discourse, whose ideas are based on fact, whose beliefs are based on morality, not just on religion, who will care about people of all color, of gender, of socioeconomic status.
Then, we will listen to debate, to civil discourse and make a decision.
3
What's with the car silliness? Lots of New Yorkers are quite happy to be able to live without one. Can we have some reliable public transportation instead?
Seriously, how about a chicken in every pot and a roof over everyone's head.
3
Oprah... a fascinating possibility, and that comes from the thoughts of a stodgy 76 year old white male! I bet the Repubs wish they had the possibility of replacing our Very Stable Genius Pres. with a REAL SUCCESSFUL BILLIONAIRE and HONEST businessperson!
If Ms. Winfrey did enter the fray we would require her to post policy positions, but even before that, she could stump for candidates in 2018!
I previously believed that "stardom" was anathema in politics, but seeing that 30-40% of the electorate was dumb enough to vote for VSG, maybe Democrats need fire to fight fire.
1
At first I scoffed at the idea of an Oprah Winfrey run for President, but desperate times call for desperate measures. Democrats are infamous for bringing knives to gun fights. If the repubs bring their 45 to the fight, then Oprah is would be the dems' AK-47.
3
The Presidency would be a step down for Oprah. She is a billionaire and already has multiple spheres of influence. Being president is no longer a big deal. However, should Oprah run and win, I volunteer to be the caretaker for her Montecito home (assuming it wasn't destroyed in the Thomas fire).
1
Since Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes and is still the most capable and qualified person to be president of United States the Democrat should choose the person who’s most feared by Republicans and that person is still Hillary Clinton. We should take back the stolen election and give it to the person who really won.
3
Why would a smart, popular person like Oprah destroy her career and popularity by getting into a mud slinging match with the GOP candidate (especially if that candidate is Trump). In no time, Trump will call her crooked Oprah, or something even worse!
Also, one rousing speech 'doth not make' a good president. Case in point, the rousing , misleading speeches of Trump in his campaign of 2016.
Notwithstanding, what I recall when a colleague of mine from the Middle East,( when we were grad students at Princeton), told me: "I will only believe the US is a true democracy, if and when they elect a black woman for President!
24
The irony of a grad student (gender & religion unspecified) from the Middle East lecturing America on true democracy is laughable. Down right bizarre.
2
In this day and age, it may take a celebrity to defeat a celebrity who happens to also be the most incompetent, narcissistic, unstable and corrupt president we've ever had. After all, his celebrity is what got him elected.
Whether we like it or not, the biggest celebrity usually wins. In 2016, Hillary Clinton was the biggest celebrity in the Democratic party and Donald Trump was the biggest celebrity in the Republican party. And between the two of them, Trump was arguably the biggest celebrity. The same holds true going back several elections.
Oprah may not have the experience of a traditional candidate but at least she's not crazy, evil or on Putin's payroll. And as the only person who is a bigger celebrity than Trump, she can win!
1
She is the most qualified Democrat to be president for sure.Maybe Meryl Streep for VP.
3
My error, Helen Mirren portrayed QE II not Ms. Streep.
Nah she'll be too busy running for PM or Queen or something British after all she's already portrayed QE II and Maggie Thatcher, she's qualified to be either no?
Democrats have "mixed emotions?" According to this piece, the Dems quoted all praised Oprah, but all, except Pelosi, were not favorable to her running for President. (The Pelosi quotes just showed me a politician saying nothing.)
I'm increasingly disappointed in the NYT focusing on Trump's tweets but not recognizing his threats to our democracy, our environment and his antagonism to all non-non tyrannical world leaders.
I fear an Oprah presidency because that'll set the NYT on another series of celebrity preoccupation.
3
"We'd see a WH briskly pursuing its goals." Heaven forbid such goals! Virtually, everything, from the appointees to erasing anything Obama leaves us wincing at the backward movement of government, driven by trump and the R's.
1
If anything, this current presidential mess should teach us that we need to look for an individual who knows government processes, knows the constitution, has served in public office and understands that the job is not a popularity contest.
10
Unless and until Democrats come up with an inspiring face and message from their own ranks I think Oprah is an excellent choice. No more boring policy wonks who can't win elections please. No more John Kerrys. No more Hillary Clintons. We need someone with a larger than life personality, a charismatic leader who can actually inspire people, because that is who and what we are up against. It doesn't work to keep repeating "we aren't Trump" like a mantra hoping it is a message because it isn't. Oprah already gave us her version of MAGA with her "New Day" speech at the Golden Globes. She was both uplifting and inspirational. She may have no political experience but that is almost a recommendation in Washington these days and at least Oprah is smart enough to surround herself with good, knowledgeable people. You have to think big. You have to think about mass marketing. You have to move and inspire people. If you can't do that please take your name off the ballot and find us somebody who can. It's 2018 (an election year) and Dems still have neither a face nor a message. Until they do I think Oprah should be seriously considered as a presidential candidate in 2020.
1
No more boring policy wonks. Well, Trump's certainly not that. It's working out really well, huh.
Democrats just don't get it. If you don't win the election nothing else matters. The catastrophe that occurred in 2016 should at least have taught us that. I'm not saying Oprah is the perfect candidate I am simply daring the Democrats to show me a better one from their own ranks. I hope they do but unfortunately I don't think they can. We need an answer to "Make America Greater Again." Which do you like better? "A New Day In America" (Oprah) or "A Better Deal?" (Schumer) If not Oprah who is the candidate for 2020? We need to start naming names please.
It should have been pointed out in this article that of course there's nothing new about show business or media celebrities going into politics, now, or in the past, for the better and for the worse. In fact, considering the blithe line from the quoted Democratic strategist that "our party tends to respect government and governing experience" in the face of the reality that Hillary Clinton's governmental service actually worked against her in the election, maybe an outsider is exactly what the Democrats need!
There comes a point where enough celebrity's is Enough! Honestly there are several very smart celebrities but considering what the Present is saying and going through could such indicate that it is time to reinstate the old requirement for running to be a USA President. And that old Requirement which was once intended to avoid what is happening now was to ensure that All US Presidents Know Our Laws and Our Constitution for they were once required to have a Law Degree.
I believe that brining back the Requirement of having a Law Degree is extremely important to Our Democracy and our country as a whole.
2
I have nothing against the likable Ms. Winfrey, but is shows to what a sad state we have sunk that after the debacle of 2016 and the complaints about a president whose only qualifications are being uber wealthy and a television personality people are willing to jump in again as if the presidency was a high school class office.
It also illustrates the sham and shame of identity politics. Oprah has never been vocal on a lot of serious issues of the day, but because she is a woman and an African American to boot many feel comfortable in believing she must believe one way one, neat lockstep down the list. But who knows what she really thinks or knows about matters like North Korea, abortion, arming Syrian rebels, dealing with ISIS, taxation, immigration laws, etc. The offensive notion that people only think one way simply by virtue of their race or sex is insane.
Oprah has also been public about some rather odd things, as well, such as tarot cards and anti-vaccination ideas, getting us into the "ignoring settled science" thing all over again.
Celebrities are the very last place we should be looking for national political leaders. Hey, why not a Kardashian, they're so successful too? We continue to harm our nation with our obsession with wealth, fame and identity. Enough!
10
Oprah for president?! No way. She was a magnetic TV host, but that doesn't make her presidential or competent to be president. And even though we have a president that many argue is not competent, I cannot imagine her running the country.
2
This seems to be what America wants. A figurehead, a reality star, a television personality in the Oval Office and a Chief of Staff and a cabinet, who can keep the ship running while the figurehead gives America the (blank) that it wants and needs. Give the people what they want.
"Everybody gets a car."
But in reality, it will only be a Corgi.
At home yesterday with the flu, watching the sudden media frenzy and thoughtless hype over Oprah, this looked like a mirror image of Trump’s campaign launch. I suppose the idea is that Oprah is the perfect answer to defeat Trump in a dumbed down America where substance in a president is just boring. But it would be so easy for him to brush her off - on day one, he suggests she should run pancake breakfasts as campaign events, with a sobriquet that writes itself. Offensive? Of course. Effective? Completely. And what if republicans do manage to get a substantive candidate, after trump decides he’d rather play more golf? Romney would, and in my very left-leaning opinion, should crush her. This is all madness.
Please stop with the circus. The spectacle. The celebrity. We need a statesman, or woman. A scholar. Enough with television.
4
As a single black female, she probably would not stand a chance against a candidate with a beaming family in tow. Are people ready for a White House without a first family?
1
Everything we know about Oprah is about empowerment - especially of women. Frankly, if Trump can get in, so can she. She would be a force to be reckoned with. Imagine the old white GOP dealing with her! How would she NOT be good for women, minorities and the underserved? And guess what, she READS!!!
Oprah Run Talk doesn't serve Democrats. It doesn't serve Oprah. So who is spinning? Oprah gave a great speech and Democrats shore up for 2018. Those two are mutually exclusive......
I think Americans are really looking for honesty, morals, ethics and respect.
HC didn't & trump does not have these qualities.
Politicians have to compromise to much of their TRUE SELVES to stay in office so they can achieve power in order to accomplish anything.
Look at the GOP top dogs.
We need LEADERSHIP not piped pipers.
I think she would make a terrific president in terms of compassion, mental fitness and every other important factor. Unfortunately it seems our nation is not ready for a woman, much less a woman of color, to be president. I hope to be proven wrong.
8
It’s the “every other important factor” that’s the hitch.,those are the critical nuances most of the tv watching public doesn’t understand or care to, and that determine the the president’s ability to succeed... at enacting progress, forwarding democracy and preserving our planet.
No, the nation was not ready for Hillary. Had nothing to do with being a woman.
1
Aren't experience and overall knowledge important factors?
Love her, but she's not qualified. Neither is DT, although that's the only place I'd compare the two.
1
Forget Oprah. Put your arms around Caroline Kennedy. Or a woman with a government background. And money... lots of money to win.
3
Dynastic rule is no better than celebrity rule. We do not need ANY candidates who's primary qualification is their last name, whether a Caroline Kennedy or a Chelsea Clinton!
Is there any groundswell for Oprah Winfrey other than from the Hollywood crowd, the few politicians who care about it thinks, and the star stuck, none of whom could not tell you, say, the manufacturer of the Deir ez-Zor reactor, how a navigable waterway should be defined, or how the food stamp and school lunch programs work? Yes she is well read, truly self made, and inspirational, but if she does not have the battle scars and smarts anyone who fights any government entity needs to get stuff done, I am not interested. Give me someone like Kirsten Gillibrand or Kamala Harris or, if it is not too much to hope for (why she sets off so many many people is a tribute to Fox News demagoguery) Elizabeth Warren, or any of the qualified men now considering running, who have experience in and know the language of government, hardened their heads butting them against Republicans, and gotten stuff done, before giving me the first choice of the glitteratti.
Boomlets like this one are the reason the rest of the world doesn't take the United State seriously. The idea of a celebrity with no experience in government in the White House is ridiculous.
Strategy - using an enemy to beat up another enemy. Oprah Hoopla detracts Democrats and deviates from real issues. She would be wise to nip this immediately and fully support 2018 Democratic Candidates...............
Oprah understands sexism, racism and poverty. Would that some of our politicians grasp those things also.
To dismiss her, Ms Katz, because she once gave away cars, is snarky She has great class. Don’t try to diminish that. As a fsct of fact, try to aspire to it.
3
If Reese Witherspoon endorsed her, that's good enough for me. Reese played a Harvard Law School graduate after all.
And, if not Oprah, when does Adam Sandler get a chance? He's smarter than the vast majority of potential Democrat nominees.
6
Ms. Winfrey needs to make a statement about this ASAP. We can get this off the table and focus on the real world.
87
Look at the most read articles today: two of them are about Oprah. If she ran she'd drown every other voice. And no, I do not want another TV star who supported the Iraq war.
3
We deserve better than to have another wealthy celebrity running for office. These suggestions of candidate Oprah reek of Hollywood elitism, just goes to show how the Dems remain out of touch with the middle of the country.
10
Stop already. JUST STOP! No more Trump and no Oprah. This is so shamelessly the work of entertainment and media and precisely how ANY media or entertainment-driven purpose only adds to the insanity. The very second even the inference of this association between Oprah and the Presidency arose it yielded to both blue and red state cluelessness.
26
Uh, no. Oprah Winfrey is a smart, talented tv personality and actress. She's a celebrity. That doesn't make her ready for the top job in the country. If she were truly interested in politics she should set her sights on running for a state office or representative. A nomination for the presidency shouldn't evolve from a 2 minute speech made on the Golden Globes.
33
Barack Obama could do it. Bernie Sanders could, too -- that is, articulate problems of injustice and inequality and get a crowd fired up with righteous indignation, determination, and hope. Oprah's speech lit that same spark.
Now we need someone -- but with governing experience -- who can light that fire again.
6
Not so fast, #METOO movement. Many, many years ago I was watching an Oprah Winfrey Show in which she and her friend Gail had a number of nubile young and attractive men dressed provocatively and parading before them and a virtually all female audience. It looked like one of those "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas moments." Oprah and Gail seemed to be enjoying themselves immensely. That must have been 30 years ago, but I still remember the scene as I describe it.
It was a scene not much different than what one could easily imagine with Harvey Weinstein and Donald Trump watching a number of nubile young and attractive women dressed provocatively and parading before them.
Before anyone in the #METOO movement gets too excited about making Oprah Winfrey President of the United States, they should watch that episode of the Oprah Winfrey Show to which I am referring. When the shoe's on the other foot, it shows that the mice will play. (That's my very best mixed metaphor.)
7
@David Lockmiller: Comparing a group of young male performers on a TV show to countless women assaulted and raped behind closed doors by powerful men backed by teams of enablers is one of the most ridiculous cases of false equivalence I've ever heard.
3
Sorry Dave,
"The shoe" will never be on the other foot. Oprah "enjoying herself immensely" while male models parade across a stage on live T.V. is not the same as what we now can see Harvey Weinstein and Donald Trump doing. We have both assault and rape admissions on top of numerous accusations for both men- so we don't need to imagine.
Stop saying "nubile" repeatedly and realize that Oprah has been a champion of people's rights, freedom, happiness and all the rest- NOT a back room predator.
1
@JR
I believe that if you read my post very, very slowly that you will discover that I used the same comparative words.
"It was a scene not much different than what one could easily imagine with Harvey Weinstein and Donald Trump watching a number of nubile young and attractive women dressed provocatively and parading before them."
1
I would be more likely to support Oprah as a vice presidential candidate, with a more experienced (but somewhat younger) candidate in the presidential slot.
1
What we're going to need in our next president is someone extremely gifted,and experienced in art of governing. Whoever the 2020 president turns out to be, let's hope he/she will be enormously capable at repairing all the damage being done as we speak by the current TV personality/ bull in the china shop, Mr. DJT.
If Oprah were to run, and won, I think her presidency would likely be a disaster for us all.
4
NO, and NO. Oprah is intelligent, a talented speaker and TV personality, but as President? NO and NO. We don't need another TV personality, even a smart one.
12
If we're going to continue to entertain having TV celebrities with no political experience as President of the US, why not Martin Sheen? At least he's had years of successfully acting like a president. :)
Good grief, folks. Get a grip. Oprah is a very talented person, but one great speech and people are running her for POTUS? Who's next, Stephen Colbert?
11
She’s smart, shrewd and tough enough, a galvanizer if optimism and, one would hope, equal measures of action. Hate celebrity pathway to presidency...still am 100 percent in. Oprah 2020. There, I said it.
1
Please. Please, everybody. Let's not go further down the rabbit hole. Oprah Winfrey may very well be a competent leader, but for heaven's sake, if she is serious about politics she should start by running as a senator, mayor, or governor (and if she is as smart as we think she is, she should be the first person to say that). Why do people continuously think someone who is successful in one area is successful in ALL areas?! Would you trust the best refrigerator repair person to fix your car, even though that person has zero experience fixing cars? Are we all mad now?
11
I have great respect for Winfrey. She's bright and clearly a brilliant businesswoman with a compelling American story.
I would be most interested in hearing her out on the most difficult decision making process a president faces: war or peace. How would she approach a Harry Truman moment or a Nevil Chamberlain/Winston Churchill moment? To drop the bombs or sign the piece of paper? To invade or use cyberwarfare? When has the last ounce of diplomacy been drained? Whom would she consult? What does she think of "The Generals"? Also, how would she define a "terrorist" - would she use the term Islamic extremism? I've never heard her talk about these things.
Anyway, however you slice it, on the surface she seems to be Sen. Kamala Harris's worst nightmare.
1
I suggest Harrison Ford run for President. He played the President in a movie so he has experience, fought a terrorist on Air Force One and told him to "Get off my plane!" thereby showing patriotism, determination and courage. He's worked for the CIA as an analyst, understands cultures and people of other worlds, is a scholar and wears a mean fedora.
3
With a country as diverse as this, and the only people running are either wealthy or striving to be so, suggest something is flat out wrong. Fame should not be a prerequisite for office. Though I have to say Oprah would get my consideration for the job.
Next tsunami of a presidential debate, let's insist on a evaluation process that challenges the candidates higher mental processes. And no this is not a cheap shot at the current President. Ive grown tired of the huge moneyed media outlets shocking and awing us with banality.
It's time this country humbles itself.
41
Yeh- Trump built an empire even tho he is dumb and can't really figure anything out.???????
With respect to all those who say we should have an experienced politician a president (and I agree with them wholeheartedly), the important thing is to WIN.
We can lose with our principles intact. I for one am not interested in that again.
How about a compromise? What about a Biden/Winfrey ticket? You get two engaging, well-spoken, self-made people, one with vast political experience (whose only real drawback appears to be his age), and the other, a wildly charismatic and intelligent person who will bring out women and African-American to vote in droves.
I'd love more political experience. Biden can deliver that. But most of all, I want someone who reads and thinks and cares about people.
And I want that ticket to win.
14
The win at any cost view of politics is a recipe for disaster. Sure you may win today, but the price we as a nation will, and are paying, for such shallow belief is going to be far too high in the end.
2
Isn't that what we have now?
Too fond of "you're fired"?
Oprah does what she does well because it's what she does. That does not qualify her for president. Hasn't the country learned that lesson yet? Even Reagan had 8 years as the governor of CA before running for president and that didn't go so well.
I'd love to see Oprah lead a leadership campaign in the inner cities and rural parts of the south. That's where she is needed.
28
Oprah is certainly intelligent, affable, and perfectly capable of starting a new career in government, but here is my concern:
Of all the criticisms which were leveled against the then-candidate and now-President Trump throughout his political career those which touched on his general inexperience have certainly turned out to be those most predictive. While it should be pointed out that Oprah Winfrey is definitely NOT Donald Trump, in many senses I believe the race between the two would mostly tread that sort of water.
That being said, I would wholeheartedly endorse and consider it a treat were she to consider "getting her feet wet" for a term in the Senate, representing Illinois of course.
5
Nothing on Ms Winfrey specifically, but the centrality of celebrity candidates these days seems to be one additional sign of the end times of empire.
Their actual personal qualities aside, the most significant people around are significant chiefly because they are famous, not specifically because of that they have done. And it is not just in politics. For example scientists were valorized in the 1950s and 1960s because they were seen to do valuable things others could not: no more.
11
As much as I admire Oprah for her many accomplishments in media, film and television production and acting, book clubbing, human rights and the education of the disadvantaged, I would be more thrilled if she did not throw her hat into the political ring by attempting a run at high office. She's brilliant at running her empire but, as we have seen, running a business is not like leading a country. I have no doubt she would be inspirational and energizing, but I fear the world of politics would only reveal weaknesses. Is she schooled in public policy, basic civics, political science? Who knows? Is it a pre-requisite? Many Trump supporters don't believe so. I personally do! And I would hate to see her detractors -- of which there will be many -- lining up to bring her down. Frankly, I think Oprah can be a greater influence in the world of politics by helping to support a strong candidate, lending her voice and business acumen, avoiding merely bashing Trump, and coming up with some major policy initiatives in tandem with like-minded and influential people in business and media. She gave a rousing speech the other night. Fantastic and wonderful. But her mega-celebrity status and her inspirational backstory and thrilling message do not necessarily qualify her to lead the free world. Please, Oprah, don't do it.
10
Oprah would be a formidable candidate were she to declare. However her whole career path has shown her to be talented, smart and extremely likable with a key component of her self being humility. She would not assume that somebody with no public office experience should be President.
But the possibility of a Biden/Oprah ticket in 2020 with a Biden promise to not accept renomination in 2024 (when he would be 82 years old), would give Oprah four years of experience under the tutelage of one of the most decent men in politics, Joe Biden.
Such a promise would not leave Biden as a lame duck either, because an Oprah victory in 2024 would be a continuation of their joint effort to restore sanity, balance, justice and pride in America.
3
Her NeoLiberalism, self entitlement and long history of embracing flaky New Agey stuff would fly out in the heartland about as well as Ted Kennedy in Alabama. Opposition research could mine enough treasure from her TV show alone to sink her before she ever left Iowa.
Remember Oprah didn't announce her candidacy--the media did. She gave a rousing speech at the Grammy's--and, all of a sudden, she is running for President. Problem is a rather hysterical media and a public who loves shiny things. I think we should know--from experience--that celebrity candidates and politicians can be a real nightmare.
5
I don't have mixed emotions. The same forces that would swoon over Oprah based mostly on a single speech are how we ended up with Trump. I hope that Oprah inspires women to run for public office, including Oprah herself if that is what she wants, but serving as president as a first foray into public service should be off the table forever, for women and men.
8
The most significant reason she should run is that she would win. She appeals across parties, prairies and city borders, all the way into the back woods. She could fund her campaign without siphoning energy into fundraising. It’s unfortunate our country has come to this, that basically only a billionaire with a tv personality can run and win but so be it. She’s the one.
28
"The most significant reason she should run is that she would win."
So did Trump!
With all due respect- no.
Oprah is a cult and is polarizing. Way too many men see her as a man basher, way too many evangelicals would distrust her vague spirituality, and her self entitled Billionaire status would raise the antennae of skeptical Millennials.
Her name recognition helped Obama in 2008- this is 2018. Ask 100 voters under 40 who she is and you might be surprised at the response you get. Baby Boomers are shuffling off the planet and Generations X and Y are going to be picking the next President. Way different game.
3
Our country is not a football game!!! What happens after she wins? Is she able to reach across the aisle, negotiate with rivals, appease enemies, balance budgets, and reign in lobbyists? Does she have the means and wherewithal to fix our crumbling infrastructure, healthcare system, and education? Does she know why and how things were done before her, ie, a solid knowledge of American history and political science?
The Democrats need a policy statement before they pick a candidate for 2020. Oprah is inspiring because she’s intelligent, articulate, self-aware and kind, everything our current leader is not. If she isn’t interested (and who could blame her?) we should look for someone with her skills. But the platform comes first. Democrats have been silent as to what they propose for the future since January 2017. That’s way too long.
7
Let Oprah try elective office at the city or state level first. Celebrity is not a qualification for the office of President of the United States.
Work experience in public office is an educational experience.
2
She is marvelous as a healer but not as a candidate: too much woo-woo!
1
You've got to be kidding. Really, Oprah for President? Will America ever get off of this obsession with celebrities who contribute nothing of importance; a country in decline and one that needs real leadership; we don't need or dare to go here. Palin was too much, and Oprah would be too much of nothing. I know Trump is absurd, not really smart, only inept, but we've got to get serious about leadership and forget the clowns.
10
Be a senator or governor first, Oprah. You need to get some policy chops.
27
She would at least know how to hire.
Another over the hill media star who will do anything to remain in the limelight. What a farce.
5
Sally Yates for president.
7
I can't believe we're even having this conversation. Is this what we're reduced to - American Presidential Idol? Can we just stick to people who actually have some experience running the government - please? This is pathetic.
82
Ms. Winfrey is 1000 times more qualified than the current president but should he run again the Democratic party must run a candidate who can defeat him. That should be their only concern for 2020. The current president was soundly booed last night, in Georgia at a football game no less, which should say something about how he is viewed.
Somehow and for some reason I have more concerns about the next candidate than can he or she defeat Trump. Of course that is important, But if that is my only concern, as you suggest, then weI might find ourselves in the same situation, or worse, than the GOP did when the one quality they were concerned about was who could defeat the Democratic candidate.
And look where that got us.
Please enlighten us and tell us how she is qualified to be President not comparing her to current resident in the WH.
Just like Senator John Kennedy recently stated so aptly to a certain nom for judgeship..........just because you've seen My cousin Vinny doesn't make you qualified to be a federal judge.
While Oprah is to be lauded for her good works she is by no means qualified to be POTUS. Try running for City council first or like Obama Community Organizer. While HE was Senator he had 150 "just present" votes. And even HE couldn't get North and South Korea to talk to one another.
We were there! He was cheered loudly! Stop watching cnn
Repeat after me: the Presidency of the United States is NOT an entry-level job (let's not speak of the Orange Anomaly). Political experience is required to run for the WH. Given we're the 3rd largest and 3rd most populous and largest economy in the world, we need to set a very high bar for who will be our President.
Oprah fails to meet that. I'm not opposed to celebrities in public office, see Al Franken. However, we have no shortage of qualified people in this country. Celebrity name-power is only for voters who are not very informed.
Rather than bow to that lower standard of civic participation, Democrats need to pick someone qualified and charismatic who truly believes in liberal policies (vs. the center-right Democrats and far-right Republicans).
62
Until we fix education and inequality in this country yes we do need to bow to that lower standard of civic participation. Sad but true.
I can't believe Ms. Winfrey became so wealthy because she didn't know how to compromise. She's probably wealthier than Trump, who does not have the "compromise" gene. Let's hear her out first, before dismissing her outright.
1
"Political experience is required to run for the WH."
And a through knowledge of world's affairs and its history is required, as many of our politicians do not know much beyond the pacific and Atlantic oceans.
2
Who knows? She could make Dr. Phil, Eckhart Tolle, Deepak Chopra, Dr. Oz, and Jenny McCarthy prominent members of her cabinet. A good thing that could happen is to give a participation trophy to ALL voters who show up to do what they are supposed to do anyway. She can also drive home, for once and for all, the point that the average American inner-city student doesn't really appreciate what he/she has. After all, isn't this what she had to say about it? "I became so frustrated with visiting inner-city schools that I just stopped going. The sense that you need to learn just isn't there," she says. "If you ask the kids what they want or need, they will say an iPod or some sneakers." What this country needs is a pivotal change of attitude FROM INSIDE each one of us, just like John F. Kennedy once said: "And so, my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country."
7
Maybe Oprah doesn’t have to promise us each a new car, but it would be great to see a chicken in every pot. Ninety years ago, a Republican ad for Hoover bill in the NYT contended that they had already provided both:
"Republican prosperity has reduced hours and increased earning capacity, silenced discontent, put the proverbial "chicken in every pot." And a car in every backyard, to boot."
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/187095
Today’s Republicans certainly cannot make that claim. At least Oprah has managed to put the car in a number of garages.
1
Folks had to pay taxes on those cars
The following is the first real fix to give women equal rights in the USA, for once this is done the men will lose a significant percentage of their overall control of most of us and will have to become more respectful of the opposite sex:
Article XXVIII (2018)
Women are equal to men when it comes to being citizens of the USA and as a result should be represented in the same sex based percentages as they are citizens. If they continue to make up 50% of the voters, they must make up 50% of the representatives of the House and the Senate and every two terms the applicable representatives must change to the opposite sex for each new representative and every eight years the offices of the President and Vice President must change from a man to a woman or vice versa and back again for the next two terms. This change is also recognized as being the first to set term limits for each and every elected official of the US Government.
3
This sort or thinking is why democrats are completely and utterly out of power now. Keep up the good work!
Why is it that so many taxpayers in the US are so poorly educated and as a result give unquestionable commitments to one or the other party? Some of us cannot support either side as the proper approach in dealing with so much of what affects us should support a conservative fiscal/monetary/taxation system while at the same time be more liberal by supporting cultural and individual rights. So, take some time to personally asses your viewpoints and as a result be more accepting of the differences in all of us.
It's obvious that Steadman would love a new role, and what role gives him more cachet, visibility and access than that of First Partner?
3
The fact that they are not married would go against her bigtime.
She's a proponent of pseudoscience and has doubts about the effectiveness of vaccinations. Just what we need in the oval office.
31
American people are utterly confused to make a distinction between ignorant and educated persons, as proven by our last elections.
Please, no more celebrities or TV personalities in the White House, no matter how well spoken. If HRC was unacceptable I would have settled for Bernie, Kasich, Romney, Gravel -- anyone but Trump, as long as they were honest, responsible, sober, well-read, intelligent human beings with a heart.
11
Actors pretend and fake it for a living. They should be able to make a good speech. Let’s not get all giddy about it.
142
It worked for Reagan, eh?
I think we need a skilled politician with Oprah's attributes and charisma, but if she was the Democratic candidate I would vote for her vs. any Republican ever.
Precisely Mr. Russell. Ronald Reagan was a powerful and persuasive speaker. He knew how to work the camera, read his lines with conviction and passion and make one proud to be an American. BUT HE WAS A SKILLED AND TRAINED ACTOR. He was a former president of the Screen Actor's Guild. He truly was a better actor than president.
And with Donald Trump's many faults, he was able to suck people into believing he was the answer to changing things in the country. His "Make America Great" line really convinced people that he was the answer to their woes and their prayers.
I can't believe people want to go down that road a third time with Oprah Winfrey. Or, is it possible that this country so broken that folks don't care who's in charge as long as they hear leadership hype that sounds good but with no substance or foundation to support it?
1
This is what is wrong with the US press they are driven to distraction. This is why it is so easy for trump to call the press fake news and to discredit them and have most Americans not trusting journalists.
A speech given by an entertainer drives speculation about the next presidential election. The US press has the attention span of a gnat. There is no depth examination of current issues like the lies about trump being responsible for the current economy, current immigration issues, continued police brutality, the possible effects of drilling off of both our east and west coasts or any other trump policies.
It is disturbing that the press wishes to be taken seriously, but then responds like a circus, then says that is what people desire.
9
Not a bad idea at all. She's smart, talented, and compassionate. Many Democrats no longer have any use for the DNC since it put its finger on the scale during the primaries, possibly preventing Bernie Sanders from becoming president instead of Donald Trump. It may take more than a policy wonk to defeat Trump. I'm sure that Oprah would surround herself with knowledgable people (although I hope NOT Dr. Phil). Other candidates I would vote for are George Clooney and Tom Hanks. Clooney's father was a respected newsman, and he knows a good deal of history and politics.
1
You might be confusing the role performance with the actor. It's a common error of celebrity fans.
During the campaign Mr. Trump mentioned that the national debt is not 19 trillion but rather over 200 trillion and that unemployment is far more than reported-
Now, all is well while the Debt keeps growing and the Tax revenues will be falling.
We might as well have a wonderful show person like ms. Winfrey since nobody is willing to try to fix anything - just keep borrowing.
Still to be seen if all this lowered taxes really bolsters the economy and creates the needed jobs.
Oprah 2020 on n the basis of one speech? I want to see detailed policy proposals and a record of prior public service from any presidential candidate before I decide whether or not to support them.
6
Why do famous people always need to aim straight for the most glamorous office they can find? Why not try to run for the smaller positions? That's still serving the people, and it gives them experience.
9
They need an office large enough to accommodate their egos.
Let me first get out of the way my opinion that Oprah is a brilliant, dynamic, incredibly well informed and accomplished individual, who also possesses a solid moral compass. Now, can our country, will our country, ever get back to where we want, first and foremost, a leader who has real experience and background in governmental functions, international diplomacy, and constitutional processes? Please, let's as a nation (or at least everyone other than Trump's 38%) rally around the sentiment that celebrities should not be leading our country and, ideally, taking the lead in the free world. This groundswell of support for Oprah tells me that too many in the Democrat, liberal, independent camps haven't learned their lesson.
1
We are at a critical point in our country. As much as Oprah is admired, we can not replace President Trump with another inexperienced candidate. If Ms. Winfrey has a desire to serve the country. let her serve in the senate or house of representatives first.
2
The United States does not need another political neophyte as President. As successful as Ms. Winfrey is, she does not have the background to be President. Like many in our country, I certainly believe our political system is broken and that our government no longer serves the people. An outsider as President is not going to fix or change that broken system because the system is rotten throughout. We need new people and fresh ideas at all legislative levels—both state and federal. We need to overturn Citizens United to lessen the ability of special interest groups to buy politicians. But for President we need someone with political experience who will keep a steady hand on the tiller of state. Television stars may be popular and they may seems like us but they lack the gravitas and experience to govern a nation. The Democratic party should rid itself of these flights of fancy— Oprah Winfrey, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, and Mark Cuban aren’t what we need. For President we need progressive, experienced leadership that is committed to changing the political process to ensure the will of the people is carried out by their elected representatives.
1
I think Oprah Winfrey is too smart to want to be President of the United States. I would hope, though, that she finds some central and high visibility role to play in the next election. She is an eloquent and powerful advocate for fairness, truth and civility, seemingly a voice in the desert in our government. Michelle Obama is in a similar position. I truly hope the women of the country unite in this next election to vote for compassion and support for the poor, the elderly and the disadvantaged, and to throw out the oligarchs and their Republicans.
Oprah played a role in the last election by rendering Obama. How did that work out? Listen, the bad news is that a good many people are simply repulsed by her self indulgence, her display of ego (has anyone else every graced the cover of her magazine?), And don't tell me her great quality is that she is "better" than Trump. In some ways she is a carnival mirror image of him.
One of the American myths I grew up with, and one I suppose children are still taught, is that in our country any child can grow up to be president. We learn of presidents from Lincoln, born in a log cabin, to Clinton, the boy from Hope, and how they overcame humble beginnings to become the most powerful in the world. So, why shouldn't Oprah entertain thoughts of the presidency? She grew up with the same myth I did, but of course, because she was black it seemed even more out of reach. Besides, given the quality and character of others who aspire to the position (just look at the lineup of Republican candidates in 2016), Oprah is as good, and maybe better, than many.
1
Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler came from "humble" beginnings and rose to be powerful as well. Not sure that alone is a good criteria for president.. Lincoln stayed humble. Can't say that for Trump or Oprah, or Clinton. The analogy falls shorter than the criteria.
As many (most) of the comments state, Oprah has many worthy attributes but lacks the political experience for the Oval Office. I concur. This opens the door, it seems, to a discussion about the need to quantify the necessary qualifications for a Presidential candidate. A minimum of...four...years public service at some serious level? A person of demonstrated metal soundness & acumen? We're talking Constitutional amendment here, so it's a pretty pie-in-the-sky topic. Still, given the difficulties with the electoral collage, might this be a way to insure that we never get another 45?
I don't know if I'm prepared for another person who is not versed in the issues she would deal with every day. But at least you know she would gather the highest quality people, and lead the most moral, human-values oriented, and spiritually elevated presidency in history.
2
Her personal life is so moral and perfect?
A lifetime of wisdom and compassion, learned with the experiences of suffering from the vicissitudes of life is best represented by a 2020 ticket of Biden and Obama. Joe can openly suggest that they are a team. We don't need any celebrity with super ego and wealth. We need servant leadership.
43
Obama is not eligible for the Vice-Presidency.
1
Check Biden's age please.
We need a woman. Enough already.
Whoever the Democrats position to be their candidate for president in 2020, be it Ms. Winfrey or who else, that individual must speak to the needs of all Americans, regardless of race, gender, social, and economic class. Thank you.
1
I'm a Democrat. I admire Oprah Winfrey. I don't want her to run for president.
5
Oprah is an actress and a TV personality so of course she can orate a speech well. I suspect she did not write the speech, however, but perhaps she did. In any case, Ms. Winfrey is NOT qualified or experienced in any way to be president. We have a business person and TV mogul in the White House now and it is going very badly-why would we risk another? There are so many experienced, good Democratic public servants who can do a good job as president. We do not need Oprah to take our attention away from what we should be talking about-the Russia investigation, important policies, and crises around the world. Oprah should limit her involvement in politics to encouraging all African Americans to vote in every election and to making contributions to the DNC, to offset what the Kochs and Mercers give to the GOP.
1
In the midst of a Trump administration - in which experience, expertise, and commitment to public service have been collectively derided as part of some horrible "establishment" - it is confounding to me how any sane person could be voicing support for an Oprah presidency.
Oprah is a charismatic, intelligent, thoughtful, self-made billionaire – everything that Donald Trump isn't. That her talents do not make her presidential material is NOT a bad thing. I wouldn't trust LeBron James to steer a rocket ship and I wouldn't ask Mark Zuckerberg to perform open heart surgery – neither instance makes these people any less fantastic at their life's calling. For this reason, I vote to let Oprah stay Oprah – media mogul, inspiration to millions, successful businesswoman – and to elect someone (anyone!) with the knowledge and temperament to deliver us from this Trumpian nightmare.
The list of horrible consequences to the Trump presidency seems endless, but topping it for me is this paranoia of so-called "elites" who are qualified for their jobs due to their education, experience, and character. What a sad, dismal response from the left if all that they can do to counter Trumpism is provide their own version of an unprepared celebrity to take his place.
1
She certainly is more intelligent than Trump, and would likely have a much quicker learning curve, but I think elective experience still counts for something. Still, when. Read the names Biden, Sanders, and Gilibrand as likelies fir 2020, I am underawed. I'd like to see Kamala Harris give it a go. She's less opportunistic than Gilibrand and clearly very intelligent.
1
My question is could Oprah be more effective outside of the White House? Because if that's the case, she's so outstanding, I think it would be better for her to skip the campaign and focus on speaking out and supporting candidates who could lead our nation from the White House.
75
And she could lead the charge to bring more people registering to vote and then voting.
Good point....
Dem. strategist, Rebecca Katz commented that they need a "compelling agenda", rather than a magnetic personality. Right there, Dem's will lose because they don't recognize, that to win, you DO need a magnetic personality and an emotional connection to the candidate.
No! We are already living in the reality of having a president with absolutely NO political experience. She and Trump wouldn't even qualify for a clerical job. Oprah has done so much for charities and causes, but that does not qualify her for president. So, please, do not waste our votes on celebrity again.
whether it's trump, oprah, or anyone else, what is it about having someone QUALIFIED to do the job that people don't understand?
I’ve been listening to the comments about the possibility of Oprah running for President and it seems to me most of the discouraging remarks come from our white males. As a white female, I say “go for it” Oprah. It’s time to break down the color and gender barriers in this country. We need someone to run against Trump who reads, has compassion, picks the best people and looks good in a suit. As for political experience...at least Oprah has the desire to learn.
Out of all due respect you might first wish her to get a track record in some political position first to learn the "chops" necessary to govern. A liberal version of Trump who is a novice just like Trump on the other side is not what the country needs at this point!
IMO Oprah Winfrey is a smart person and good person. She is certainly better qualified than the current occupant of the White House.
That is not the same as saying that she is qualified. She is not. I want a President who has spent their life studying this country's issues and who comes to the Oval Office with knowledge of all of our major problems at their fingertips.
And then there's the elephant in the room:
If Hillary Clinton can only beat Trump by 3 million votes and still lose the Electoral College, what chance would Oprah Winfrey have in a society that still has massive issues with racism and sexism? Oprah's candidacy would almost certainly ensure four more years of Trump. We're hanging in there after one year. I cannot imagine what the wreckage of our country would look like after eight years of Trump.
Dan Kravitz
I like Oprah a lot. If she were the only one who could win in 2020, I'd say sure.
But what I absolutely don't want is some kind of preemptive choice based on demographics that precludes anyone else from having a serious chance.
We need to focus on the Nov elections, and having as wide and open a field in 2020 as possible. If, at the end of that, Oprah is the candidate, I'd vote for her.
3
I was honestly moved by that speech. Such eloquence, poise, and beauty with an honest and heartfelt message. What a gifted orator! Reminiscent of Obama’s 2004 DNC speech. I’d vote for her in a second. This is what we the people want to hear from our leaders, Democrats! Rejecting or thinking twice about Oprah is why I left your humdrum, middle-of-the-road, do-nothing, politically correct, Wall St. party. #Oprah2020
Oprah is a remarkable woman, talented, competent, a woman of understanding and empathy who raised herself from poverty to being a billionaire. But we have sen what happens when a non-politician gets in the mix. While I'm sure Oprah is collaborative, in the end she is an entrepreneur and when the decision comes down it's hers. Politicians learn the art of compromise, for determining the possible and working incrementally towards a goal. Let's have a professional next time. As Trump has pointed out in caps--this is not a job for an amateur and Oprah, no matter how fine a person, is not a politician, has no desire to be, apparently and contributes more in private life.
39
Ms. Winfrey is by all accounts a wonderful and talented person. but she is not the person we need in the White House. The vast majority of Democrats are not taking this seriously - and I find it preposterous that anybody would. I sincerely hope that responsible party leaders - and Ms. Winfrey herself - put an end to this foolishness, before the Democratic brand ends up as tarnished as the GOP's already is.
241
How about proposing some alternative candidates?
James, why? Give a reason, please. I am not sure about Ms. Winfrey, but let's see what transpires.
NY Times, why is this a "pick?"
3
Your points are completely valid and under other circumstances or in a previous time, would stand to reason. It does seem that because of both voters' preference and media wanting someone who'll increase their readership/viewership, a candidate with great charisma, or at least a high-profile personality would be most likely to win in a national election. A candidate's sterling qualifications will remain no more than resume points if he/she loses to a lesser competitor favored by the media and with a popular following. This seems to be the unpleasant reality we face.
Given the slave-based Electoral College system we use to elect Presidents, a Democratic brown person, especially a woman has no chance, that's no chance to get elected. Democrats, and I've been one my entire life, need to get real. The only candidate that will have a chance is a white male, and preferably a Southern or Midwestern male. This will be particularly so if the economy keeps perking along, and of course Trump doesn't blow up the world. Democrats at the local to federal level lose elections most of the time. We're too ideological for our own good. While Winfrey is a bright and caring person, she like the current President has no experience, especially experience to bring back our country after 4 or 8 years of devastation.
7
"Devastation"? You need to stop reading the NYT and spend a little time watching CNBC. Get your head out of the sand.
2
What?!?
Last time I checked, former President Obama was black and though from Illinois, didn’t spew Midwestern values.
Just because Democrats lost one election doesn’t mean things will always be the way they are. The American people are not consistent in voting habits, especially for presidents (remember Regan Democrats?). If there is one thing you should take away from 2016, it is that there is not just one path to the White House.
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are both horrible political candidates. In 2016, if a Republican lost to Clinton it is only because Republicans were dumb enough to run Trump and if a Democrat lost to Trump it’s only because Democrats were dumb enough to run Clinton. Any other Democrat could have beaten Trump and any other Republican could have beaten Clinton... 2016 was an odd year.
Obama won twice with electoral college
Enough with reality TV personalities: Reagan, Eastwood, Trump. We need to get REAL.
70
Clint Eastwood is not a reality TV personality. He is a fine director and he has a right to his own opinions. As do we all.
2
Explain what "real" is. F.D.R. started as a millionaire, and yes, he became Governor of NY State, but his agenda made him governor, not to mention his charisma.
Let's hear what Ms. Winfrey has to offer by hearing her out. Why with the knee-jerk reaction against show-business people? Al Franken, IMO, would have been a great president had the Democrats not shot themselves in the foot by forcing him to resign.
Reagan was Governor of California for 8 years. Better experience than Hilary or Obama had.
1
This would be an attempt that would look desperate.
We need a professional politician with experience particularly for the president of United States. Even though any amateur would be better than the present occupant of the White House it’s ridiculous the Democrats would entertain an entertainer as president. Particularly one election after the most experienced and qualified person beat Donald Trump by 3 million votes but lost to this silly electoral college system. To go from the most experienced to one with no none looks desperate.
13
Much akin to Trump, Oprah Winfrey espouses thinly disguised “prosperity gospel”. No matter how literate, or competent, the garb, it is a decidedly selfish and destructive world view.
35
Thank you for a great point we need to remember. Next will be electing that charlatan from that big church, Joel somebody.
1
Thank you!
"Anyone in America can become President of the United States. That is the problem." - George Carlin
97
How many people elected to the office have not been Ivy League (either undergrad or grad)? Oprah doesn't have the academic pedigree to win.
1
Our current President has a pedigree and he can't even read.
1
What a preposterous comment. If Trump and George Bush are the products of the Ivy League then what exactly are those institutions offering. I'd rather have a community college drop-out with a soul running the country then narcissistic whack-a-doodles like those two. I have a daughter who graduated from Harvard who, like Trump, never read a book for pleasure. I want my money back.
Lure,
It doesn't matter. You need the pedigree to win. Oprah would spend many millions on campaigning only to lose. It's not preposterous. It's accurate. Would you bet MONEY on an Oprah victory? Would you bet 20 grand that she'd win? Unless you'd be willing to put your money where your mouth is, don't call people's points preposterous. Money talks and liberals are all talk.
America would never elect an overweight woman. It wouldn't elect an overweight man either. John Goodman couldn't run.
I don't like Trump, but his election sent my stocks up.
This is ridiculous. She's a TV star. Enough.
87
Those were just my thoughts before the 2016 GOP primary. Actually, he's worse than ridiculous, considering the fact that he has the nuclear codes.
1
Please! The last thing the US and the rest of the world needs is another celebrity president, no matter how well-spoken. And let's hope that news organizations don't pounce on every word Ms. Winfrey says, like what happened with Trump, and effectively drum out every other potential candidate's voice.
37
The more outrageous Trump behaved during the campaign, the more publicity he got. Free TV coverage estimated in the billions of dollars. The media got the lucrative story about a nut job running for office, normalized him, and thereby managed to install him as another Republican electoral college president.
1
If Oprah runs, she will not win and only cause division in the Democratic party. Instead of votes going to a more feasible nomination with education and political experience, the percentage of votes for an appropriate nomination with education and political experience could be weakened and the mistake called trump. It could set in motion a weaker nomination insufficient to beat the republicans and beat them soundly. Honorary degrees, tough life experience and then becoming very successful does not ring for me a person to be the next President of the U.S. Smiling personality contests run by the media who only want something to say to fill in their time slots should not have such an influence.
6
Our country needs to encourage and enable capable people to participate in politics and governance. It is wonderful to see a movement encouraging Oprah. Known by almost no one when he began, Tom Steyer is showing the courage to be involved. Oprah and Tom have unique appeal or resources. And maybe that’s a necessary ingredient for national office. Let’s keep in mind we also need to encourage qualified candidacies at the state and local levels, whether liberal, moderate or conservative.
After having read this article, I have to ask the question I've been pondering for sometime: Is it time to abolish the office of President? Does a representative democracy need a figurehead like a king/queen? The office and name of Presidency was conceived as a way to avoid the idea of a king/queen when kings/queens ruled. Why does one country need a single head? A true democracy evolves with the people. The people voted for an intelligent, highly trained female figurehead, yet the electoral college elected a person whose intelligence is questioned and whose tweets are irrational at best. Knowledgeable people question his capacity to "lead." I question whether the country needs a leader. Democracy is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Who is Trump? Who is Oprah? Entertainment brands. Why does American need another entertainment brand, why not just be a true representative democracy?
9
Opah is a much-beloved public figure. Upon close scrutiny we might find that she does--or doesn't--walk her talk. But what we need is a person with a background as a true public servant, someome whose career has been devoted to putlic service, the public good--not building a personal business empire, as Oprah has done. Oprah is a giant celebrity and mostly she 'hangs' with other celebrity. She often evokes her past as a poor person. She has done an admirable job of pulling herself up by her own bootstraps. And she has helped others do this (e.g. her school in Africa), but to what extent has her career or business been built on this?) Oprah is most of all a huge celebrity, a one-percenters. She is a vote-getter, no doubt of that. But if the best the Democrats can do is put forward a big vote-getter, we are in deep trouble. We need a candidate who can show us a roadmap to the future, one who most of all understands economics and can show us a way beyond our economy, which is huge but just not working for most people. NO to Oprah, much as I've loved her over the years. (Before she went over to the dark side of celebrity.)
8
Please no! We don't need another celebrity president, no matter how good their values and communication skills. (We also don't need Hollywood telling us who should run for president.) We have actual problems to address (and policies to agree on) that take knowledge and experience.
14
Nicole Brodeur, columnist for the Seattle Times, put it in perspective in her today's column "I want a president who has worked on the front lines of our country without commercial break." This was after Brodeur wrote glowingly of Winfrey's many accomplishments and characteristics. In short, we don't need another TV "star" in the White House. While Winfrey is worlds away from Trump in every way that matters, she has no record of political experience that would make her a president. What we need to replace the current debacle is a tried and true candidate, a candidate that can win and return sanity to the White House. Joe Biden comes to mind.
19
Joe may be better than most professional life-long politicians, but he's pretty much been a political hack. Let's look for someone who'se spend a carer in public service of some kind, maybe political, mayb not. Heads of not-for-profits. Heads of state or national organizations whose subordinates have earned a living wage. In fact I would love to see some CEO who has found a way to pay his subordinates, every single one of them, a LIVING wage while ensuring his company is profitable and sustainable. That's hyat we need.
Ms. Winfrey didn't go from poverty to her present position without understanding politics; she's probably richer than that great genius, Trump. Let's hear her out before we may be possibly shoot ourselves in the foot.
David Kannas: Joe Biden would be great, but he's getting a bit too old for the job.
Oprah is undoubtedly an intelligent and successful person but there is no indication she is knowledgeable about world events, defense, diplomacy. She doesn't have contacts who can advise her on technical and scientific concerns. We have one rich tv personality in the White House and the Democratic Party would be deservedly open to ridicule if that's the direction it goes. Let Oprah support the issues about which she feels strongly, like any citizen. She can advise and support issues in her community be that women, minorities, communications. She could serve on local groups and do great good. Let's mentor some candidates with experience in at least a few fields
or background related to governance of a nation. As for Ronald Reagan having been tested as governor - be real, a man who wouldn't say AIDS is not a role model.
7
Be real. Reagan was the best President since FDR and there has been no one as good since.
2
What's the problem with a celebrity with no governmental experience whatsoever running for president?
On the other hand, in a minute, I'd prefer Oprah to someone like Andrew Cuomo.
2
She may discover that the campaign trail is filled with unpleasant experiences she never imagined. After winning, being president is not as glamorous as many believed. Continue what you are doing, Oprah, and enjoy your wealth and life style. There are multi-millions of people who would trade places with you in a nanosecond. Not so for being president.
3
She worked Obama's campaign with him. She's also doing a great job of marketing herself right now to step into the campaign if she decides it will work. I"d rather see her run for governor in Illinois to see what she can do locally. Let' see what she's got politically.
I understand that the next step on Oprah's personal journey is to become President, but that doesn't mean we have to play along. I admire the woman, but the White House is not a starter job for wannabe politicians.
35
So, if the economy crashes again do we all get a copy of The Secret?
Sarcasm aside, I find it a troubling aspect of our culture that we so readily want to put celebrities into the presidency simply because they make a good speech, or are popular, or capture the zeitgeist for a certain moment of time. In case anyone has been asleep for the past year or so, we have a celebrity in the White House right now, and it is an unprecedented catastrophe.
We do not need any more celebrity politicians. What we desperately need are public servants who are committed to the offices they hold, or seek to hold, and will work tirelessly on behalf of the electorate to maintain and expand the integrity of those offices and its duties. Simply because someone is successful in the entertainment industry in no way translates to success in other areas, especially governance. This is just as bad as people who think the country "should be run like a business". We've all seen how poorly that turns out.
More importantly, whomever ascends to the presidency after Donald Trump will have a colossal clean-up job to do. Not only will they need to restore the integrity of the Presidency itself, but they will need to rehabilitate our alliances, and crucial government agencies, which have already been looted, shattered, and sabotaged by this administration and Congressional Republicans. That is no task for a neophyte.
47
Public service, yes. Why is it so hard to name our national public servants? There is Raplh Nader. There is Jimmy Carter. There is _________... Please let's fill in the blanks with capable persons of vision who have a track record of leading some organization that operates in a principled way, for the public good and not just for the good of it's executives and investors.
1
Once I admired Oprah Winfrey for her honesty and courage to tell the truth to her audience and advocate for "little people".
No more. She is just another entitled billionaire who used OUR money to promote herself. She is just like The Con Don.
She often discussed her dislike of her poor, single, teen-aged mother on her show so it made me very angry that she brought up her mother's "three jobs" and how hard she worked to support herself and family.
She once made fun, to her audience around the world, of the man who taught her how to create wealth because he wanted to date her - Roger Ebert of Siskel and Ebert.
Her friends made such a fuss when Hermes in Paris wouldn't stay open late for them to shop, while they were visiting the country, that the President of Hermes later came on her show and apologized.
She made such a fuss that she couldn't bring her dogs to her hotel rooms that hotels now regularly accept pets, which is trouble for those of us allergic to dogs/cats who stay in those hotels.
Oprah has done some very positive things but they have been in her own self-interest - not for WE THE PEOPLE. She gets my vote for being a woman who beat the odds and made it to the top. She will never get my vote for president. WE THE PEOPLE need people who are educated in governing to manage OUR country - not an ego-driven celebrity.
We are a Democratic-governed United States of America. Not a monarchy. No kings and queens to siphon off the wealth of WE THE PEOPLE wanted.
50
Bravo. You're very correct. Once I thought she might make a great VP because she had such broad credibility. No more. She's gone to the dark side of celebrity ambitioun, disproportionate wealth, and yes, some narcissism. She is not the kind of person we need in the presidency.
4
Any entertainer wanting to go into politics should first be required to get a degree in political science. Even Ronald Reagan tested himself as governor of California before entering the national "stage." We've suffered enough from entertainers (comedians, reality stars, etc.) thinking they can just simply transform celebrity into good political leadership.
103
Would you say the same thing about engineers (Washington, Hoover), generals (Washington, Eisenhower, Grant), lawyers? The real question is whether the candidate has educated him or her self to make intelligent and compassionate decisions, and can lead a large organization. Holding prior elected office is one good qualification but we've had a number of presents who didn't (Washington, Eisenhower, Grant, Taylor, Hoover, Taft, I believe). We've had two presidents with political science degrees, Wilson and Obama. Clinton come close with a Foreign Service Degree. So, who would I prefer as president, a self-made businesswoman who had the leading book club in the country, or a guy who started with his dad's fortune and doesn't read? Believe it or not, some celebrities are intelligent people who are very well-read. Oprah has a demonstrated capacity to lead and I think she is a person of good character.
She can surround herself with the best people regarding your allegations that she is not prepared. What president (or any human being) is omniscient?
Washington, Eisenhower and Grant were generals, something that gave them not only leadership experience but taught them compassion and to distrust a government controlled by the military. Hoover was certainly not the greatest one for the job. All I'm saying is that a celebrity should take it upon him or herself to learn about political leadership, and that does not come easily. Law school would be another way to do it.
Numerous entertainers have gone into politics including Arnold Schwarzenegger and have had a great deal of success so why not Oprah?
She's worldly, smart, and knows how to surround herself with people who can help her succeed.
Many of our politicians on both sides of the aisle aren't inspiring a great deal of confidence so why count her out.
43
Schwarzenegger was installed as governor of California by the same democracy-destroying stolen-wealth, socially unconscious billionaires who put The Con Don in office.
The Good People of California are paying exorbitant road/bridge tolls so the wealthiest don't have to pay taxes. The cost of living is preposterous.
No more Richie-riches protecting and enriching their brethren by stealing from the rest of us. Oprah is a Richie-rich.
1
So let her fun a state first. Going straight for the most powerful job in the world smacks of arrogance.
Arnold is a state governor, not President of the US. BIG DIFFERENCE.
1
Relative to the current Kremlin-installed President, Oprah Winfrey would be George Washington.
She is an excellent communicator, stable and sensible, and intelligent enough to surround herself with the most talented people in the country in every field.
Contrast that to Trump’s nepotism, cronyism, self-dealing, instability and lack of bandwidth to learn and operate based upon relevant facts.
Oprah would win in a landslide and the county and the world at large would stand and applaud.
Let the President be a great communicator counseled by experts and the country would thrive once again.
16
The founders didn't envision or make provisions for a career political class. Whatever happened to the notion of "leave your farm to serve, then return to your plow?" Oprah has as much right and talent to run as any of the Washington fixtures.
23
The permanent political class has been captured by the donors on which it is so entirely dependent. It is now the problem, aka money in politics.
2
The country, the union, the government, the job, the world are a LOT more complex than when the Constitution was ratified.
Oh and by the way, yes the founders did very much envision a political class. Indeed, after the "kingship" of Washington (essentially a unanimous consent presidency) for many years there was an understood "heir apparent" -- first Adams as VP to POTUS, then Jefferson as VP to POTUS, and then after the very problematic experience of the Adams-Jefferson pairing & the resulting amendment to the Constitution to make the VP elected as part of a ticket rather than as the POTUS runner up, for the next 25 years each successive president served as Secretary of State in his predecessors administration.
As much as I love Oprah, I would hate to see her torn down as is common in politics. Also, I don't think enough men would vote for her. That was one of Clinton's problems. For some reason, a strong, self-proficient woman didn't resonate with the men on the right.
RJ, at least Clinton has political experience.
And, again, people did not vote fro Clinton, not because she was a woman, but because of a number of other issues.
3
My photos of her smooching Harvey Weinstein are a wonderful reminder of the long memory political opponents will have. Racial and gender appeals will eventually alienate white/hispanic/asian men. She should run as a reminder to the rest of the world how base our political system has become.
1
Oprah, obviously, lacks the foreign policy chops.
But she built her own empire, participating in every part of it, working with every part of it. She has demonstrated competence at every step.
Good enough for me.
11
Last week the near unanimous contention among Democrats was that only a lifetime politician should be president, because only a lifetime politician, unlike Trump, spent his or her life's work in the public sector preparing to be president. And anyone who is rich, they felt was part of the 1%, so was definitely unqualified.
This week the position of so many Democrats' switches to hold that any rich entertainer can be president, if a black woman. How convenient and reassuring a demonstration that their primary contention for the past two years was totally erroneous.
2
You should learn to distinguish between reality and a news cycle. Tomorrow we'll be on to something else and so will Oprah.
1
We already have a :"celebrity" president, a person with zero political experience running the country. A person who won because of a popularity content. A person who has created so much disarray, in their first year, it could take years to fix. Tax cuts, attacking our allies, attacking our enemies, and complete lack of respect for his office.
While Ms. Winfrey is no Donald Trump, by any shape of the imagination, she is not going to be able to fill the role that will be desperately needed, if Trump makes it to the end of his term. This country needs an executive that can unite the country, work with both parties and has a wealth of political savvy and experience.
Le6's face it, it has been a very long time that we had that kind of unity and experience in the White House. The country need a leader strong like a Truman, Eisenhower or FDR to deal with the myriad of the nation's current, and Trump created, problems.
Ms. Winfrey can help campaigning, but is no where near prepared to be President of the United States.
114
She is a fabulous person,intelligent,accomplished,wonderful people skills,a great role model however,no foreign policy experience,no government experience,not qualified for this job..no idea how Washington works!
6
Agreed. Thank you Nick.
3
Why? Give reasons. Why not wait and see what transpires? Al Franken came from the world of show-business and IMO, the Democrats shot themselves in the foot by forcing him to resign.