Oprah For President, Really?!

Authored by Mike Whitney via Counterpunch.org,

Being president isn’t like hosting a talk show or running a media brand. Oprah’s success in her field is no more indicative of her potential to be a good president than Trump’s success in real estate was. You can’t criticize Trump for having no relevant experience or evident understanding of public policy, then say that the solution for Democrats is just to throw up their hands and find their own celebrity to promote.

— Paul Waldman, “Get a Grip, People. Oprah should not run for President”, Washington Post

Will she or won’t she?

No one knows for sure.  Best friend, Gayle King, says Oprah Winfrey has no plans to run for president, but longtime Oprah partner, Stedman Graham, disagrees. Graham says bluntly, “She would absolutely do it. It’s up to the people.”

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/20180113_noprah.png

So who’s right and who’s wrong? And what’s up with the Golden Globes? Was the reaction to Winfrey’s emotionally-charged speech really as spontaneous as we’ve been led to believe or was the deluge of adulatory coverage in the media already in the works? I don’t know about you, but the ridiculous outpouring of praise –including more than 700 gushing articles in the MSM accompanied by a saturation campaign on social media— smells fishy to me. Was this supposed to be an inspirational speech to fans and well-wishers or a ‘product launch’ by Democratic party leaders who needed a glitzy venue to showcase their future presidential candidate, Ms. Talk TV herself, Oprah Winfrey?

If I was a gambling man, I’d bet that the whole Sunday night extravaganza, including Winfrey’s heart-wrenching oration, was a set-up from soup to nuts.

My guess is that the DNC honchos have cynically decided that their best chance to beat Trump in 2020 is by following the blueprint that worked for the inexperienced, 2-year Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama.  First, they start with the product launch to a target audience, then they create a positive buzz in the media and on the internet, then they magnify the size of the “groundswell” of support (remember the fainting ladies at O’s speeches?), then they transport their candidate from one soapbox to the next where he/she mutters the same stale chestnuts over and over again to the adoring throng.

Oh yeah, and one other thing: Real issues have to be avoided like the plague while promises should be made in the vaguest, but most uplifting terms possible. That was the key to Obama’s success and it looks like that Oprah is following his lead.   Here’s a brief clip from her speech:

“I’ve interviewed and portrayed people who’ve withstood some of the ugliest things life can throw at you, but the one quality all of them seem to share is an ability to maintain hope for a brighter morning — even during our darkest nights.”

Ahh, another 8 years of hope and change. Who would’ve known?

Of course, Winfrey is enormously popular but her popularity does not necessarily translate into political support. Take a look at this excerpt from an article in the Washington Post and you’ll why her transition from TV celbrity to presidential candidate could be bumpier than many people expect:

 “A March 2017 Quinnipiac University poll found Winfrey had a 52 percent favorable rating (and just a 23 percent unfavorable rating). She was most popular with Democrats (72 percent) and independents (51 percent).

But that doesn’t mean those polled wanted her to throw her hat into the ring: Just over 1 in 5 said Winfrey should run in 2020, and 69 percent said she shouldn’t.” (Washington Post)

That doesn’t mean it’s a lost cause, it just means that her presidential bid is not a sure thing.  It’s going to be a long, uphill slog with plenty of pitfalls and mudslinging.  Even so,  most analysts expect Winfrey to sail through the Democratic primaries without breaking a sweat. There’s simply no prospective candidate in the party who could compete with her charisma, her name recognition or her wide-ranging fan-base. But nabbing the nomination and becoming the party’s standard-bearer merely puts Oprah in a position where she can lock horns with big Don Trump in a no-holds-barred cage match that will decide whether the country is going to be governed by a flamboyant billionaire oligarch or by a flamboyant billionaire oligarch. 

Could things get any weirder?

I always thought the Dems would put Michelle Obama on the 2020 ticket, after all, for the ‘identity politics’-driven Dems, Michelle has it all; she’s black, she’s a woman, she’s bright, she has massive name recognition, she has stature, gravitas, charisma, she knows how to deliver a riveting speech, she knows how to handle herself among dignitaries, and she knows ‘the drill’, that is, she knows that the president is a meaningless figurehead who has very little power and follows a tight script that is written by his big money constituents. Michelle knows all of that which is what makes her the perfect candidate.

But Michelle probably didn’t want the job. And why would she? Hubby just cashed in on a $60 million book deal, so Michelle can afford to put her feet up and enjoy life. That’s why the Dems moved on to Door Number 2: Oprah Winfrey. If Trump can win with no political experience (the thinking goes), then why not Winfrey?

Why not, indeed? Here’s how Paul Waldman at the Washington Post sums it up:

“It’s true that Democrats have underappreciated the importance of charisma in presidential politics. But the answer to those electoral failures isn’t to stop caring about substance. It’s to find candidates who are both charismatic and serious, who would be able both to win and to do the job once they took office….”

(Paul Waldman, Washington Post)

Bingo. And what would it take to make Oprah Winfrey a “serious” candidate?

Well, she’d have to have a good grasp of the issues which means she’d have to take a crash course in policy, world affairs, negotiation and economics.

She’d need to have an opinion about the nuclear standoff with North Korea, the confrontation in the South China Sea, the Saudi war and blockade of Yemen, the escalating conflict in Afghanistan, the US occupation of East Syria,  frayed relations with Turkey, economic sanctions against Iran, Russia, Venezuela and Cuba. And she’d have to understand domestic issues, cuts to Medicaid, corporate tax cuts, burgeoning budget deficits, stagnant wages, the skyrocketing price of tuition,  out-of-control health care costs, free trade, deregulation, Wall Street, the environment, transportation,  law enforcement, national security and the steady evisceration of the American middle class.

Whew.

The fact that Oprah really has no grasp of any of these things nor any understanding of how to negotiate with congress, staff an administration, or appoint judges to the bench, makes me think that Democratic honchos are merely using her as a stalking horse to shoehorn themselves back into power so they can–once again–enjoy the spoils of war.

Isn’t that what this whole ‘Oprah for Prez-thing’ is really all about?  Aren’t the party fatcats and their behind-the-scenes constituents just looking for the right vehicle to tout their message and fly their banner without any intention of addressing the issues that ordinary working people really care about?

Of course they are. These people are cynics.

Comments

jcaz 45North1 Sat, 01/13/2018 - 20:02 Permalink

She's terrified of being uncovered as a clueless teleprompter reader, she just saw that in action......

It wouldn't even be Oprah- it would be the useless gaggle of sycophant fembots who have surrounded Oprah for 30 yrs- that's the risk we're really up against with her.......

In reply to by 45North1

Theta_Burn macholatte Sat, 01/13/2018 - 20:14 Permalink

Hillary started her 2nd-go-round the same way.

Maybe she will maybe she wont, the turd is being floated..

The "I like bread" platform... my God sound the imminent incoming missile strike siren.. 

I'll say it again, if you thought the fagnation under obama was bad.. wait till rupaul gets a cabinet position in an winfrey administration..

In reply to by macholatte

The Alarmist BokkeDavola Sun, 01/14/2018 - 15:25 Permalink

"I always thought the Dems would put Michelle Obama on the 2020 ticket, after all, for the ‘identity politics’-driven Dems, Michelle has it all; she’s black, she’s a woman, she’s bright, she has massive name recognition, she has stature, gravitas, charisma, she knows how to deliver a riveting speech, she knows how to handle herself among dignitaries, and she knows ‘the drill’, that is, she knows that the president is a meaningless figurehead who has very little power and follows a tight script that is written by his big money constituents. Michelle knows all of that which is what makes her the perfect candidate."

 

And Michelle is a Wookie, one of the many beloved Star Wars characters, which will assure her/him/xe (note that Joan Rivers "died" on the operating table shortly after outing Michelle as a Tranny) of the votes of white, male Star Wars fanboys and fangirls ... and fanxes, I guess.

In reply to by BokkeDavola

rrrr IH8OBAMA Sun, 01/14/2018 - 11:19 Permalink

1. Most whites think that blacks vote like whites vote, that is, based on factors having little or nothing to do with race.

2. But every black in the US would vote for her, with very few exceptions.

3. And then Oprah would either give away or destroy much that our ancestors made this country into.

That is probably the main reason she is being suggested as a candidate. Those who suggest her do want to destroy our country.

In reply to by IH8OBAMA

IntTheLight To Hell In A H… Sun, 01/14/2018 - 08:36 Permalink

Oh please. Oprah on tape wishing all elderly whites (anyone over 22) dead. Accused Hermès in Paris of racism cause wouldn’t open store just for her. They had private party. And accused shopkeeper in Switzerland of racism cause she wouldn’t let the fatty feel up a 38,000 bag unless she wanted to purchase. Oprah is black first, second and third.

In reply to by To Hell In A H…

IntTheLight To Hell In A H… Sun, 01/14/2018 - 08:36 Permalink

Oh please. Oprah on tape wishing all elderly whites (anyone over 22) dead. Accused Hermès in Paris of racism cause wouldn’t open store just for her. They had private party. And accused shopkeeper in Switzerland of racism cause she wouldn’t let the fatty feel up a 38,000 bag unless she wanted to purchase. Oprah is black first, second and third.

In reply to by To Hell In A H…

PT Ajax-1 Sun, 01/14/2018 - 07:27 Permalink

Let's get something straight here:

If Oprah became Prez she would invite Putin, Assad, Kim, the leader of ISIS and all of the US's other enemies onto her TV show to explain their point of view.  Lots of shouting and crying will be involved.  And at the end of it all, the US public will feel sorry for them and agree to give them everything they ask for.

In reply to by Ajax-1

Karl Marxist Theta_Burn Sun, 01/14/2018 - 09:55 Permalink

It's already gay. At the top, particularly. Watch Kay Griggs on YouTube to know the homosexual power structure that is the military, world leaders, heads of state, corporate and Hollywood magnates and power brokers. Merit has nothing to do with nothing. All you gotta do is bend over and take it in every hole God made you to have.

In reply to by Theta_Burn

Future Jim IH8OBAMA Sat, 01/13/2018 - 20:39 Permalink

First let me say that Hillary is possibly the most evil person in America, and Oprah is in her circle.

That is why Trump supporters need to get their head out of their ass.

It is laughable how the MSM and controlled opposition have convinced Trump supporters that they have any power whatsoever. They have no power in corporations, the media, universities, schools, government, social media, or even in their own political party. They are completely and utterly powerless other than their guy is the President.

... except ...

It's worse than that ...

Trump's job is to discredit anti-establishment types. He obviously works for the same people as Hillary, Bush, and Obama. They chose him about 10 days before the election because we made Hillary too much of a threat to the Illusion of Legitimacy.

If Hillary had won, too many people would have understood how the establishment is an illusion, and anti-establishment types would have been mobilized, but with the election of Trump, the majority of anti-establishment types (Trump supporters) have been neutralized instead of mobilized. In fact, many Trump supporters are worse than complacent because they went from being anti-establishment to being pro-establishment because they think they're in charge of the establishment now. They think they're  "winning".

In reply to by IH8OBAMA

jcaz Future Jim Sat, 01/13/2018 - 21:21 Permalink

Dude, the "I hate Hillary but" psy-ops bullshit approach has already been tried on this board many times before-  exactly WHO do you think you're talking to?

Thanks Mulder, but I'll just stick with the simple point that we have someone who is unafraid of being an asshole and  pointing out what we're ALL thinking in office-  that's ALL I asked last year,  and I'm not disappointed.

BTW, Trump has already created more change than the past three administrations combined, so your fantasy that he's some sort of pawn of the Inner Sanctum is tedious- no one fixes this mess in 12 months,  try a new tune.

In reply to by Future Jim

52821740 jcaz Sun, 01/14/2018 - 02:15 Permalink

I think your missing Jim's point. He's not saying he likes or supports Clinton only that the anti establishment has been disarmed because Trump has sold himself by saying he would drain the swamp when the reality is he has employed bankers and is still subject to establishment control which maybe his supporters don't realise?

In reply to by jcaz

jcaz 52821740 Sun, 01/14/2018 - 08:41 Permalink

Clearly you missed MY point, but I'll play along with your 1-D thinking-

Tell us- EXACTLY- how long it will take to drain this swamp.  You're unhappy with current results, so tell us- EXACTLY- what it takes, and how long.   Go ahead- we're waiting......

You're being infantile-  "Wah-wah-wah, it's been 12 months, Trump hasn't drained the swamp that took 40+ yrs to fill, wah"......

Here's a clue- you're on a FINANCIAL blog, POPULATED by "bankers".....  "Subject to establishment control"- what the FUCK are you babbling about???  Explain to us- EXACTLY- how your revolution takes place!

You don't even know enough to ask the right questions.  Stop whining unless you can produce tangible solutions to a problem.   "Hiring bankers" is an ignorant generalization-  what- he should hire inner-city black women instead to run finance?

Stop being part of the problem and start being part of the solution- otherwise, stay in your little safe place and vote for Bernie again......

Edit- oh, priceless, I should have checked your profile first- you're an Australian trust-fund baby, floating around the world on pretend money, "waiting for the market to correct" as of FOUR YEARS AGO- nice timing,  Crocodile!    What you really are is a fry cook looking for an escape from reality here-  suddenly, your view makes sense........

 

In reply to by 52821740

52821740 jcaz Sun, 01/14/2018 - 11:20 Permalink

Wrong again. You jumped to a lot of premature conclusions about what I supposedly think and my personal situation.   I never made any judgement about how long the swamp drain would or should take I was merely suggesting what Jim was saying which you ignored or misinterpreted.   And my previous login here was Crashtstdummy  from 2008 which I lost hence the new id of 528. Wrong again about trust money.  I'm a direct investor. I own no trust funds except superannuation which is a small part of my portfolio.  There are a lot of pretenders on this forum but I've walked the talk and its true that I'm proud that I'm self made and that's not through any inheritance or overnight cyrpto gamble or earning a high salary through being the VP of a citi bank department although good on you if you were.  I made my wealth purely through trading. Wrong again about my timing if you look at my post under the Credit across the US thread you'll see i leveraged in the near lows of 2008 then sold at the 2014. My main investments are NAB, ANZ and WBC - three of Australia's largest big 4 banks.  They are still below their 2014 highs so again my timing was good. I then waited until Brexit and bought NAB again at 24.11 and ANZ at 22.11. Go and look at the charts. Australian market hasn't made new highs like the US market. 

In reply to by jcaz

loveyajimbo wcole225 Sat, 01/13/2018 - 21:56 Permalink

Really?  Ask yourself why Hillary, a supposed enemy and a proven multiple major felon... is still walking around free?

Trump is a deep state puppet.  remember too, his "deport them all" horseshit?  Iran deal revocation?  Not.  Deal with NK?  Nope.

And his staff and cabinet looks like a who's who of the Deep State and Goldman Sachs.

In reply to by wcole225

Folkvar loveyajimbo Sat, 01/13/2018 - 23:27 Permalink

The establishment has had decades to embed itself into every institution of power and influence across the US (the entire West in fact) at every level and you believe that Trump can wave a magic wand and remove these people practically overnight? Seriously? He doesn't even know who he can trust within his inner circle. Establishment characters do not advertise that they're establishment!

I don't know if Trump is the man he has convinced people he is (largely because of his fanatical support for Israel) but I have enough sense to know that it could take years to remove these evil establishment criminals. Only a fully aware public that revolts against the criminal establishment can remove it quickly and that's not likely to happen given how divided the nation is and how many people are still buying the establishment propaganda via the mainstream media.

What I know for certain is this, if Trump does not remove them then the US is lost via the political route, nothing short of a very bloody uprising could free the nation again. This is the likely outcome if Trump does not deliver as the establishment (if he isn't one of them) isn't going to let someone like him win again - they've learnt their lesson.

In reply to by loveyajimbo

To Hell In A H… Future Jim Sun, 01/14/2018 - 05:55 Permalink

I grew up on the "Outer Limits" and the "Twilight Zone" You are absolutely correct. I would also go a little further. the Trumptards have no idea of the depth of the illusion, behind the illusion,  behind the illusion. 

As you said, Trump supporters were anti-Establishment and voting in Trump, they believe they have their anti-Establishment candidate. But such is the illusion. Trump is just as much establishment as Killary, just less PC, rougher around the edges and told them exactly what they wanted to hear.

I call Trump the establishments, anti-Establishment candidate. It fell on a lot of deaf ears.

In reply to by Future Jim

CatInTheHat BigCumulusClouds Sun, 01/14/2018 - 00:03 Permalink

And if Assange knows that Russia did not meddle in the election, he should have stated so long ago before Democrats went running with the Russian narrative long enough to start a cold war with Russia again, as well as the fraudulent sanctions slapped on it, covering up primary rigging and election fraud by Democrats.

Why put the public unnecessarily in danger???

This is one of the reasons I'm highly suspicious off Assange. 

In reply to by BigCumulusClouds