Oprah for president? Winfrey rethinks a run after Trump win.

[Deleted]

1. She said she's never going to run, she said so last week.
2. She isn't that popular, she's known to be a real ego tripping maniac and she'd do worse than Hillary.
3. She'd just be another Trump.

- - - Updated - - -

I was going to talk a lot of smack about her. But given that someone has to run from the left, she has started and owned multiple successful business, she has talked to people in every walk of life on her show. She'd be a great candidate coming from someone who despises the left, and a much better first female president than Hillary.

She exploited a lot of innocent people on her way to the top. Her track record isn't that impressive.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep - and she is likely richer than Trump (we would know if he would post his tax returns like every other POTUS).

If the qualification for POTUS is just "rich" now - can we skip all the bullshit and get to the point?

#BillGates2020

Bill Gates would actually do well, he has the results, he has the brain and he's also quite knowledgeable in politics.

However I think he loves his charity work too much, I don't think he even would consider doing anything else than what he loves doing.

- - - Updated - - -

What a very, very interesting thought. Who the fuck wouldn't vote for her?

Didn't she build her business from the ground up? (no $40MM loans from daddy?).

No she just slept her way to the top with a few sugar daddies early on.

[Rennadrel]

I can already smell the memes.

[May90]

Bill Gates would actually do well, he has the results, he has the brain and he's also quite knowledgeable in politics.

However I think he loves his charity work too much, I don't think he even would consider doing anything else than what he loves doing.

People like Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg tend to not be interested in working in politics usually, because politics is pretty far away from what they do every day.

Who would do really well and be a realistically possible runner, I think, is someone like John Stewart. Someone who has a strong political position, who easily sees what's under surface, is almost a perfect detector of hypocrisy and various logical fallacies... Plus, John Stewart is pretty much universally loved, by all sides, so I don't see how he could possibly lose while running against Trump.

[TITAN308]

She's smart, black, and a woman. Three strikes in GOP land.

If they want a chance at securing the white house for the following 8 years they better keep playing chess instead of checkers like the Democrats have done.

Honestly I think Rice would be well received by the Republican base outside of far right fringe groups.

I don't vote outside of direct local politics, but I might break the mold for once if Condoleezza ran.

It would certaintly put Democrats in an awkward position I imagine.

[mvaliz]

Another theory... Maybe Trump IS an alien! Sent on Earth to punish us for our sins!

nah, Grulump the Galactic Unmaker put a "travel ban" on all aliens immigrating to Earth, but we all know its a way to ban Space Muzleens

[Hiricine]

She exploited a lot of innocent people on her way to the top. Her track record isn't that impressive.

Well I didn't say that she's perfect or that I'd even consider voting for her (maybe in a primary). If you compare her with other candidates from the left most of the criticisms about her would be a lesser version than her competition's

[May90]

If they want a chance at securing the white house for the following 8 years they better keep playing chess instead of checkers like the Democrats have done.

Honestly I think Rice would be well received by the Republican base outside of far right fringe groups.

I don't vote outside of direct local politics, but I might break the mold for once if Condoleezza ran.

It would certaintly put Democrats in an awkward position I imagine.

While I personally really like Condoleezza, I don't think she has the charisma to succeed in the race, where people usually care more about the surface than the depth of the candidate. In a hypothetical scenario of Condoleezza running against, say, Bernie, I think she will look pretty bleak on the stage, with Bernie yelling and waving hands, and her standing quietly with a serious face expression and talking serious politics.

Trump will have ruined Republican candidates' credibility significantly by 2020. I think the best bet for Republicans would be to choose someone rather unconventional, like Rand Paul, who will give the impression of someone from GOP without the standard flaws of the GOP candidates. With the usual, even sane, candidates like Bush or Rubio, I think it will be a landslide for, pretty much, any Democratic candidate, especially a likable one.

[Mormolyce]

I still think it's going to be Snooki 2020.

[Zyky]

Why not just hold a game show, let anyone be president.

[dieudal]

No experience just like Trump, and even more of a racist.

[kyoloco]

isnt The Rock running too?

im totally voting for him

[belleflop]

Why not just hold a game show, let anyone be president.

One could argue that the 2016 election cycle WAS a game show, and anyone DID become president.

A real billionaire and a very well respected and liked women like Oprah is definitely qualified to be president after this election cycle. Heck, literally ANYONE is qualified now.

[cubby]

1. She said she's never going to run, she said so last week.

I love people like you who don't bother to read even the initial post in a thread and just shout out whatever lies and drivel you want because, feels over reals. In the fucking OP cite, she says she'd consider it. How does that add up with your bullshit lie above.

The other two things you listed are too laughable to even debate. Grow up.

No she just slept her way to the top with a few sugar daddies early on.

Site? Source? Anything? Or more of your bullshit feels over reals?

[May90]

One could argue that the 2016 election cycle WAS a game show, and anyone DID become president.

I disagree. If we picked a random person from a random game show, it would be a much, much more competent person than Donaldino!

[cubby]

Who would do really well and be a realistically possible runner, I think, is someone like John Stewart. Someone who has a strong political position, who easily sees what's under surface, is almost a perfect detector of hypocrisy and various logical fallacies... Plus, John Stewart is pretty much universally loved, by all sides, so I don't see how he could possibly lose while running against Trump.

I very much agree with you about John Stewart. And the guy is wickedly bright (not that it matters in this day and age, but it's nice regardless). And he would be a very nice opponent for Trump. And he is loved and/or respected by both sides.

[Very Tired]

Oprah 2020.

Cars for everyone.

[Berengil]

isnt The Rock running too?

im totally voting for him

The Rock is a registered Republican who has expressed libertarian views. How about a Rock/Rand Paul ticket?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JOHNSON/PAUL 2020

Can You Smell It?

[breadisfunny]

Yep - and she is likely richer than Trump (we would know if he would post his tax returns like every other POTUS).

If the qualification for POTUS is just "rich" now - can we skip all the bullshit and get to the point?

#BillGates2020

the koch brothers are technically richer than him with combined net worth of almost 80 billion dollars.

[May90]

I very much agree with you about John Stewart. And the guy is wickedly bright (not that it matters in this day and age, but it's nice regardless). And he would be a very nice opponent for Trump. And he is loved and/or respected by both sides.

He also offers a positive counterpart to Trump's narrative. Trump says, "Everything is baaaaad, we need to dismantle our achievements of the last handful of decades and return to the glorious old days". Stewart says, "Everything is baaaaad, we need to move forward much faster than we are moving". I think the latter variation is going to be much more appealing to the vast majority of those voting for Trump in protest, than his doomsaying narrative.

[cubby]

He also offers a positive counterpart to Trump's narrative. Trump says, "Everything is baaaaad, we need to dismantle our achievements of the last handful of decades and return to the glorious old days". Stewart says, "Everything is baaaaad, we need to move forward much faster than we are moving". I think the latter variation is going to be much more appealing to the vast majority of those voting for Trump in protest, than his doomsaying narrative.

He very much is - I agree. My concern is that the people who voted for Trump are afraid of, and don't understand, progress - which is what Stewart would be offering. I mean, people in West Virginia basically voted for continued black lung - and got it.