Quote: Why would you think Oprah is not competent?

BECAUSE SHE HAS NO FUCKING EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENT.

We have tried the "bring in the outsider" shit.  How's it working?

(January 8, 2018 at 1:05 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote: Why would you think Oprah is not competent?

BECAUSE SHE HAS NO FUCKING EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENT.

We have tried the "bring in the outsider" shit.  How's it working?

Damn dude! The political establishment's been doing no better for years. They've been acting like a bunch of fucking amateurs themselves.

(January 8, 2018 at 1:05 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote: Why would you think Oprah is not competent?

BECAUSE SHE HAS NO FUCKING EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENT.

We have tried the "bring in the outsider" shit.  How's it working?

Yet both parties have career politicians which I hear BOTH parties complain when the other party wins about needing term limits.

Obama didn't have a long time in political office before he ran. 3 years if I remember correctly. 

Again, if you think Oprah would be inept, not going to buy it. I think her empathy and background knowing that she supports the likes of Obama and I can remember her constantly supporting him when he ran and won.

I think you underestimate her.

OBAMA was only in the Senate for 3 years before he ran. Mitch McConnell (Turtle Man) has served for decades. I far longer than Obama has both as President and congressman. So longevity has nothing to do with effectiveness.

Now, again, NOT saying she will get nominated. JUST ASKING if Oprah got nominated AND Michelle and Barrack threw there support behind her, what would you do, call the Obama's incompetent too? 

I would bet my life Michelle and Barrack just like they did Hillary would throw their support behind Oprah, and I don't think they pick incompetent people. Obama didn't when he was president.

---

(January 8, 2018 at 1:21 pm)A Theist Wrote:

(January 8, 2018 at 1:05 pm)Minimalist Wrote: BECAUSE SHE HAS NO FUCKING EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENT.

We have tried the "bring in the outsider" shit.  How's it working?

Damn dude! The political establishment's been doing no better for years. They've been acting like a bunch of fucking amateurs themselves.

No, only the GOP, and look at the fucking asshole they have at the head of their party.

(January 8, 2018 at 1:05 pm)Mr.Obvious Wrote: Not saying trump is a decent prez. Far from it. But right now i fail to see why Oprah would be a good one. Maybe if indeed she ran, she could show why she actually would make a good leader for one of The mayor world-players. But until she does, i'm going to assume people are banking on fighting The fire of The trump-circus with a similar fire of their own.
I might be mistaken, but if that is The plan, even a democrat victory would still feel like a loss to me.

Mr. Obvious gets it.  There's just no reason to pick Oprah.  It's just a desperate half-ass attempt to copy what Trump did.  

Just run a competent likable qualified candidate.  That's it.  Unless of course, things are great come election time, in which case a hail mary non-issues oriented celebrity deathmatch popularity contest might be the only path.

But if Trump is the worst president ever, and his programs are going to fail, it's just a matter of not fucking it up in '20 for the left.  Any good candidate should win with ease.

Although it begs the question, if all you have to do is nominate a competent likable qualified candidate, and with all the senators/governors/congresspeople the best you can come up with is Tom Hanks, Oprah Winfrey, and the Rock, what does that say about who you're electing into the government.

I admire the woman, but she's far from my first pick for president. That said, if she gets the nomination, she gets my vote. I'd be sorry we didn't choose the most qualified person, but she's far more qualified than the person currently holding the office. I have trouble imagining the DNC being able to field a less-qualified candidate than Trump if they tried.

(January 8, 2018 at 1:21 pm)A Theist Wrote:

(January 8, 2018 at 1:05 pm)Minimalist Wrote: BECAUSE SHE HAS NO FUCKING EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENT.

We have tried the "bring in the outsider" shit.  How's it working?

Damn dude! The political establishment's been doing no better for years. They've been acting like a bunch of fucking amateurs themselves.

So you are telling me that when you see one of those air disaster movies where the crew is incapacitated the stewardess gets on the horn and says "if there is ANYONE who knows FUCKALL about flying a plane please come to the cockpit?"

Yeah.  Right.

You know, this country did okay ( not great, but okay ) for a long time until these tea bagging assholes went to Washington and declared "compromise" a dirty word.  And for that I blame shitheads like you for electing them.

---

Quote: Yet both parties have career politicians which I hear BOTH parties complain when the other party wins about needing term limits.

Term limits were a republicunt mantra.... which a lot of them dismissed as soon as it was time for them to go.  Besides, who do you think does the grunt work in a congressional office.  Toss one guy out and you bring in a newbie who hires the same staff people that his party always uses.  Beware of simplistic panaceas.

(January 8, 2018 at 1:38 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: I admire the woman, but she's far from my first pick for president. That said, if she gets the nomination, she gets my vote. I'd be sorry we didn't choose the most qualified person, but she's far more qualified than the person currently holding the office. I have trouble imagining the DNC being able to field a less-qualified candidate than Trump if they tried.

That's the problem.  Trump for better or worse has been undeniably hands on in the global economy.  I was curious to see if Trump was ever on Oprah, and the clip that came up was 1988 with Trump talking about America first and how bad US trade deals are.  

On a side note, it's pretty clear he's slowed down a bit in the brain department.  Listening to him talk back then is completely different.  The phraseology is similar.  But it's very slick compared to the more plodding style nowadays.

(January 8, 2018 at 10:34 am)Mathilda Wrote: The Guardian made a good point that about the first female president probably needing to be a Republican

Quote:Of course, if Ivanka does run for president, it will likely be on a Republican ticket and she will have to abandon her current pretence at mild progressiveness. Just look at the UK: there is a reason the only two female prime ministers we have had have both been Tories. Electing a woman who is also liberal as leader seems to be far too much for the British establishment to handle.

In the more religious, less tolerant US, it is even more of a challenge. Hillary Clinton may have won the popular vote in 2016, but the levels of misogyny directed against her made it clear that the US establishment still finds it near-impossible to stomach the idea of a female head of state. And certainly not one who is a Democrat.

No sorry, this is bullshit. If Obama proves a black LIBERAL MAN can win TWICE, then this story is nonsense to claim a women, black or white cant win as a liberal.

HILLARY only lost on a technicality, she still had more votes.

---

(January 8, 2018 at 1:28 pm)wallym Wrote:

(January 8, 2018 at 1:05 pm)Mr.Obvious Wrote: Not saying trump is a decent prez. Far from it. But right now i fail to see why Oprah would be a good one. Maybe if indeed she ran, she could show why she actually would make a good leader for one of The mayor world-players. But until she does, i'm going to assume people are banking on fighting The fire of The trump-circus with a similar fire of their own.
I might be mistaken, but if that is The plan, even a democrat victory would still feel like a loss to me.

Mr. Obvious gets it.  There's just no reason to pick Oprah.  It's just a desperate half-ass attempt to copy what Trump did.  

Just run a competent likable qualified candidate.  That's it.  Unless of course, things are great come election time, in which case a hail mary non-issues oriented celebrity deathmatch popularity contest might be the only path.

But if Trump is the worst president ever, and his programs are going to fail, it's just a matter of not fucking it up in '20 for the left.  Any good candidate should win with ease.

Although it begs the question, if all you have to do is nominate a competent likable qualified candidate, and with all the senators/governors/congresspeople the best you can come up with is Tom Hanks, Oprah Winfrey, and the Rock, what does that say about who you're electing into the government.

Yes there is.

1. She is smart.

2. She did not get her money handed to her like Trump.

3. MICHELLE AND BARRACK WOULD SUPPORT HER IF NOMINATED.

Is Oprah my first pick? No, but the two biggest reasons to vote blue no matter who.

1. SCOTUS...

2. Trump

I don't want to see this bullshit I am seeing right now in this thread give 45 8 years.

(January 8, 2018 at 2:29 pm)Brian37 Wrote: ...
I don't want to see this bullshit I am seeing right now in this thread give 45 8 years.

Why not?

Trump is the best thing to happen to US politics in decades.

(January 8, 2018 at 11:13 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Have you lot forgotten the last time a TV star with zero political experience became president?

Boru

HOLY FUCKING SHIT


Oprah having a TV show is not the same as treating politics like JERRY SPRINGER. 

2. Reagan was an actor.

3. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY ......... Oprah WAS NOT RAISED  a spoiled brat, who had a multi-million dollar head start like 45.

AND AGAIN, 

IF, because it is not a done deal by any stretch. BUT if Oprah DOES become our nominee, do you really think, AFTER SHE SUPPORTED PRESIDENT OBAMA, that President Obama himself will sit there and say, "DON'T ELECT HER, EVEN THOUGH SHE SUPPORTED ME"

FUCKING NONSENSE.

IF OPRAH wins the Democratic nomination, AND AGAIN, I am not trying to predict shit right now. BUT IF she were to get our nomination, do not tell me after she SUPPORTED Obama, he'd turn on her. I have no doubt Michelle AND Barrack would support her after what she did to support him in both his successful bids.

https://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007...s-obama-2/

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3974561

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/08/oprah.obama/

---

(January 8, 2018 at 1:38 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: I admire the woman, but she's far from my first pick for president. That said, if she gets the nomination, she gets my vote. I'd be sorry we didn't choose the most qualified person, but she's far more qualified than the person currently holding the office. I have trouble imagining the DNC being able to field a less-qualified candidate than Trump if they tried.

My point exactly. Michelle would be my first. Warren my second. Cobert my third. 

But if you are going to nominate someone who can go up against 45 Oprah could do that too.