Once upon a time in America, being a rich celebrity was considered its own reward. A whole television franchise was devoted to their fabulous lifestyles, houses and airplanes. No one suspected that anything was lacking in the lives of tech billionaires, Hollywood moguls or famous talk-show hosts.

Then came Donald Trump, and suddenly the wealthiest .01 percent was confronted with a new standard of personal achievement to be measured against. Increasingly they are being asked, often but not exclusively by themselves, “Are you running for president?”

The latest household name to be mentioned in the same sentence as “2020” is the inescapable Oprah, who if elected would be the first woman president, the first one-name president, and in many ways the natural heir to President Trump: a household name steeped in tabloid culture, prone to eschewing fact-checking in the cause of a higher, or more marketable, truth. She could, for instance, expand Trump’s crackdown on crime by undocumented aliens to include alien abductions.

To be fair, it’s not clear that Oprah is seriously, or even casually, considering running for president; the speculation stems from an interview with David Rubenstein on Bloomberg Television that was recorded in December but just aired Wednesday. Rubenstein asked, “Have you ever thought that, given the popularity you have, [and] we haven’t broken the glass ceiling yet for women, that you could actually run for president and be elected?” Oprah seemed nonplussed by the question, admitting that “I never considered the question, even the possibility … I just thought, I don’t have the experience, I don’t know enough … now I’m thinking, oh!” — an answer that could be merely equivocal, or a subtle plug for O, the name of her magazine.


from: https://www.yahoo.com/news/president-oprah-president-zuckerberg-the-rich-and-famous-seem-to-be-asking-why-not-me-222419434.html

she is too nice a lady to live under the hyper scrutiny she would no doubt get,,,,,

but maybe President Gates,,,he is brilliant and capable enough to have WAY more business and money than Trump could ever dream and very few if any controversies or bankruptcies, and a track record of GIVING back to community,,,,

and the single best qualifier in today's climate: No political experience,,,

This is funny, isn't it a little early to be talking the next Presidential candidates?


Oprah? I can see her campaign now.

You get a car, you get a car, everyone gets a car! Yayyyyy!

President Springer!

another Trump bashing thread.. oh boy!

your ready to vote for a person without hearing one word about their stance on anything.

nah, Springer is only worth 45 million and his claim to fame is mayor and tv host.

Oprah is worth billions, coming from a background of poverty, and has multiple successful business ventures and business intelligence,,,,

or Gates


same alleged qualifications that Trump's supporters were so in love with,,,,except neither of them CAME FROM WEALTH , which is even more of an accomplishment

nobody bashed him, although this is the politics thread and it clearly has a precedent for 'President' bashing,,,

I do not know if I would vote for them, although the idea that words matter is kind of laughable considering the way our current POTUS spoke during his campaign

but they certainly are just as 'impressive' as candidates

So...Money makes you qualified to be president...Got it.

or because of gender and color

those seem to be the qualifier for some.

really, who?


Because Clinton (the woman frontrunner) had experience as US Senator, first lady AT THE WHITE HOUSE, AND Secretary of state, as well as civil service in the area of legal aid for the underserved.

And OBama had experience as State Senator, US Senator, Constitutional law professor , AND civil service in the area of organizing for the underserved.

Worked for the current POTUS.

I don't think you grasp what Trumps appeal to the masses really was.


His riches? Hardly

o.k., so exactly what are her positions on ANYTHING in politics.. or world affairs.. or finance.

She never even said she had a interest.

your pushing someone for President.. on exactly what basis ?

I'm pushing someone as a CANDIDATE. That is what the POTUS was before his campaign and election ,, right? on what basis was he a candidate?

I think MsH would cheer for ANYONE who could potentially take it away from Prump lol

I don't think the 'alternate facts' fans grasp what 'experience' means, I do think they felt it was the equivalent of being a billionaire, and I know that many here do not grasp the difference between 'CANDIDATE' and POTUS.

oh, and I believe the 'tired of the establishment' bs is something they tell themselves and others to look less like they are supportive of bigotry and divisiveness,,,,

many NON ESTABLISHMENT people they would not have voted for,, for instance

FARRAKHAN or SHARPTON , they didn't want 'change' that bad,, they wanted someone saying what they felt and making it acceptable for them

kind of like how people wait for the first couple to go on the dance floor,, he was the one that took away the need to feel self conscious about their own bigotry and/or incivility

Many people I would not vote for


Paris Hilton
Zuckerberg
David Duke
Bloomberg

or any other people that are long on bs talk and self adoration but short on responsibility and integrity,,,,

Trump was elected President by the people by the words he spoke on the campaign trail.

Oprah doesn't have a single word under her belt.. not one stance on ANY subject. yet you " nominate" her.. Lol

She may be great.. but people make Presidential choices based on actions, based on words.

When she actually stands up and says something.. then her name should be thrown into the ring.. by.. her

but of course, she has a long wait time;)

The "experience" you speak of is exactly what is wrong with your seasoned politicians... the status quo was no longer an option and your population chose not to continue on that self imploding way, pretty simple... the Clinton dingbat was corrupt and America knew it, experience in borderline criminality is not appealing.

Trump RAN before he had a 'campaign trail',,,kind of the point


I have heard her speak and I'm sure she wouldn't say some of the absolutely disgusting, divisive, and ignorant things he did, so why wouldn't I NOMINATE her?

people did make their choice based upon actions and words, so would I ,,,I'm a big fan of both where ms Winfrey is concerned.

I don't think she would run, this thread is about a hypothetical situation. Like years before the election when people here spoke about how they would LIKE to see the current POTUS run.

Experience is NEVER what's 'wrong',, lack of experience is
(except to alternate facts fans)

oh, and I believe the 'tired of the establishment' bs is something they tell themselves and others to look less like they are supportive of bigotry and divisiveness,,,,

many NON ESTABLISHMENT people they would not have voted for,, for instance

FARRAKHAN or SHARPTON , they didn't want 'change' that bad,, they wanted someone saying what they felt and making it acceptable for them

kind of like how people wait for the first couple to go on the dance floor,, he was the one that took away the need to feel self conscious about their own bigotry and/or incivility