Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 583

Warbler said:

I’m just curious, other than not being Trump, what qualifications does Oprah have for being President?

Being Oprah.

Jeebus said:

I am going to take a bold stance against all out-of-touch billionaires with no political experience running for president. No Trump, no Mark Cuban, and no Oprah.

But people like Oprah.

Warbler said:

I’m just curious, other than not being Trump, what qualifications does Oprah have for being President?

Well, when Trump ran for President, he would have been the least qualified person to ever be elected to that office.

If Oprah runs for President, she would be tied for the least qualified person to ever be elected to that office.

Totally different 😉

But all snark aside, lack of political experience is not an immediate disqualification, just a giant red flag. Oprah is clearly a successful businesswoman, which puts her above Trump on that scale, for whatever that’s worth. She doesn’t appear to be mobbed up, which is nice. She also can go hours and even days without lying or committing a major crime, which again is a serious leg up.

Maybe she’s got some political savvy that we haven’t seen very clearly yet. Trump’s political liabilities were on full display and easy to discern during the primary and general election, and people ran from him in droves (not enough, but still). Obviously Oprah will come across more favorably than Trump, but she’ll be up against people like Kamala Harris who will be very clearly smart, levelheaded, professional and experienced. Don’t forget Trump was up against a clown car full of amateurs in the primary, so it didn’t really matter what sort of fool he looked like there, and he failed to be more appealing than his opponent in the general. Oprah will have to really prove herself to come out on top, just in the primary alone.

CatBus said:

Mrebo said:

With Trump in office, I keep hoping liberals will see the danger of consolidation and expansion of federal power. Some wonder if marijuana could be the gateway drug to federalism.

If Federalism’s most notable appeal is that it can throw a wrench in the gears when the Federal Government opts to do spectacularly bad things, the argument is already lost IMO. Because, among other things, who can throw a wrench into the gears when states opt to do spectacularly bad things? Whoever gets primacy gets the ability to screw people over, any good anarchist could tell you that.

That said, liberals AFAIK have never been against Federalism per se, but see the role of the Federal goverment fundamentally differently than conservatives. There’s plenty of good stuff in Federalism, liberals just hate most of the things conservatives love about it, and vice-versa.

I think Federalism’s biggest appeal is that decisions are being made closest to home. Of course, this isn’t a purely either/or choice where anarchy can get a foothold. Our Constitution imposes limitations on the states and grants broad powers the the federal government.

Some may be happy with the current balance but the clear trend is toward consolidation and expansion of federal power. Some think we should keep going in that direction, and quickly! There is a conviction that history will continue on an arc they like. And there is a belief that the federal government is capable of doing things better than the states. The fact that there are 50 not wholly independent states (each composed of liberal and conservative dominated areas) all exerting influence on each other, that can itself mitigate bad things and create good models for other states to adopt.

So when California wants to be a “Sanctuary” for immigrants or New York wants to implement stricter gun control or Colorado wants pot to be legal, they can do those things. And if Alabama wants to turn people here illegally over to the Feds, allow open carry of guns, and keep laws against drugs, let that happen too. That’s almost where we are right now. And yet, many people think we should/must adopt a uniform law on these matters.

Whether these are spectacularly good or bad policies is in the eye of the beholder, but there’s something to be said for giving the leeway for different policies to exist, and to maintain obstacles to consolidation of power.

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

I’m just curious, other than not being Trump, what qualifications does Oprah have for being President?

Being Oprah.

I agree with Jeebus and CatBus but I think this is a good answer.

The reason lack of political experience is only a giant red flag and not a disqualification is delegation. The President does not need to know how to do everything – they only need to be smart enough to know who knows how to do things, and delegate accordingly. I’d be fine with an amateur pitching in the Word Series if they could delegate the pitching duties to someone else, as long as I trusted their judgment about who that person might be.

That said, it’s still a giant red flag. I’m not excited about the prospect.

Warbler said:

What qualifications does Frink have for being President?

Being Frink.

… I never really thought about it that way before … it’s all so clear to be now … must make campaign contribution …

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

I’m just curious, other than not being Trump, what qualifications does Oprah have for being President?

Being Oprah.

I agree with Jeebus and CatBus but I think this is a good answer.

It is not answer at all.

What qualifications does Warbler have for being President?

Being Warbler.

What qualifications does Frink have for being President?

Being Frink.

What qualifications does Mrebo have for being President?

Being Mrebo.

See?

Given that Trump was elected, more or less*, for being Trump, I think “Being Warbler” is a perfectly acceptable answer.

*I may have placed that clause in the wrong place.

deleted!

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

I’m just curious, other than not being Trump, what qualifications does Oprah have for being President?

Being Oprah.

I agree with Jeebus and CatBus but I think this is a good answer.

It is not answer at all.

What qualifications does Warbler have for being President?

Being Warbler.

What qualifications does Frink have for being President?

Being Frink.

What qualifications does Mrebo have for being President?

Being Mrebo.

See?

Yes, but all of these people aren’t successful businesspeople with a large TV audience.

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

I’m just curious, other than not being Trump, what qualifications does Oprah have for being President?

Being Oprah.

I agree with Jeebus and CatBus but I think this is a good answer.

What qualifications does Warbler have for being President?

Being Warbler.

What qualifications does Frink have for being President?

Being Frink.

What qualifications does Mrebo have for being President?

Being Mrebo.

😦

I’m pretty sure both yhwx and Mrebo were joking, though.

Am I, though? Oprah has very high favorable ratings, especially among Democrats. Oprah is liked.

I’m not saying that I would support her; I’m just making a case for her.

Warbler said:

I will have to do some research on this Kamala Harris.

I think the road for her was (ominously) mapped out by Al Gore and Hillary Clinton. She is on many occasions doomed to be the smartest person in the room. Gore tripped over that by seeming too eager to crush his neophyte opponent in a debate. Clinton (I felt) successfully managed to walk the line between being strong and knowledgeable without showing any drive to kneecap her opponent just because he didn’t know how to defend himself, preferring to let him hang himself instead.

That’s the trap of an Oprah candidacy IMO. If Kamala does anything that seems mean to Oprah, it’s over. She’s got to get that tough but fair balance just right.

The BernieBros don’t like Harris though.

yhwx said:

The BernieBros don’t like Harris though.

The BernieBros don’t even like Bernie. They’re just there to sink Democrats.

EDIT: I should add that I’m an actual Bernie primary voter (not just someone who plays a Bernie supporter on the Internet to peddle pro-Trump conspiracy theories) and sure Harris is more conservative than I’d like but so are most people. If we could have stopped fascism in the 1930’s merely by voting for less-than-perfect candidates, I’d have jumped at the chance. I would gladly vote for Romney or Bush Sr. if I thought it would stop the rise of white supremacy.