January 8th, 2018

So now it’s Oprah for 2020. Of course.

You may have thought that the Golden Globes would be about the anti-Weinstein men and women in black—if you thought about it at all. But just look at memerorandum today and you’ll see that the real event was Oprah Winfrey’s speech and the desire of Democrats that she run in 2020.

It makes perfect sense. If Trump runs for re-election, it would be the celebrity vs. celebrity contest, the mega-wealth vs. mega-wealth contest, the man vs. woman contest, and the white vs. black contest, all rolled into one. What could be more au courant?

Oprah is exceedingly well-liked and has been in the public eye forever, or at least for about 35 years. In 2020 she’ll be 66, but that’s younger than Trump. Her lack of any political experience certainly won’t be a factor in running against Trump—although by 2020 he will be very experienced indeed.

No wonder Democrats are salivating at the idea of Oprah being their savior in 2020. NBC tweeted this (as a joke or an error? If a joke, it fell a bit flat, because they seem to have taken it down):

“Nothing but respect for OUR future president,” the verified NBC account tweeted on Sunday night during its Golden Globes telecast, complete with an image of Winfrey, after host Seth Meyers joked about his desire for the talk show icon to run for office.

Early Monday, NBC appeared to back off the apparent Oprah endorsement, and blamed it on a “third party.”

“Yesterday a tweet about the Golden Globes and Oprah Winfrey was sent by a third party agency for NBC Entertainment in real time during the broadcast,” read the tweet. “It is in reference to a joke made during the monologue and not meant to be a political statement. We have since removed the tweet.”

Media Research Center Vice President Dan Gainor told Fox News that the initial tweet was “stunningly unprofessional” and it’s the “latest of about a billion examples” of how openly liberal and anti-Trump the mainstream media is on a regular basis.

Reports that Oprah is “actively thinking” about it came out almost immediately, fanning the flames. But in a post-speech interview Oprah said she isn’t planning to run. Nevertheless, her significant other had this to say:

“It’s up to the people,” Winfrey’s longtime partner, Stedman Graham, told the Los Angeles Times on Sunday when asked about a presidential run. “She would absolutely do it.”

I wonder—will we ever again have a president who’s ever held political office before?

41 Responses to “So now it’s Oprah for 2020. Of course.”

  1. Lurch Says:

    You asked “What could be more au courant? ”

    That would be Oprah stepping out of the closet and finally admitting she’s a lesbian.

  2. steve walsh Says:

    Oprah Winfrey for President in 2020!

    Hillary Rodham Clinton hardest hit.

  3. T Says:

    So those people who faulted Trump for being a billionaire celebrity with no political experience are willing to back a billionaire celebrity with no political experience.

    You can’t make this stuff up.

  4. Yancey Ward Says:

    I don’t think Winfrey will run, but if he does, Hillary Clinton will have to be sent to prison first.

  5. Yancey Ward Says:

    And that was a simple typo, not a Freudian slip.

  6. Dano Says:

    Regarding your question “will we ever again have a president who’s ever held political office before?” The answer to me is would the public consider the Trump Presidency a success? If the answer is yes then it is quite likely we will have another one, again and again.

    If no, then it will be a very long time before we see another non-politician (celebrity) president again.

    That is assuming your question was a serious question and not a tongue in cheek one

  7. AMartel Says:

    Topic change alert! (Oprah for Prezzie is a topic change.)
    These people are such frauds and phonies. They all wore black like some sort of sisterhood of oppressed serious sad people instead of the sisterhood of silly notions and playacting that they are. Some hauled along representatives of the underprivileged clinging to them and showing them off like good luck totems of virtual virtue. Most of them are just as complicit as their male colleagues but they freely and not at all bravely crapped all over the men. Nobody took accountability. Everyone talked about how great they were and how things were (unaccountably) going to change. Nobody believed a word of it. Oprah is a snake oil saleswoman in the true American tradition. She’s the hero of the stupid and gullible. That nonsense in her speech about how “your truth” is most important is typical – giving idiots permission to be selfish.
    She is, however, a good actress.
    I remember that she blamed Bush II for Katrina, riding the racist train. Then when she had him on after his presidency and listened to him talk about what actually happened she seemed all surprised like, “Oh, my, I did not know that!” BS! So much for believing that the “absolute truth” is conveyed by journalism. Feh to Oprah and all her enablers.
    Just remember: They’re telling a STORY and it’s NOT TRUE.

  8. AMartel Says:

    Also, I think that the celebrity president fad will fade away. Obama was a celebrity. Now we’ve got Trump. In eight years we’ll be ready for a steady, dull, grey, executive.

  9. Steve57 Says:

    The leftists are salivating at the idea of calling anyone who doesn’t vote for Oprah racist and misogynist.

  10. AesopFan Says:

    “I wonder—will we ever again have a president who’s ever held political office before?”
    Given the hash the experienced ones routinely make of their office, what difference, at this point, does it make?
    Seriously, I think that experience and ideology of the advisers and enforcers of the Prez make as much difference or more, so long as the One at the top is able to set an overall agenda (campaign promises) and select competent administrators who agree with the goals (notice some lacks in the current admin; Obama and Co. were all on the same page, which is why they were so effective).

  11. AesopFan Says:

    T Says:
    January 8th, 2018 at 1:16 pm
    So those people who faulted Trump for being a billionaire celebrity with no political experience are willing to back a billionaire celebrity with no political experience.

    You can’t make this stuff up.
    * * *
    I used to have a bookmark folder labeled YCMTSU, but it got so almost every story I read was eligible (and that was by the end of 2008), so I gave it up.

  12. AesopFan Says:

    Dano Says:
    January 8th, 2018 at 1:50 pm
    Regarding your question “will we ever again have a president who’s ever held political office before?” The answer to me is would the public consider the Trump Presidency a success? If the answer is yes then it is quite likely we will have another one, again and again.
    * * *
    We tend to repeat what works (or seems to) unless we are insane (and sometimes we are that, especially Dem voters in dysfunctional cities). Maybe it depends on our personal definition of “what works” which isn’t necessarily the same that a reasonable observer would select.

  13. AesopFan Says:

    AMartel Says:
    January 8th, 2018 at 1:55 pm
    Also, I think that the celebrity president fad will fade away. Obama was a celebrity. Now we’ve got Trump. In eight years we’ll be ready for a steady, dull, grey, executive.
    * * *
    Testable proposition; I suspect some poli-sci PhD has already looked at the factor of personality in voting.
    However, the number-one factor is almost always economic, and second or tie is “throw the incumbents out”. I’ll see if I can find the references later.

  14. AesopFan Says:

    Steve57 Says:
    January 8th, 2018 at 2:09 pm
    The leftists are salivating at the idea of calling anyone who doesn’t vote for Oprah racist and misogynist.
    * * *
    Then let’s run Nikki Hayley.


    In this crazed historical moment, Ambassador Nikki Haley is, as usual, a voice of sanity. She responds to George Stephanopoulos’s faux concerns about the president. Notable quote: “Having been governor, now an ambassador, I’m always amazed at the lengths people will go to to lie for money and for power.”


  15. TommyJay Says:

    So the MSM has been hammering us with the outrage that foreigners (Russia) had influenced the last election. They paid no attention to the fact that Obama had a major Euro donation web site in his last election, nominally for ex-pats, that had zero provision for detecting illegal foreign contributions.

    Now we have Oprah, with essentially a major candidacy announcement, addressing who? The Hollywood Foreign Correspondents.

  16. neo-neocon Says:


    You forget Trump? Do you think he won’t want to run for e-election in 2020?

  17. Ann Says:

    Well, Trump was all for her, at least back in 1999:

    But would she challenge Trump? He had glowing things to say about her political prospects back in 1999. When asked whether he’d ever consider a female running mate, Trump responded: “Well, I would consider, and as Chris [Matthews] can tell you, I threw out the name of a friend of mine, who I think the world of. She’s great. And some people thought it was an incredible idea, some people didn’t, but — Oprah. I said, ‘Oprah Winfrey,’ who’s really great. And I think we would be a very formidable team.”

  18. AMartel Says:

    Hollywood had a televised Dinner with Schmucks/Radical Deplorable dinner party a la Leonard Bernstein’s radical chic soiree. Apparently, Tonya Harding and Tommy Wiseau – real life deplorables – were guests at the party for their respective films. Tommy had to be physically discouraged by the Star of the Show from participating in the acceptance speech.

    “Everyone casts a glance, or stares, or tries a smile, and then sizes up the house for the somehow delicious counterpoint . . . Deny it if you want to! but one does end up making such sweet furtive comparisons in this season of Radical Chic . . . . ‘“I’ve never met a [Deplorable]—this is a first for me!'”

  19. Ann Says:

    John Podhoretz, back in September of last year — Democrats’ best hope for 2020: Oprah:

    If you think that Trump can be beaten by a two-term governor of a Midwestern state with really good ideas about health care, or by a senator who really attracts young people, think again. The idea that a relatively conventional elected official will differentiate herself from Trump by dint of her seriousness or that an unconventional elected official can out-populist Trump is crazy.

    If you need to set a thief to catch a thief, you need a star — a grand, outsized, fearless star whom Trump can neither intimidate nor outshine — to catch a star. We’re through the looking glass here. America is discarding old approaches in politics. Democrats will have to do the same to match the mood to the moment. …

    As for politics, it’s worth remembering that Oprah played a not-insubstantial role in the 2008 election. Her decision to endorse Barack Obama after his campaign failed to catch fire in its first eight months in 2007 provided the initial accelerant that took him from 25 points back to winning the nomination away from Hillary Clinton.

  20. Oldflyer Says:

    Flavor of the moment. The Dems cycle through them regularly.

    We will see. Would OW have the fire to go through a grueling campaign? She appeals to a couple of demographics.; a few are obvious. Even my sensible, conservative wife thinks highly of Oprah as a talent; and as a humanitarian. Still, I doubt she would vote for her for President.

    As our British friends are apt to say; “early days yet”.

    Trump is doing things. He is shaking up the status quo. If he is successful, would the country really turn back toward knee jerk big government socialism over the span of one term?

  21. AMartel Says:

    Agree with Oldflyer. It’s a distraction and a talking point and a position from which to criticize Trump – all in one! To be forgotten when the next favor of the moment takes over.

    Many pics of her with Weinstein. She knew.

  22. Dave Says:

    I actually think George Clooney is a better presidential candidate for the dems.

  23. AesopFan Says:

    neo-neocon Says:
    January 8th, 2018 at 2:38 pm

    You forget Trump? Do you think he won’t want to run for e-election in 2020?
    * * *
    Just musing that Our Girl is much better presidential material than Their Girl.
    If the economy stays good and NK / Iran avoid outright insanity (or are countered effectively), 2020 looks good for Trump regardless of who the Dems run, so NH v. OW in 2024?

  24. neo-neocon Says:


    In 2024 Oprah will be 70 and Nikki 52. Not a bad matchup.

    I’ve been very impressed by Haley at the UN.

  25. OldTexan Says:

    If we can keep this train on the tracks with the DOW, employment, and dollars coming back for US industry and if the tax cut yields higher tax revenue we could be in for a great run with the GOP in charge for a bit. That is a lot of if and I would love to see Niki run for pres.

    As for the black dress crap at the show I have not watched for decades the pictures look like a bunch of rich Goth Bitches trying to resurrect something or a bunch of Crows with too much makeup or, the finest Mafia funeral of all time.

  26. Mike K Says:

    They paid no attention to the fact that Obama had a major Euro donation web site in his last election, nominally for ex-pats, that had zero provision for detecting illegal foreign contributions.

    When the FBI/CIA/NSA stuff all comes out we may find that Obama had a significant Iran component to his fund raising and maybe much else.

    Also, in Obama we had a president with no experience who was not successful.

  27. Sloppy Steve Says:

    Wow, a veritable “four-fer”: a body-positive negro woman who is also reputedly a lesbian on the down low.

    Oprah definitely brings to the table “the perfect storm” of presidential attributes for the party of identity politics and grievance. The wretched Lena Dunham and her fellow identity-obsessed vulgarians would be in raptures at Oprah’s candidacy, no doubt.

    But such people would vote for the Democrat anyway, no? The fact that it’s Oprah would just mean they’d do so just a tad more enthusiastically and would linger just that much longer in the view of the cameras while they did it. So what?

    Oprah’s electoral viability would be decided by the swinging voters – the voters who had previously voted for Obama, (twice), but who transferred their votes to Trump despite the “first female” gimmick that was all Crooked Hillary had to commend her.

    These people voted for Trump because they recognised that without a strong economy there can be no work for them, (or almost as bad, no security of employment), and without work their marriages fail; their sons and daughters will fail to form families in the first place, their health and morale will decline as they fall prey to despair and turn to self medication in drugs and alcohol; their communities will continue to fail and hollow out.

    As long as Trump continues to honour his promises to them to focus on the economy unemployment will continue to fall and the forgotten men and women and their families and communities will have hope.

    As long as he continues to adhere to the notion that the US is a nation state with an economy and a people of its own to whom it owes loyalty in their tough times just as it expects loyalty from them in times of national emergency he will be reelected whichever novelty candidate runs against him, be it a negro “four-fer” or a blonde, blue-eyed faux Indian.

    The people need and want a president who recognises their problems and then addresses them. Demographic gimmickry is just a luxury neither the US or the West can presently afford in its leaders. And that’s all that Oprah offers. Fortunately people see that – which is how Trump got there in the first place.

    What got Trump into office is exactly what will keep him there: the Democrats are invested in the notion that the US is just one component economy within a border-less world where it doesn’t matter that US jobs are off-shored to other component economies; they think it OK if whole US industries that could be viable are priced out of competition or even shut down by restrictive regulations; and are religiously devoted to importing foreign workers to compete with American citizens for those few jobs remaining then the swinging voters won’t defect.

    Fame is just not enough anymore. Reagan wasn’t elected because he had been a film star. He was elected because he spent decades thinking seriously about politics and economic issues and refining a cogent political philosophy responsive to his times and deepening his real-world knowledge during the years he spent touring factories and speaking with workers in his role as GE’s brand ambassador.

    Likewise, Trump though also a celebrity, wasn’t elected on that fact alone. He too spent decades thinking and speaking out about political issues. Sure, he’s not as widely read or as subtle a thinker as Reagan, (Wolff’s book calls him “post-literate” and ‘all about tv”), but then the problems facing the US and the West today are a lot more obvious to us and call more for an energetic change-agent than a philosopher king.

    Yes, by all means let the Democrats search out and run another gimmick candidate, however well-known and how ever many boxes he/she ticks in the racial/sexual grievance sweepstakes. I say that the American people will instinctively respond as Octavius did in Antony and Cleoptara: “Our graver business frowns at this levity”.

  28. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    This picture perfectly encapsulates Oprah’s relationship with Weinstein.

    The circumstantial evidence that she knew Weinstein’s nature is the following picture of Oprah, Weinstein and British actress Kadian Noble who accuses Weinstein of using promises of career advancement to lure Noble to his hotel room, where he raped her.

    Take a look at that picture, particularly the expression on Oprah’s face, she knows exactly what Weinstein is and is acting as Weinstein’s procurer by leading Noble to Weinstein.

    Just like Obama and Michelle, Oprah is a racist and so Noble ‘got what she deserved’ and her rape was simple atonement for her ancestor’s ‘sins’.

  29. Sloppy Steve Says:

    Good points, GB.

    I’m not sure that we can fairly ascribe those “procuring” thoughts to Oprah since neither of us is gifted with ESP but if she wins the nomination, then her “generations” of white people needing to “die off” statement will certainly get 24 hour air-play and by rights ought to prove fatal to her candidacy.

    No sane political party that remained in touch with reality – or even basic morality – would even consider nominating such a bigoted person, but the Democrats left all that behind years ago so she may win through.

    It would of course be quite fruitless to argue with Leftists that the distasteful pussy-grabbing they consider to be so evil on Trump’s part pails by comparison when compared to the death-wish willed upon us whites by Oprah, but that doesn’t invalidate the objection.

    But it’s not the hatred of whites, per se, by a person who has been propelled to vast riches largely by white audiences in a society built mainly and largely still maintained by whites that should offend reasonable people.

    Grifters and opportunists will be true to their nature and calling and will spew these things out. No big deal.

    What ought to hurt because it is just so damned insulting is that whites are expected to buy into this garbage, learn to loathe themselves and cast a vote for a candidate who wishes them dead based on their skin colour.

    Oprah, the financial success story, would no doubt justify this hateful speech because white privilege.

    But as more and more people these days are beginning to ask: is the the son or daughter of an unemployed steel worker or of an unemployed West Virginia coal miner always to be treated as privileged against non-white professionals and their children? And if so, then why?

  30. Cornhead Says:

    She could win 10-15 states.

  31. John Guilfoyle Says:

    Cornflour…by my count, HRC won 21 states.
    So…she grabs half to 2/3 HRC’s total.

    If it’s still less than 270…I’m cool with that.
    More Trump. (Then maybe a Pence/Haley Ticket?)

    And yes…as noted about…The “die whiteys” and Harvey smooching & swooning commercials would write themselves.

  32. John Guilfoyle Says:

    that’s “above” not “about”
    bless the auto-correct function and my fat fingers 😉

  33. n.n Says:


  34. Sloppy Steve Says:

    n.n, Agreed.

    Just looked in/hate-watched on the Golden Globes out of curiosity and to see HRH Oprah’s performance. Underwhelmed.

    While there, though, I learned from various moral poseurs that Hollywood is all about “strong, powerful women who refuse to be victims making films about other strong powerful women”.

    Learned from presenters of both genders, as they opened awards envelopes, that actors do pray, their favourite prayer apparently being:”please don’t be a straight white dude”, (because unlike every other demographic straight white men must be judged by their absolute worst).

    Wonderfully inspiring to see all the strong empowered women like Oprah and Meryl and Shirley proclaiming, ad infinitum, their devoted “sisterhood” with the abused despite having seen and heard and turned a blind eye to the abuses for years.

    Saw that it’s all OK, though, because the strong empowered women wore black dresses, bravely insulted all the “straight white men” and, just because they believe so strongly in human dignity, brought along and displayed their own pet non-white “activist” totems.

  35. Dave Says:

    Trump was a outsider candidate in 2016, Oprah is just another establishment candidate, what is her advantage over other dems candidates other than being more well known? Oprah is a billionaire trying to run as a democrat, there is a different level of acceptance for a billionaire being their presidential candidate between republicans and democrats. Political Experience is not crucial for an outsider running against establishment candidates but if you have a match up between two outsiders, if trump presidency turns out to be decent in 2020, an outsider with four years of proven track records still trump an outsider with no records.

  36. MHollywood Says:

    good new terms, thx to n.n & sloppy steve:
    #SheKnew (as in she’s a #SheKnewer)
    “vulgarians” (useful, cogent)

  37. Tim W Says:

    Her anti-vaccine credentials will stand her in good stead with….well, crazy people?

  38. ConceptJunkie Says:

    Oprah’s got way too much baggage. That wouldn’t stop the Democrats from backing her, but it would take a lot of the work out defeating her.

    On the other hand, Trump had no lack of baggage either…

  39. kevino Says:

    RE: steve walsh: “Hillary Rodham Clinton hardest hit.”

    How many lamps has Hillary thrown today? She must be screaming mad. She’s lost two presidential elections, even though she presents herself as one of the smartest women on the planet with an awesome resume. The first election she lost to an inexperienced community organizer, and the second she lost to a totally inexperienced reality TV star. And, of course, the book Fire and Fury states that she lost to a guy who didn’t expect to win and didn’t want to win.

    Now she’s plotting her comeback, only to wake to the news that the DNC thinks their best shot at 2020 is a TV talk show host with zero experience in politics.

  40. charles Says:

    If she does run you can bet that the MSM will do everything to avoid the subject of her throwing that sales clerk in Switzerland under the bus with race-baiting to help sell her movie.

    Hillary as President would have been failure number one. Oprah as President would be failure number two.

    And, I’m sure a lot of white women who supported Hillary would NOT support Oprah since many of them will not forgive her for throwing Hillary under the bus to support Obama.

    And if for some stupid reason the DNC convinces her to run against Trump – well, that is another reason Trump will win – hands down! (Please run Oprah, please!)

  41. Ymar Sakar Says:

    Tim W Says:
    January 9th, 2018 at 11:20 am
    Her anti-vaccine credentials will stand her in good stead with….well, crazy people?

    Alt Right, Independents, some Democrats, New Age, as well as some Christian lines.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.

Monthly Archives


Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge