Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Oprah: A Pawn of the Left?
Consider the possibility that Oprah Winfrey may actually run for president. There are plenty of reasons why she shouldn’t or wouldn’t, but let me tell you why she might, and why the Right should be concerned. I want to thank Georgi Boorman for her article in The Federalist for inspiring me to explore the following: why we should be worried if Oprah runs for president.
First, Oprah has a huge fan base. They adore her. Unlike Barack Obama, people feel as if they know her, know what kind of person she is, and admire her integrity and directness. I have to admit that I do like and admire Oprah; after all, she overcame huge odds to become one of the most successful people in the world. And she’s likeable and smart, too. Anyway, when people like a celebrity a lot, they will give credence to his or her ideas, and they especially like Oprah because she essentially says to her audience: you can do anything:
The highest honor on earth that you will ever have is the honor of being yourself. And your only job in the world is to figure out, that’s what this movie is about … people think your job is to get up and go and raise money and take care of your family. That’s an obligation that you have, but your only true job as a human being is to discover why you came, why you are here.
Every one of us has an internal guidance, a GPS, an intuition, a heart print, a heartsong that speaks to us. Your only job is to be able to listen and discern when it’s speaking versus when your head and your personality is speaking. And if you follow that, you will be led to the highest good for you. Always.
Now before you start rolling your eyes, remember that people in our culture today want to be reassured, coddled and encouraged. They love the idea that success will come to them, that they just have to want it enough. Unfortunately in offering this advice, Oprah seriously underrates her own abilities to succeed, including discipline, drive and dedication. Those qualities are part of her make-up, and I think she assumes everyone else shares those same qualities and will make the most of them. But she’s wrong.
So Oprah has developed a huge audience that has essentially deified her, that believe she is spiritually deep and knowing. If Oprah says a person can be successful, well, it must be the Truth.
Even now Oprah is showing up in the spotlight more often, although she has left television. I suspect she is testing the waters for a presidential run. Her motivation may actually be to serve “her people”, i.e., fans (like a female Moses who will lead them to the Promised Land), so I think she’s considering the role of president of the United States, even if she says she’s not.
Two developments will be intersecting over the coming months, as Oprah becomes more visible and her ideas become even more mainstream. Slowly people will begin to realize that their personal success isn’t just around the corner, as Oprah has predicted. But rather than question her ideas, they will assume that they have to wish harder for good outcomes. And over the next two years, when they realize their dreams still have not come through, they will look for someone to blame. And it won’t be Oprah, whom they adore. It will be Trump, whom they’ve been conditioned to hate and blame for everything.
Meanwhile, the Left will find a way to persuade Oprah that she has a calling to run for president. Rather than emphasizing power, they will frame the position as an opportunity to serve, to humbly accept this duty to help the country and rescue it from Trump. They will de-emphasize Leftist ideology, and rather than talking in Leftist terms, they will speak in Utopian terms. They will say, yes, the country has become successful and Trump has been able to back laws that have helped people get by. But he hasn’t helped them realize their dreams, the way Oprah would if she were in power. As the population nurses its own greed, narcissism, and apathy, Trump will be further demonized (if that’s possible) and Oprah will be discussed in messianic terms. Her opponents will be reluctant to criticize her because they will be labeled racist. And of course, the mainstream media will be thrilled to have her run.
Once she is in office, the ideologues will work through her, manipulate and control her, and assure her that their Leftist ideas will support her Utopian dreams.
Does this sound crazy? That’s because you are on the Right. But for people who are either on the Left or don’t know what they are, who treasure their materialistic dreams, Oprah fits the bill.
I think we should be worried.
Published in Politics
She attended Reverend Wright’s church until she realized it might not be smart to continue.
Susan, I didn’t say she’d have to take blatant SJW left wing positions, but that she wouldn’t have the political guts to take the more centrist positions between Clinton 1996 and Obama 2008 which might win her the nomination after a nasty battle with the left and set her up for the general. And let’s keep in mind that the positions which defined Obama’s supposed centrism — opposition to an insurance mandate and gay marriage — would cause his expulsion from the party today.
When Oprah states, in her kumbaya cadences, her support for Gosnell abortion practices, the entire Kaepernick/BLM race racket, single payer, gun confiscation, federal enforcement of transgender mandates, amnesty and lax immigration enforcement, tax hikes, and coal/fracking killing green schemes her broad feel good support is going to take quite a hit.
She won’t run.
I think this is the weak link in your prediction.
The biggest debate among Democrats right now is how far left they should go. There are many people who believe that the problem with Hillary was that she is too moderate and thus didn’t have anything concrete to offer anybody besides “I’m a woman.” Under this theory, Bernie Sanders could have beaten Trump because he at least had something “positive” to offer.
That debate is ongoing, and is not merely going to be put on hold just because Oprah shows up. If anything, it’s more likely that Oprah would be a kind of left-wing Trump, with a primary bloodbath to determine which way their party goes. That assumes that Oprah has or would adopt some beliefs that other Democrat politicians don’t have or are paying lip service to, which I think is possible because she doesn’t appear to be a committed, garden-variety leftist.
There’s plenty of runway left for him to crash into the control tower before takeoff, especially with the tariffs and possibly with whatever happens with North Korea.
I see your points, QV. Thanks for clarifying for me.
Point taken, @joep. I guess there’s a part of me that hopes the Left will put on the brakes on their trek farther Left. But that’s probably a meaningless hope. Circumstances will be different this time around; how different, only time will tell. Thanks.
I think we may see a repeat of 1972. The left will see an unpopular, Republican President as an opportunity to harness the President’s unpopularity to drag otherwise unelectable far-Left candidates across the finish line, only for the “Silent Majority” to prove that the people aren’t that desperate for an alternative to the incumbent.
I think this is spot on. The fall election will maintain the status quo in the power balance. From a conservative best-case scenario the Republicans gain enough Senate seats to actually get something done without completely gutting the filibuster/blue card rules. Trump will be Trump delighting in infuriating those he wishes to infuriate. The economy continues between steady progress. Europe and American elites keep their Trump hate-on at high dudgeon. “Smart people” are anti-Trump. That is the formula for a “1972 election” in 2020.
There’s a lot of big picture validity here. But, man, look at it closer. Where’s the Muskie, Humphrey or Scoop Jackson in the 2020 Democratic race? (Not to mention George Wallace).
McGovern would be a centrist in the present crowd.
Biden would fit in with 1972 field, but Biden would probably fit in with the 1856 field.
I’d take Shirley Chisholm over the present lot.
Of course Joey “Choo Choo” Biden would fit in with the 1856 field. Part of their 2012 platform was focused on the big technology of 1856, trains and windmills.
Oprah is first and foremost a person of color. Remember how she went over to Switzerland, and not bothering with her hair or makeup, stumbled into this high class snobby boutique where she was ignored even as she tried to examine a $ 40 K purse she wanted to buy.
She saw that whole fiasco as proof that people are racist. Whereas it had nothing to do with race, and everything to do with class. No one is permitted inside one of these boutiques unless they are recognized as being a celebrity – it was Switzerland and the young store clerk didn’t recognize Oprah. When a person enters one of those stores, they must be being willing to display the outer indications of fab wealth and power. Had she showed up with an entourage with her, and a bit glammed up, she would have been waited on hand and foot.
Anyway I admire Oprah for being a normal human and not always glamming it to the max. But the incident was not about race. And she made it about that. Her Presidency would be about bringing immigrants into the country, as both parties are controlled at the top by people who want that to happen. She will employ her poor-girl-child-rags to riches story as an indication of how well immigrants can do if only given the chance.
Michael Medved used to talk about “the Oprahfication” of America, which reflected her focus on following one’s heart over doing one’s duty. This is a progressive ethos, and it’s how many well-meaning Democrats get swept up in statism: they want to help hurting people, and every minority group is hurting, victims of injustice. She doesn’t need to proscribe any policies, she just needs to express sympathy, and her presence will cause powerful waves.
The big things Trump and Oprah have in common as celebrities are:
Cults of Personality. This is what national politics has become, and both of these celebrities, who are famous for being themselves (as opposed to actors), have a big head start in this area over traditional politicians, who we get to know during a campaign. They cannot catch up to these types of self-made celebrities whose names have already become brands.
Mobilizing Traditional Non-voters. One of the ingredients in Trump’s surprise was that he got a lot of people to the polls who normally don’t vote — enough to offset considerable GOP disaffection. Obama also brought in new voters. And it would be foolish to focus on the small number of fans Oprah might alienate by stepping into party politics when she is far more likely to energize previously un-activated voters, the same army of mostly women who read the books she tells them to read.
Great observation, @dorrk. The Left will only be her vehicle (not their ideology) to serve the people. Interesting. Thanks.
I would say you are bringing forth good points. But from what I have observed, the voters who chose Obama in 2008 and the voters who chose Trump in 2016 had logical reasons for doing so. Obama was the only choice for anyone who wanted “out” of the McCain-Clinton-Oligarchy decision to have Massive Banks Bailed out. He pledged he would hold banks accountable. (unfortunately he did not honor that stance.)
Trump said he would stand with people in stopping immigration. Also he said he would bring jobs back, and make the tax code more fair. He also pledged to see to it that Homeland Security would take down predatory sex slavers – he has done that as well as the other three things mentioned.
Oprah’s voters are all about emotion. Period.
She has two years to come up with a platform, @caroljoy. She’s pretty darn smart, and if she decides to run, she’ll find her inner businesswoman–remember she is one. ;-)
I for one see Oprah as a pleasant version of Hillary. I mean, if we somehow were at the same lunch counter, I wouldn’t move away from her. (Whereas if it was HRC, I’d give her a shove on her rump and blast on out of the diner.) But I doubt I would believe a word of Oprah’s platform.
She had a large part in allowing Obama his victory. And as far as I know, she has never been critical of him being in bed with Big Banking/Big Insurance. That alone would make me think twice about considering her.
Good points; however, I don’t need any reasons to not vote for her. ;-)
That may be true for you, and most of us here at Ricochet, but don’t underestimate how much of a factor Hillary’s unpleasantness was in getting Trump elected.
I was gone when this was published, so I’m late to the party, but I agree with Susan. Oprah does have a loyal following among women, though it may have diminished a little since her show isn’t on TV anymore. Unfortunately, we might just have enough fatuous low-info women voters to propel this woman into office. I always thought she might run for Congress of the Senate, but I didn’t see this coming.