CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:8
Arguments:5
Total Votes:10
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Television Star/Billionaire for President! No, Not Trump... Oprah! (5)

Debate Creator

JaceCarsonne(93) pic



Television Star/Billionaire for President! No, Not Trump... Oprah!

*Note: Be civil. I am going to do my best to take the position of an unbiased moderator. 

Since the Golden Globes last week, everyone has gone crazy about Oprah potentially running for President. The left, with cries of: "Yes!; This is who we need!; Oprah for President!" and the right with "No!; Why?; It doesn't make sense!"

The political parties are already in turmoil, given that a significant percentage of the right and the left couldn't come to grips with the primary candidates that were chosen for their respective parties. One of the biggest criticisms of Trump's presidency (and his running in general) was that while he is a reality TV star and billionaire businessman, he knows/knew very little about politics and how the country should be run. 
This is a valid criticism. 

However, now that Oprah has expressed her interest in running, the left are over the moon about her potential candidacy. However, does Oprah not represent their very criticism of Trump that they were so vocal about the last two years? Here is a shortlist of likenesses between the two: 
- Great at talking, can captivate their respective audience, as well as individuals from other viewpoints
- Famous television stars
- Quite wealthy
- Universal awareness of their existence prior to any political campaign
- And most importantly: Little--to no--political experience, whatsoever. 

I understand where this is coming from. A black, female president would be a tremendous social stride forward for America. However, that individual should be a qualified one. Oprah is a great speaker, and seems like quite a genuine person. But, she has said nothing that indicates that she would be a better leader for the country than other women in the conservative or liberal parties. 

So the questions for debate: 

1.) Is Oprah fit to run the country? 

2.) Have we, as a society, stopped voting based on policy, and started voting for people mainly based off of their gender and the colour of their skin?   

3.) Is it hypocritical that the same people who slammed Trump for being a billionaire television star with little-to-no knowledge of how to run a country, are now supporting Oprah: a billionaire television star with little-to-no knowledge of how to run a country? 
Add New Argument

It is no secret that the Left is made up of clinical dysfuntional hypocrites. They ran a corrupt treasonist Hillary Clinton for President!!!!!!!! NUFF SAID!

Oprah will be their darling child for one reason alone. She is extremely pro abortion just as the Democrat Party.

That is an absolute must for Democrats who are controlled by the feminist and pro abortion lobby.

There will never be a prolife Democrat running for the Presidency. They are almost extinct.

If Oprah were prolife, she would not stand a chance of being nominated by Democrats.

1 point

According to liberals she is too far out of touch to be president. Recall that they said this about Romney and Trump because they were rich. Oprah is rich, so she cannot connect to the average American, at least not anymore.

1 point

People have been rooting for Oprah for President before now, it's only at this point in time that it seems plausible since Trump was pretty much in the same boat she is in now and he is the President.

Personally, I don't think she has experience.....but that didn't stop Trump.

I don't think someone who has mostly been on TV and has had no exposure to law and international affairs save for what their televisions shows/businesses handled is fit......but that didn't stop Trump.

I'm all for a female President on either side provided the candidate is qualified, professional and acts in a manner that benefits the country, but then I'd say this for any candidate.

It's a ridiculous notion which I absolutely despise. I have nothing against Oprah, but she has no political experience and I've seen nothing from her apart from some emotional speeches that would suggest she'd be capable of running a country.

I dislike Trump, but at least he somewhat had experience with economics and business.

America's already the laughing stock of the world. Keep electing TV personalities as your president and we'll probably end up with a reality TV show called Made in Washington.

(1) Executive Officer Trump is duly elected Executive office, he is more than the distraction to the United States Constitutional responsibilities he would need to demonstrate to earn title of President of the United States.

(1a) Is Oprah fit to run the Country? Presidents do not run the County, the Executive officer in charge of the Judicial Branch does not run the County, and Executive Officer is a political station of governing. Both Oprah, and Executive officer Trump have publicly forfeit any representation to be President, or Prasedera in at least one regard, as they both are defending a 1st Amendment interpretation against basic principles of separation. The lack of representation can be linked directly to elected offices of Oval Office and Congress as well. Evidence of a lengthy history of this Civil War is by the formation of a Congressional militia, which placed woman in the military by accusation, this Right to excuse woman from the burdens of Constitutional separation for protection of the general welfare . Doctor’s notes do not count in lack of Constitutional representation. It is do or die on the House floor.

(2) As a society the United States in general has allowed itself to be incriminate into felony crimes which may negate their very right to cast vote. This in spite of the diversity of color of skin, politics, and gender. To stay on topic the state of the union made by Prasedera is Constitutional interpretation created with the use of Latin to describe only one way, a woman who is elected by all people to represent all woman before the United States Constitution. That is the legal job description petitioned for. It appease as if there is a combined media effort to undermine this basic principle.

(3) Same people. Victoria’s secret was she was under the age to be voted as President, this trick a religiously test in legal water. The United States Constitutional secret well kept. It is illegal for a woman to be President by precedent set in law. Unconstitutional law did not change this by their state of the Union design.