The point is not what anyone can do with the current hamstrung Senate, i.e. nothing much. We need a candidate who will motivate people to get out and vote to change that.
Moderating:
Although this is framed as a question, accusations of threadshitting are not allowed. In future, please flag what you may view as a threadshit to staff. Thanks.
Not a warning.
Moderating:
A general note to those posting in this thread. It’s drawing a lot of flags. I encourage everyone to take a break. I don’t want to close it, but it has become more work than it’s worth, and I will if the temperature doesn’t cool down.
Thanks.
I get it, and I don’t disagree with you. I think Biden’s doing about the best he can with the hand he’s been dealt.
But part of the hand he’s been dealt is that he’s, well, Joe Biden. Like it or not, part of the job these days is to be a larger-than-life personality, or …
The POTUS is the only person in the U.S. guaranteed to lead the evening news anytime he does or says something remarkable. I’m rooting for Biden as much as the next guy, but I can’t recall a single remarkable thing he’s said or done since taking office.
Our democracy is on the brink. Has he said so?
Instead of Stewart, why not Stephen Colbert?
Make America Truthy Again?
He could play the entire thing as a parody and get 90% of the vote. I think the headlines that claimed conservatives think he’s serious are misleading, but via some tortuous reasoning some conservatives seem to think he’s a conservative double agent trolling the left.
Because, quite frankly, I think Colbert lost his uniqueness when he had to give up his faux-conservative schtick and just become a regular highly-paid talk-show host. The faux-conservative stuff was inspired and he was very good at it, but with that behind him, he’s now basically just a run-of-the-mill talk-show host. You may as well ask Jay Leno to run for prez. Whereas Jon Stewart I think has real intellectual depth. He also appears to be smart enough to stay out of the cesspool that American politics has become.
Love Jon Stewart. Always loved him.
But President? No, absolutely no.
He’s very impassioned about all American problems— from opioids to guns to politics. He led a very passionate campaign for 9/11 aid.
But he’s TOO impassioned. He takes each problem personally. That’s what a president says about tragedies, but a good president jumps into action immediately and finds the right people to make the changes.
Jon would try too hard. And even in interviews and during the 9/11 aid, he stammered a lot, had a lot of asides. He seems like a guy that sleeps two hours a night.
And I credit him for being impassioned about our National issues. I would love to put him somewhere on a special counsel for victims of all kinds, equal rights, etc. I even credit him for being from Jersey! 
But he really doesn’t fit the leader-type quality of a president for me.
I’ll disagree by saying that an incredibly important aspect of a president’s job is to argue policy by making clear and understood platforms to the masses, as well as to vociferously counter stupid republican policies.
And as far as Stewart’s lack of management skills, Reimann - as Meatloaf put it - totally took the words right out of my mouth*:
Obviously Stewart does not need to be a G.W.H.B. I myself would prioritize electability, in the first place, and then, from there, pretty safe bet that Stewart would not, at all, be any sort of disorganized naif while in office. Surely he wouldn’t lack the intelligence to assemble a competent enough team of advisors to guide him in the adminstration of the executive office, no?
I’m guessing this is in reference to Trump, but I’m not seeing how such a concept would negatively impact Stewart.
This doesn’t seem (to me anyway) as a very strong argument for concerns for Stewart.
*Don’t worry, the lyrics stop right there. 
Are you sure about that? She did an awful lot of damage to Germany and Europe by refusing to face the facts regarding Europe’s dependence on Russian natural gas.
So more than a few people here seem to think electing a celebrity was the problem with Trump, and that we should never elect celebrities again as a result. Trump wasn’t a disaster because he was a celebrity, he was a disaster because he’s an absolute gutter-sucking terrible human being.
We don’t need to elect someone with a career of electoral service. If that was the case, our current president would be one of the most effective presidents we’ve ever seen. Sometimes people who can inspire with their speech can grow into the role and be what’s needed for the moment.
Reagan was more celebrity than experienced politician when he became president, and while you may not have approved of his accomplishments, he was an effective president. Lincoln was an inspiring speaker, who had only two years of federal political experience before becoming president. Obama, similar. Experience in politics doesn’t really predict how someone will do as president.
I stand by my assertion that an inspirational candidate is more important than an experienced one in 2024. Whether that’s a Jon Stewart or someone else with similar characteristics, i guess we’ll see what happens.
But a “celebrity” candidate shouldn’t be dismissed just because they don’t have electoral experience. And someone with a great political resume shouldn’t be elevated just because they look good on paper. Electoral experience, imo, is overrated. If you can inspire, you can hire, and you can meet the moment, you can succeed.
I agree in general on a fair amount of these points. Reagan, it should be noted, had been governor of the largest state in the country for eight years before he ran. He definitely had political experience, even if a lot of people still remembered him as Bonzo’s pal.
The problem with celebrity candidates is that far too many of them appear to be running on the idea that their tremendous charisma will allow them to achieve great things in office. This is what, from my outside observation, proved to be the Achilles heel for Arnold Schwarzenegger when he was governor of California. Schwazenegger ran thinking he would be able to get legislators to vote for his proposals if he just gave a whole lot of public speeches where he quoted the catchphrases from his movies. Arnold won, but learned pretty quickly that that ain’t how things work in Sacramento.
Oh I’m not saying he had no experience, but he was 100% a celebrity candidate when he ran for governor of CA, and his years as an actor outnumbered his years as a politician by over 20 when he became president. But damn, the guy’s strength was his ability to stir up emotions and communicate his message. That’s what at need now.
Biden was the absolute right guy 2 years ago; i don’t think he will be in 2 more.
Randy Rainbow.
Shut up and take my vote!
…or that bearded redneck (rankles me I’ve lost the name) who puts out those fun, straightforward videos debunking GOP silliness.
Seriously, though, as mentioned several times already, Katie Porter is the kind of player, especially in these times where optics is (most unfortunately) increasingly taking more precedence over policy, (and who, as a take-no-shit mom of three), would/should have massive crossover appeal that other “more establishment” D. female candidates like Hillary, Kamala, and (not as much) Amy substantially lack: to come across more as an ‘every day type’, with a fiery passion that the democratic party could certainly use a boost from.
True, I’d concede that just seeing Jon and Katie together would be…a bit much, but, frickit - after seeing some actor* become president back in 1980, that pretty-well re-calibrated my surrealist expectations.
(hoping we’re deep enough into this thread for a hopefully brief hijack on this - if mod thinks otherwise, I’ll post no further on this sidebar)
* yeah yeah there was that Screen Actors Guild presidency and governorship that he absolutely tefloned his way through. (not to mention his next chapter)
Beau of the Fifth Column?
Ah yes, thanks.
Trae Crowder – Liberal Redneck. He should get a Cabinet post, at least.