«
»

Oprah Winfrey versus Bill Clinton

I hate to dredge this thing up, because looking specifically for this item I see it framed this way by the illuminating news sources of Fox News and Newsmax, but…

A new CBS/New York Times national poll out Tuesday shows that 44 percent of Democratic primary voters say they were more likely to vote for Hillary Clinton because of her husband. But only 1 percent said they were more likely to vote for Barack Obama because of his supporter, Oprah Winfrey.

I suspect the “Oprah Effect” is a tad under-represented, and the “Bill Clinton” effect is over-represented since it’s already factored into Hillary Clinton’s support.  The problem is that, like it or not, and to some degree it is true and to some degree it is false, a Hillary Clinton presidency is viewed as a restoration of the previous presidency.  But then again, it would be amusing to see Bill Clinton endorse someone else.

I do not understand the Oprah Winfrey detractors — But 80 percent percent of those polled in the CBS/New York Times survey said the Oprah factor made no difference for Obama’s chances, and 14 percent even said she made them less likely to vote for him. — or, maybe I can understand it, but I don’t sympathize with it — Oprah Winfrey is at worst an innocuous figure so I’d be more along the lines of those 80 percent.

Anyway, it’s a comparison between apples and oranges, and this ledger of polls becomes meaningless.  Trudge up a different “Celebrity Endorser” and then see where it gets us.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 12th, 2007 at 1:06 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

One Response to “Oprah Winfrey versus Bill Clinton”

  1. Earnest One Says:
    December 16th, 2007 at 5:23 pm

    “Oprah Winfrey is at worst an innocuous figure so I’d be more along the lines of those 80 percent.”

    “Innocuous figure”?!

    I know she has done “some” good things (good works), but her overall effect is wildly destructive: materialism, glorification of Hollywood figures, gossip-mongering, discussion of trivial issues while the standard of living of MOST American citizens falls into the sewer.

    I don’t want to sound extremist, but I doubt her overall effect is innocuous – it certainly isn’t positive. Besides, look at all the money she has “made”. Unless you are truly engaged in “expansion of the powers of production – productive activities” (invention, scientific discovery, etc.), then this vast wealth is simply money “taken” from others (including many relatively poor folks who watch her show).

    “Taken from others”?! Well, no. Of course not. My solution is for people to simply turn the TV off, ignore a whole class of people, refuse to participate. But these are opiates for the masses.

    Things would change rather quickly. The propaganda system relies on people like “Oprah” to “make it” and then spew ridiculous ideology and/or promote ridiculous sidetrack issues.

    There. I am against Oprah. Pure evil (almost).

Leave a Reply