Oprah for president?

We don’t know whether the idea of Oprah Winfrey for U.S. president, inspired by Winfrey’s eloquent speech Sunday at the Golden Globe Awards, will prove an ephemeral excitation or a movement with staying power. But we find it depressing.

We mean no disrespect to Winfrey, who strikes us as much better informed and more intellectually curious and presumably less reckless or dishonest than the incumbent president. But it’s bizarre that Americans who are appalled by President Donald Trump’s oafish and ignorant conduct of the nation’s highest office would gravitate to another television star untested in politics.

There is more to being president than the ability to deliver a stirring speech. Also, as the first year of the Trump presidency demonstrated, there are colossal risks in electing a political neophyte to the most demanding public office in the world.

Winfrey might possess a more stable temperament than Trump — who doesn’t? — but she would face the same steep learning curve.

The United States doesn’t need another TV star running the country — even a talented and accomplished star such as Oprah Winfrey. What it needs is someone who has prepared for the job, who has made tough decisions, who is familiar with the issues, who has a history of public service. Not all senators or governors make good presidents, to be sure, but they’re a better bet, by and large, than the typical movie star or businessman. Here’s the kind of resume that more closely approximates what we tend to look for in a candidate (and forgive us if it sounds familiar): former U.S. senator, former secretary of state.

It would be better for the country if voters thought they could put their trust in potential presidents who shared their views and their passions, but also had experience in government. We still cling to the hope that elections for the president haven’t been permanently transformed into an episode of Celebrity Apprentice.

Los Angeles Times