• RememberTheApollo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I’m not in favor of celebrity moving to politics. Even ones that I think are intelligent. Stewart has long been involved in political mockery and has actual experience in helping a bill get passed, but I think he wouldn’t survive the frustration of being forced to work in DC as President.

    There’s a video out there that I can’t find where Stewart is talking to (political science students?) who ask him about his time in DC trying to get the 9/11 First Responders Bill passed and what he thought of politics there. His disgust for real politics and how politicians operate is vividly apparent and borders on revulsion.

    I think he’s a good man, but I don’t know that he would be a successful president.

    • funkless_eck
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      not particularly invested in this comment but isn’t the concept of “politician” essentially just “celebrity” nowadays anyway?

      That someone has access to money and influence, can use those to set policy and maintain/secure both in-party and general-public votes. What’s the difference between politician and celebrity there? One could argue that experience in setting policy and/or studying law, but that doesn’t apply to a whole range of politicians anyway.

      • RememberTheApollo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think the lines are blurred, sure. However there are plenty of politicians that really just kind of do their job and stay out of the limelight, whereas celebrities are by default in the public eye. Also, the biggest difference is the part where you vote for a politician and they set policy. I don’t vote for celebs, and I don’t call them telling me what to wear or watch “policy”. We’ve had 2 legit celebrity presidents and they’ve both been disastrous.