Should Jon Stewart Run for President in 2028? The Movement Is Growing — and It’s No Longer a Joke
Should Jon Stewart Run for President in 2028? The Movement Is Growing — and It’s No Longer a Joke
Just have him be White House Spokesperson. Perfect role for him.
Exactly this.
The Dems are so bereft of charismatic folks in their ranks because their own internal power-squabbling and pressure between dusty old skeletons to keep themselves in office, that anyone who HAS the skill set has had to spend that time in the entertainment industry at best. They're so dogmatic about internal "it's your time" protocols that they would rather sink AOC and Bernie forever so that the political equivalent of Assistant Regional Managers can get promoted to Regional Manager.
Both parties are broken to shit, and this is why Dems aren't doing a single thing to fight anything, they expect to just sit back and have it handed to them later. It'll be too late by then. We need an entire wave of new blood. Fuck this 2-party system.
Or, hear me out: we abolish the presidency. There’s absolutely no need for so much power to be vested in one person.
Even the constitution agrees with that. Just over the decades more and more powrr has been ceded to the president
Abandon presidents, return to monarchy
Personally, I think that the USA should be divided up into four regional blocs - West Coast, Middle America, East Coast, and all of the external territories like Hawaii, Alaska, and others as an Outer Region. Each of them can have their own president elected by popular vote, and those four presidents select a previous president from one of the regions as a Figurehead President, who represents the nation as a whole - such as diplomacy with the EU, making public national policies the regions have agreed upon, and so forth.
This divides up the executive into branches. Each region can have their own house and court, with a supreme court & senate drawing an equal amount of members from the four regions. This means we get regional laws, and then a national version when 3 out of 4 regions manage to agree on something.
I feel that the root of America's issues comes from too few people representing too many people, which also means the few have too much power and no incentive to really care about folk.
Doesn't sound too different from the parliamentary system we have in Canada, except we divide things much more finely than into 4 quadrants.
Basically, we're divided into "ridings" that can be a small section of a city if you're in a dense city or multiple towns where population is sparse. Each riding votes in someone as a member of Parliament (MP). The MPs then select someone to be the figurehead that represents us (i.e. the prime minister).
Personally I think all nation states should be dissolved
The problem with this is you are screwing over liberal bastions (e.g. Chicago) in conservative zones. Or what about somewhere like New Mexico? We'd be grouped with Arizona and Texas? New Mexico is liberal and that'd kill us. The arrangement also gives even more power to sparsely populated sections of the country vs highly populated sections. It is almost like you are suggesting gerrymandering at a regional level.
Keep in mind that we already have regional representation - state governments. They don't work great because of the lack of attention they get vs presidental elections. The here part is that states need to have power, but there are things they are insane to declare as "states rights" issues. How do we divide them up? I don't know. We even have "majority agree" as you suggested via constitutional amendments.
yeah, texas is never gonna agree to be in club with minnesota or michigan or wisco.
it’d be cool if they did, but yeah, no.
I definitely think the US needs to split up. What’s the point of having another president though? Won’t we just end up with the same problem over time?
Ukraine got Zelensky. We deserve Jon.
He's way too smart to accept that job.
Americans elect a non celebrity challenge (impossible)
Well when you have 24 hours news and you have repelled the law that kept them at least somewhat grounded then you have created a fucking show and so celebrities thrive.
Also electing a celebrity is not automatically a bad thing
I mean we could do a lot worse than Jon Stewart. He is exactly the type of anti establishment candidate that could possibly pull moderate conservatives into the fold. I'm not saying that's the best or only way forward but it seems to be what the DNC are planning.
He's been an advocate for Veterans and First Responders in Congress and at least his forward facing personality is decent.
Also he isn't a pedo grifter.
No.
President John Stewart
Vice President Stephen Colbert
Fuck Colbert. Sleasy ass "Liberal".
I love this idea (edit:) A LOT, but presidency ages people so fast, and I want that man to live a long, healthy, happy life.
Colbert was a dick to Zohran about Israel, right? No thanks.
No
If Zelensky is any indication, comedians make for excellent heads of state and ministers of war. A good leader not only has wits, but also the voice to convince people of a vision.
Comedians have a day job of making people agree with them, without needing bribes or institution to back them.
Zelensky is actively censoring Ukraninan journalists from reporting any criticism on the war. Is this what you mean by comedians being good at making people agree with them?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/18/world/europe/ukraine-press-freedom.html
Why not? The fuck Ronnie Reagan, an actor, made it into office. Like many have indicated below Zelensky is another good example. If Stewart runs, who should be his running mate. I would choose AOC.
I'm going to go with no. I appreciate John Stewart, but can we please stop having TV stars run for office? Same goes for career politicians.
If we eliminate career politicians with term limits you can expect to see more celebrities, billionaires, CEOs etc running.
If you want normal people to run and you don't want career politicians, elections need to be publicly funded and your job needs to be guaranteed when your term is done similar to maternity leave and military service. Otherwise who is going to throw their career away and go to Washington besides celebrities and people who are already rich?
I mean I feel like Walz is a pretty good example of someone who had a career and then became involved in politics.
I don't think you necessarily need to throw your career away, and I'm not sure we really need term limits for house and Senate seats (although 6 years between reelection is a bit ridiculous).
There are definitely some career politicians who have proven that they earned and deserve their seat, it would just be nice to see a bit more variety in the track most people take to politics.
I will raise the point that he REALLY doesn't want the job. One thing about leaders is that the person who most wants it is often least qualified for the position. The reverse is true as well. As much as I agree about pop stars in politics, he has a record of political action and commitment. He's not just talk.
The Beeblebrox paradox
This is true, and I'm not saying I wouldn't support him as a nominee. Depending on who else would be running during the primary, he might truly be the best pick.
We should really get off this train of pushing only career politicians into high office. Seems like the liberals hold this high bar so we end up with old farts that don't know how to use the bully pulpit. I don't care at all that they have no experience in office, I care if they are smart enough to listen to their staff that does.
I agree, but clearly lack of executive competence isn't a blocker for much of the electorate. Jon Stewart does seem genuine informed and engaged on current political topics, so he'd certainly be better than someone that's "simply" well-known and well-liked.
I think TV stars could be valuable resources to a campaign, but I don't think they should generally be the candidate. I'd actually prefer a "career politician" that has a career they celebrate.
When I say career politician, I mean the not so great aspect of politicians. Jon Stewart actually seems like a genuinely caring and empathetic person, and I would prefer someone like that to someone who is willing to compromise their values for a check.
I would vote for him if he was the nominee, it's just not ideal to keep having TV stars at the helm of a country. He probably would make some really well informed and bad ass cabinet picks. I'm kinda picturing him as the anti-Reagan.
If Jon Stewart was the nominee, I'd vote for him. I'd honestly prefer him to someone like Buttigieg bc he seems more genuine, but I wish America would just give a scientist or an economist (or really anybody that can make educated decisions about the policies being created) a shot before we turn to another TV star. I know it's never going to happen in my lifetime, but that would be my preference.
I’d go for al franken. He was a very intelligent person who was a good senator. The me too movement took him down. He stood too close to a girl/ fan during a photo shoot. He then. Resigned. After all that uproar the country knowingly elects pedophiles and rapists
He definitely shouldn't have pretended to grab that lady's tits while she was sleeping (I believe she was a soldier??? she was a reporter) and taken a photo, but honestly in hindsight he probably should have just apologized, and put in a lot of effort to making up for doing something like that instead of resigning.
He did something really dumb, but he still wasn't a rapist or a pedophile. America has set a very low bar in his absence.
It was more than that. He pretended to grope a girl while she was asleep and also coerced her to practice making out in preparation for a skit.
We've already decided our political system is basically satire so why not have fun with it?
"Jon".
Americans, seriously, fucking stop it. You look like the dumbest cunts in the world right now. Stop looking to celebrities to fix your problems. Look at yourself, look at how you are letting yourselves be influenced into thinking everyone else a cunt, and youre the most perfect thing to every live. This is text book how the democracy fails. Once you start thinking the other side is all cunts who are cheating, you'll never trust the system again. Look at Trump, lost in 2020, none of his followers believed it. Its rigged, the dems stole it, etc etc etc. In 2024, Harris lost. None of her followers believed it. Musk rigged the voting boxes, MAGA stole the election, etc etc etc.
When you lose, or when you win, youre just supposed to go on with your day. Youre not supposed to think and act like its the end of the fucking world, and that you only lost because someone else cheated. Youre supposed to look at your opposition, still as countrymen. Sure, they disagree with you on some issues, but they are still Americans, like you. But whats happening now is the same thing thats happened many times before. The extreme polarisation of party identity politics. Instead of arguing with people, you write them off as evil. You forget the core principle of democracy is compromise. You vote, you win, you lose, you get on with it. But that only works when you dont look across the aisle and see literal nazis. Look at the Spanish in the 1930s. Same thing. The saw each other as evil, it only took 6 years to go from arguments to violence in the streets to full blown civil war.
You all need to stop doom scrolling and thinking everyone you dont agree with on every single issue is a cunt, and should be murdered. And Im not speaking to just one said, both sides are dong it. Creating the extremism thats started to turn super ugly. The United states is currently run by a paedo. Instead of this being a huge issue, what we are seeing is next to nothing being done by any of the safe guards in place. This is on you. All of you. You didnt vote for people, you voted for party. Not all of you, but enough of you. And whats worse, some of those on the right think this is the best thing ever. Which is usually what happens before Hugo Chavez types completely fuck the country.
And if youre right wing, and going to spin some bullshit about how Chavez is left wing, please. Continue reading. Donald Trump and Hugo Chávez, though ideologically opposed show the very same political behaviours and leadership styles, particularly in their use of populism, media manipulation, and personalization of power.
Both leaders employed a populist strategy centred on portraying themselves as avenging outsiders battling a corrupt elite to restore national greatness. They used vulgarity and humour to break political norms and forge visceral connections with their supporters. Chávez famously hosted the marathon TV show, where he improvised for hours, blending policy, personal anecdotes, and political attacks. Trump mirrored this with unscripted rallies, freewheeling speeches, and prolific use of Twitter to dominate media cycles, often attacking opponents and the press.
Their rhetoric was marked by personal insults and inflammatory language. Chávez called opponents “assholes,” “squealing pigs,” and likened George W. Bush to “a monkey with a razor blade,” while Trump labelled critics “pussies” and “disgusting”. Both used sexualized comments for political effect: Chávez once leered at the camera telling his wife, “you’re going to get yours tonight,” and Trump bragged about his penis size.
They also both vilified journalists, expelled reporters, and promoted their own versions of reality. Chávez built a state-funded media network to amplify his message, while Trump weaponized social media and sympathetic outlets to bypass traditional journalism.
The also both turned their illnesses into political performances. After being diagnosed with cancer, Chávez portrayed himself as a Christ-like figure enduring suffering for his people, especially during the 2012 election. Trump, after contracting COVID-19 in 2020, staged a dramatic return from the hospital, proclaiming a “total cure” and calling the infection “a blessing from God,” using it to promote unproven treatments like Regeneron. Both turned their illnesses into political performances.
Ultimately, while their ideologies diverged, their methods, polarization, media dominance, personalization of power, and the use of crisis for political gain, reveal a shared playbook of populist leadership.
If anyone is looking to the future of American politics. Might I suggest a radical option? Vote for people who actually know what they are doing! John Stewart, Im sure, is great guy. Hes certainly funny, and knowledgeable. But hes not someone who knows how to be a politician. But more to the point, the last fucking thing the America needs is another old man running the country. Look to GenX, Look to Millennials. Who there speaks to the good of America, not just "your side", but the country as a whole? Find that person, and start some grass roots shit. And never again look to populists to fill the shoes of people who should be making your lives better, not making others lives worse.
Yes, yes, yes. He’s not just a TV show host. He legitimately puts his time, money, and reputation where his mouth is. I have a lot of respect for Jon Stewart as a person with moral character, intelligence, and influence. I would advocate forcing him into the election even if he doesn’t want it. In fact, that he doesn’t want it is all the more reason to push. We need someone like him desperately.
Anybody that doesn’t want the job is imminently more qualified that anybody who does in my opinion.
The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them.
To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it.
To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
– Some hoopy frood
I'm not sure if this is some idiomatic usage I've not encountered, but "eminently" would seem more appropriate than "imminently". If only because John's already more qualified than he apparently needs to be.
Ooo so you're saying I'm qualified? That's a shit job I don't want. Fucks up your hair and ages you. Plus there's a good chance I might send some reps I don't like on a scouting trip to Mars.
...
Oh dang, I AM qualified!
Fairly stupid opinion considering the breadth of people that would encompass.
I would advocate forcing him into the election even if he doesn’t want it.
Are you fucking serious?
He'd crush it IMHO.
No.
If this is what we've come to where you have to be a popular TV star to win, then somebody get AOC her own TV show ASAP.
I'd vote for him. Even when we disagree on stuff-- a rarity-- he is still leagues better than anyone in the Pedo Party. John is more of a man and a human being than that scum sucking pig drumple thinskin could ever be.
Yes. Take my vote, all of them, forever.
Jon could absolutely destroy anyone on a debate stage. Mainly because it's a popularity contest, and he's spent his entire life learning to be popular on screen and stage. He's also a smart guy with great insight into a lot of situations.
None of that means he would be a good president. It's a different set of skills.
The bottom line though, would he be better than the alternative? And I hear what you're saying. Those nazi crack monkey's put on a hell of a show, how could Jon possibly do a better job? I'm not sure, but given the option, I think I'd give him a shot.
He's too conciliatory to win debates. He'd have to seriously change his personality because I don't think he likes face to face conflict, given how he softballs interviews with asshats like Jeffries.
He softballs when he wants to get more guests. If he goes after every politician, they all run and hide. To see him actually debate you have to see him off his own show. He's given very compelling addresses to congress as well.
And seriously, he's one of the most popular TV personalities in the country. What you're saying is you don't like Taylor Swift's music, so she must be a shitty entertainer. Maybe you're just not the target audience?
He would mop the floor at the debates but I’m not sure debates matter anymore. I remember “they’re eating the cats” not mattering as much as it should have.
Debates matter. Remember when Biden beat medicare?
Oh it mattered, it became a chuckle line used in memes that I couldn't enjoy even at the time because I knew that his stupid, racist bullshit would not be interpreted in a normal way by most of the electorate.
I think the Jon for president thing is copium, but to be fair Jon does have two of the most important traits in a president: conviction and a good bullshit detector. Whether he'd be able to do the day to day work aside, there's no reason to believe he wouldn't be able to lead the country in a better direction in a big picture sense.
most important traits in a president: conviction
And not in the way that Trump has convictions.
I think Jon would have the intelligence and humility to have very qualified, intelligent people to advise and challenge him.
My only concern for him is he would take it very seriously, and not be able to let anything go. He would burn himself out hard in 4 years.
I would say the most important skill is listening to experts, and knowing when you aren't one. Jon has this down.
You don't want a president who thinks they're an expert in everything. You want one who knows that aren't and is willing to bring experts in to guide them.
If Jon Stewart became the Ronald Reagan of progressiveness, I wouldn't complain.
Zelenskyy did it. Ukraine would no longer exist as a sovereign nation today if he didn't; it would have been entirely annexed into Russia right now.
I mean, Trump did it and he was a fucking TV clown. The bar is really, really, reaaaaaaally low for who can become the next US president.
It'd be a better analog if everything else Zelenskyy has done as president wasn't eclipsed by Russia invading. Would he have been considered a good president if that hadn't happened? We'll never know.
He stepped up as a leader when his nation needed him. That is one of the best qualities to have. Anything else is just whatsboutism that can be applied to anyone.
Would he have been considered a good president if that hadn't happened? We'll never know.
A quick glance back shows very much no. However, he stepped up for the war.
Yes. He would make the hard choices we would understand we needed to make. Not the choices of self-preservation most all politicians make.
Edit: would we be willing to sacrifice him to force him into the position? It would probably wreck the man…
would we be willing to sacrifice him to force him into the position? It would probably wreck the man…
That's my thinking. When the job is done well, it becomes very stressful and puts all of your morals and ethics to the test. Most people tend to cave at least a little bit and drift to the side of corruption. (our current flung itself headfirst to that side)
He was on that side before he became president. Always was a scumbag, rapist and child molester.
How the fuck could he be worse than some cunt politician?
Exactly what they said about Trump.
In the grand scheme of things I don't think Jon Stewart wouldn't be that different from Gavin Newsome as president. I'd prefer Stewart 100x more than Newsome, just on a personality level, but the direction of the office would be pretty much the same. Newsome is a slimeball but he's not the worst Dem option on the progressiveness & electable matrix. I'm pretty sure Stewert isn't to far from Newsome on the spectrum overall. I'd much rather have AOC personally. I think she's far to the left of either Jon and Newsome.
Well unlike Newsom. John isnt a transphobe
Newsom has been leaning into transphobia recently, he's a slimeball and I don't trust him to not throw the trans community under the bus for some bullshit.
Newsom would straight up push the DNC to abandon transpeople
People really think there will be an election in 2028?
Well either way, ya'll better be showing up somewhere when we're supposed to be voting
Ya know Russia technically still has elections
Election, yes. Fair election, no.
For fuck's sake, NO.
Why are we countering Trumpism by repeating it.
Obviously Trump is a fascist because he was on TV once
I mean, there are precedents...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Franken
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servant_of_the_People_(2015_TV_series)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volodymyr_Zelenskyy is a Ukrainian politician and former entertainer
I loved when Al Franken was my senator. He was a sacrifice to main the high road against some shithead right-wing pedophile whose name I forgot. There's been so many since
I hope he still would have time to do the Daily Show on Mondays if he was president.
TBH we need to bring back fireside chats. A more direct communication from President to people. Imagine if that was just the expectation
For my part, if I were President, I would explain what I am working on and who is in my way. Just every week. "This week, my main goal is still universal healthcare. I want everyone to be able to get the medical care they need. Here is a list of the senators currently opposing, and the state they represent...."
There should be a modern version of this. Imagine the president having his own platform where he could write messages to the world, just like your uncle doese on Facebook! It would be so good!
No.
Don't do this. Let him be. Jon deserves a break, not more work
Read the article. This has come up before and Jon always says no. Here he implies he's considering pretty explicitly. Zelensky has done pretty well for a man who played penis piano on TV.
Hasan’s reflexive response — please, no more reality hosts — came with one notable exception: “Unless Jon, you’re thinking of throwing your hat in the ring… we can talk about that.”
Stewart laughed. He didn’t deny it. He didn’t wave it off. He just leaned back, smiled, and chuckled — the kind of non-answer that fuels speculation.
You’re saying this is Jon Stewart explicitly implying that he’s considering a run?
He took a break during trump's first term. Now, he's up to bat.
Fuck that. If he's the one that can do it, then he NEEDS to do it.
I love John Stewart... but this is a terrible idea.
edit: Based on the responses to this I'm just gonna be thankful I'm not American. You guys apparently have so little clue what is actually involved in civics that you're unironically doubling down on reducing the entire system to a reality tv debacle.
His 911 advocacy is common knowledge. Bringing it up like that automatically makes him the ideal candidate to run the worlds largest economy and military is ludicrous.
Similarly people comparing Zelensky in Ukraine to a potential Jon presidency are comparing apples to coconuts.
Honestly I don't even know why I said anything. Americans slept while their democracy devolved into the world shittiest reality show. Expecting them to see the folly in tripling down on populism was clearly my mistake.
Disagree. Democrats need someone who can make Trump look like a loser
Disagree. Each and every political party needs to focus on finding leaders that have made their name through action, not through commentary and grandstanding. We don't need another TV president with infinite experience hiding behind words and cameras, we need a person that can fulfil the executive function of the executive branch government.
He wouldn't be running against Trump anyway.
No matter who the Democratic nominee is the right will attack him or her in the exact same way, calling them radical communists that want all of our boys turned into girls and all of our murderers to have taxpayer funded penthouses. I just want a candidate who understands the severity of the situation and isn't going to fuck around. Jon Stewart definitely fits the bill.
I think the biggest determinant of a politician's success is their ability to delegate to the right people, and a big determinant of that is their ability to assess other people and to question them critically. Stewart’s interview skills suggest he wouldn’t be terrible at that.
*Jon
Jon Stewart has been working politics for decades as essentially a pundit. I get that you want to think your politicians are better and educated for the position but that's a lie you're telling yourself.
There is not one nation on this earth who's politicians are chosen for being exceptionally qualified. Politics is at it's core theater. Because while you may(think) you're always chosing based on logic that logic is always perception driven.
Also money. Duh.
I wish I wasn’t American with this BS.
You’re right, except I’d say comparing apples to screws or something. Zelenskyy and Stewart, Ukraine and the US like our situations…. Are only similar in that they are in fact people and those are in fact nations.
Also, yes can we stop electing ….. tv personalities?
Please elaborate...I gotta hear this
Better than Newsom
No. We need to stop fetishizing celebrities.
Jon Stewart has his heart in the right place and even knows where the democrats are really lacking
It’s easy to criticize from afar. When he’s actually in the muck, he will be scrutinized for every thing he says. We need more people like him to stay in the media.
Are you familiar with Jon? He's qualified. The Rock or Tom Cruise would be poor choices. So would Mark Cuban. But Jon knows government and all the individual assholes that make it up at the top. The only other hope the democrats have is AOC. Bernie and Warren are too old.
This is more fetishizing good people. Something that is in severely short supply.
Shawn Fain
Jon himself is not behind this idea, he constantly reminds people he's just a comedian. We need to stop confusing age, fame, whiteness, and being male with actual experience.
Counterpoint from Douglas Adams:
The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them. To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
I am 100% in favor of Jon Stewart for president, especially if he refuses to run.
Actual experience is irrelevant to the office of the President.
Being able to listen, learn, and discriminate between lies and truth are what matters.
Well…
Stewart dropped a line that made Hasan pause: maybe Democrats just need “the right reality host” to take over the party.
Hasan’s reflexive response — please, no more reality hosts — came with one notable exception: “Unless Jon, you’re thinking of throwing your hat in the ring… we can talk about that.”
Stewart laughed. He didn’t deny it. He didn’t wave it off. He just leaned back, smiled, and chuckled.
As another commenter brought up, when the idea has been suggested in the past, Jon has unequivocally and instantly shut it down.
Big “Hmmmmm” vibes here.
got it, Tom Hanks for president.
I love this idea but what if he was bernie sanders vice president first?
My biggest complaint for people saying sanders should be next is that I think he's too old, But if john Stewart was his vice president I would love that idea. And then immediately follow up with two terms of Stewart
I can't imagine I will be alive to see the day that the US elects two Jews to the White House.
Great Man Theory strikes again.
The fact that anyone still believes there will be anything resembling "fair" elections by 2028 is baffling to me.
The american capacity to stick their head in the sand as long as they have the newest gadget in front of their face and an endless stream of tiktok content to look at is fucking insane.
There are some pretty big claims that the 2024 election wasn't fair either. I'm not talking about the obvious GOP actions to disenfranchise minority voters, calling in bomb threats to Dem leaning areas, purging voter rolls a few weeks before the election, rejecting many votes due to minor inconsistencies, etc.
I'm talking about Election Truth Alliance's claim that there was active vote flipping just for president. It's a huge claim, so it needs irrefutable evidence, but I would fully believe that a guy who has cheated and lied his whole life, who was surely going to prison from the 4 cases he was being investigated for, would cheat with Elon to rig the elections in a few swing states.
Zelensky was an actor who started in a hit sitcom about a teacher who gets elected president to fight corruption, and Ukrainians responded by making him president.
I look at John Stewart, and see how that could happen. I'd for Stewart in a second, over ANY MAGA candidate.
Yes
And AOC as vice, bring youth into office.
I'd vote for them in a heartbeat. Stewart-Ocasio-Cortez 2028
Please for the love of anything!
No.
At this stage of US history, only a sadist or a scam artist would want the job of President.
Stewart doesn't strike me as either.
I would vote for him instantaneously
I would host parties just for the debates alone. Please God, let this happen!
Don't tease me. I just can't take it.
I think it would burn him out. So while I think he'd do a good job, I don't think he'd be the right candidate.
If we have to elect a comedian, I would prefer Colbert. Not least because it would be a really funny twist given that Trump basically bullied the network into firing him because Stephen hurt his fee-fees with his jokes. Plus, the debates would be really spicy.
I don't think there exists a person who would both take the job seriously and not be burned out by it.
Plus so many republicans are fans of his not understanding that his work was satire. So he'd get a good bunch of their votes.
There are certainly worse candidates. Stewart still seems like he has a soul, unlike most republicans.
Maybe. But the time for Jon Stewart was 2024. There wasn't a single person alive in a better position to take down Trump.
I mean he’s better than 99% of politicians but if AOC isn’t the candidate I’m just joining the fascists (haven’t yet but as a straight white “Christian” man at least I have that option open)
"If I can't have a progressive, we might as well kill the minorities"
I've said for years that I wish he would run for any office. I'd vote for him comptroller if I could and I dont even know what that job is. But for real, he has a great mind, a good viewpoint, a take no shit attitude and a massive fan base for more than just his jokes. Plus he has already spent a lot of time as a successful advocate for 9/11 first responders and other groups that the government has failed to take care of despite their culpability in their situations. I would be shocked if he didn't have an incredibly successful career as a Representative in the house at least. Though, I think he has no desire for that amount of stress and responsibility.
I’d vote for him twice.
So says “allchronology.com” — whatever the fuck that is.
It's reporting on an interview. I've watched that interview and Stewart for years and the quotes and commentary about how he usually emphatically refuses are accurate.
Not another celebrity.... These people aren't relatable and don't reflect the reality of life I know.
I'm gonna fucking puke.
For every Zelenskyy, there's a Trump. So no.
We already have Trump, so we're due a Zelensky.
Jon Stewart is kind of meh. I guess I'd vote for him though.
I'll take "kind of meh" over Trump anyday.
Hell, a stinking turd floating down the Potomac river would make a better POTUS than Trump...
I was talking as compared to other democrats. Hes not as progressive as people think.
That said yeah obviously I'd be to the moon if he was president right now.
Right now because Trump won a second time I'm dead inside. And I think I'll probably be dead inside forever because even if we elect someone better in 2028 I'll know we elected Trump twice. That will haunt me forever.
The entire point of having a democracy is to avoid gambling on the next heir of a bloodline dynasty being fit to rule. So, a popularity contest among celebrity television entertainers isn't the worst, but the qualities of personality this population selects for are generally those that assist maintaining distracting fantasies rather than engaging with harsh realities.
This was written by someone who has never seen Jon passionately speak about something.
An informed, competent, liberal? A successful communicator? Noooooooo.
“lefties”: hE sUpPoRtS iSrEaL! hE’S dOnE NotHiNg fOr tHe WoRkiNg cLAsS!!
Jon Stewart supports Israel? Source?
I mean, he passes more bills than most.
Why would he want to take the helm of this dumpster fire?
Ric Flair should run also.. It’s serious and the movement is strong nobody is laughing!
No one is laughing after trump.
I mean it'll still be a joke even if he gets elected, but it's a bigger joke that's largely independent of him.
The dude that chastised those calling out fascism because "it's what we voted for"? Yeah, that's a terrible idea.
We need someone willing to fight fire with fire and John Stewart isn't it.