Michelle Obama Responding To Question If She Would Run As President

[RAMROD 117,252]

 

[StarstruckIllusion 53,579]

So, never 

[Petie Estie 5,707]

I don't think Michelle Obama is going to have good politics. She's popular but idk I just want money out of politics and universal health care. 

[Helxig 45,424]

She's so right AS USUAL. She would be so great but unfortunately there is no chance of her winning. And why would she put herself through all of that just to face the highest level of disappointment?

[monstertoronto 11,774]

This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I always hated her catchphrase “when they go low we go high”. It just means the Democrats will never fight as hard as the GOP and this is why they’ve proven so useless to oppose anything this administration has done. They’re too concerned with hanging on to the moral high ground that they wont get down and fight on the level they need to win anything. The Democrats need a scrapper at this point not someone who wants to go high, which has been proven to be completely ineffective. 

[River 127,735]

 

[TheARTPOPball 1,660]

Wouldn’t the point of being president tho kind of be to “repair” a system you disagree with and lead the country into the right direction? Shed rather wait until all the heavy lifting is done and the vast majority of Americans “grow up” aka follow her hypothetical adjustments to the way the country is ran? 

[AsleepOnTheCeiling 6,976]

53 minutes ago, monstertoronto said:

This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I always hated her catchphrase “when they go low we go high”. It just means the Democrats will never fight as hard as the GOP and this is why they’ve proven so useless to oppose anything this administration has done. They’re too concerned with hanging on to the moral high ground that they wont get down and fight on the level they need to win anything. The Democrats need a scrapper at this point not someone who wants to go high, which has been proven to be completely ineffective. 

That catchphrase is like 17 years old at this point and at a time when the Obamas were constantly under a microscope simply because they were black. Just like their outfits were meticulously chosen to be more "conservative" and "family friendly" I'd assume that the catchphrase existed to counter the racist argument of "black people are all ghetto and they shouldn't hold the highest public office". 

 

It also highlighted the decorum needed in politics for things to work. The lack of many formal rules in all the highest bodies of every branch of government is what got us so deep in this mess. I don't think it's wrong to promote the message that we shouldn't all just resort to whatever the hell is going on today in politics. 

[Sarah H 4,383]

1 hour ago, TheARTPOPball said:

Wouldn’t the point of being president tho kind of be to “repair” a system you disagree with and lead the country into the right direction? Shed rather wait until all the heavy lifting is done and the vast majority of Americans “grow up” aka follow her hypothetical adjustments to the way the country is ran? 

She said the country isn't ready for a woman president and there's a lot of men who feel they can't be led by a woman. So she (rightly imo) thinks wouldn't even get voted in if she did put herself up for it. 

Edited November 16, 2025 by Sarah H

[TheARTPOPball 1,660]

8 minutes ago, Sarah H said:

She said the country isn't ready for a woman president and there's a lot of men who feel they can't be led by a woman. So she (rightly imo) thinks wouldn't even get voted in if she did put herself up for it. 

I mean i can understand that  but there can’t be a female president unless females continue to run. I think she definitely has a higher chance of winning than Kamala did, and the votes between her and trump were quite close no? 

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,689]

She's correct, but I wish she wasn't. After reading some of her books, I'd vote for her in a heart beat (after looking through her formal policy propositions ofc). Unfortunately, we don't deserve her as a leader. 

[Nite 5,913]

I've seen a lot of people respond saying Hillary did win the popular vote back then, but I can't help but feel like 2025 is a very different and more hostile world than 2016 was. Then again, I'm not American, so my impression might as well be off.

[Bronco 25,853]

Honestly, I don't think she'd be a good candidate. She's a typical liberal democrat centrist from everything we've seen over the years. 

I think people hype her up and build her up as future President everyone would love precisely because she's always managed to avoid being overtly political and only steps in on very hard to argue with political areas like childhood nutrition in schools etc. She's essentially a personality people imprint their values onto which is why she remains popular even as Barack's legacy is increasingly questioned and critique'd. 

 

37 minutes ago, Nite said:

I've seen a lot of people respond saying Hillary did win the popular vote back then, but I can't help but feel like 2025 is a very different and more hostile world than 2016 was. Then again, I'm not American, so my impression might as well be off.

Honestly, Hillary was a white woman firmly entrenched within the "elite" who was running without any immediate baggage (the Bill Clinton presidency wasn't a major factor for anyone under the age of like 50 in 2016). 
Kamala was a mixed-race woman with less support from the elite (partly because a lot of it had jumped over to Trump for tax cuts and partly because they didn't want to get their hands dirty in a race they thought was lost already) running with the immediate baggage of being part of the Biden administration. 

I don't think things were neccessarily worse than they were in 2016, I just think the 2024 candidate highlighted it way more due to their identity and lack of shielding really. 

[Ladle Ghoulash 53,971]

35 minutes ago, Bronco said:

Honestly, I don't think she'd be a good candidate. She's a typical liberal democrat centrist from everything we've seen over the years. 

I think people hype her up and build her up as future President everyone would love precisely because she's always managed to avoid being overtly political and only steps in on very hard to argue with political areas like childhood nutrition in schools etc. She's essentially a personality people imprint their values onto which is why she remains popular even as Barack's legacy is increasingly questioned and critique'd. 

 

Honestly, Hillary was a white woman firmly entrenched within the "elite" who was running without any immediate baggage (the Bill Clinton presidency wasn't a major factor for anyone under the age of like 50 in 2016). 
Kamala was a mixed-race woman with less support from the elite (partly because a lot of it had jumped over to Trump for tax cuts and partly because they didn't want to get their hands dirty in a race they thought was lost already) running with the immediate baggage of being part of the Biden administration. 

I don't think things were neccessarily worse than they were in 2016, I just think the 2024 candidate highlighted it way more due to their identity and lack of shielding really. 

Not sure I’d say HRC was running without immediate baggage, given that the email scandal was alive and well in 2016 and James Comey opening a probe into it that October may have cost her the election. 

[timdrake 2,124]

49 minutes ago, Bronco said:

Honestly, I don't think she'd be a good candidate.

Same. Nothing against her personally, but I prefer presidential candidates who have held some type of elected office before. It's like the minimum job requirement for me.