She has zero political experience, biggest claim is being attached to Oprah, and several claims of toxic environment which led to her campaign manager leaving. She doesn’t have a good poll turnout. Zero chance.
several claims of toxic environment which led to her campaign manager leaving
They say that about every female politician, including Amy Klobuchar, Elizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris.
Heaven forbid that a woman raise her voice sometimes.
She had multiple staff quit over it. Doesn’t sound like raising her voice.
Wasnt it like whole team turnovers?
Her campaign was collapsing anyway because it wasn’t doing well and they were running out of money. I suspect that was the bigger issue.
So uh… Three women?
or do you mean all that ran for president?Just google “politician abusive to staff” and count how many women pop up on the first page of results.
No one cares if a man raises his voice to his staff. When a woman does it, it becomes tabloid and blog fodder.
Men particularly feel indignant if a female boss chastises them.
Who?
The crystal lady
They call her crystal lady, but she’s more of a “power of positive thinking” lady.
She says she’s never even owned a crystal.
Nutso Russian plant
She’s running in a Democratic primary. It’s not possible for her to take votes away from the Democrats.
In case anyone needs a refresher on Marianne Williamson:
The crazy ‘spiritual advisor’ that punches cars and abuses staff. No thanks!
Won’t someone think of the cars.
Yes! The car was the important bit, not the unhinged punched a car until they needed medical attention part. Prime leadership material.
“These are the hit pieces that come with politics. I don’t know what else to say… I’m not running for sainthood here, I’m running for President”.
Marianne, you got tarred as a nutjob in 2020. That’s not going away, no matter how unfair it may be.
I love how up until yesterday, they posted about every poll like it was decree, and today, polls be damned, Oprah’s spiritual advisor needs a shot.
Honestly though, I do hope it’s an open convention, even though Harris looks like she’s got backing from all angles.
Oh, Williamson can try. I don’t begrudge her. She’s just not gonna win because she’s seen as the nutjob and has been since 2020.
Is she not? I remember her being pretty nutty.
Yeah she kinda cray cray.
I’ll be blunt: I don’t want someone who thinks “crystal energy fields” are a thing anywhere near the nuclear football. It was harrowing enough having the orange nutjob in charge of it for 4 years.
She says she’s never even owned a crystal, and the whole “crystal lady” thing is a media smear.
None of her books say anything about crystals.
Ok, I’ll be more blunt:
I don’t think a “spiritual advisor” has appropriate or pertinent experience to lead anything outside of a spiritual or religious organization.
That’s not the only thing on her résumé. Back in the ‘80s, she formed a charity for people with AIDS called Project Angel Food, and a lot of her support today comes from gay men who remember Project Angel Food.
Project Angel Food is still running today, but Williamson is no longer involved.
Kamala Harris is getting support from every major Democratic constituency — from progressives like Sen. Elizabeth Warren to establishment types like Hillary Clinton to moderates like Rep. Josh Gottheimer. There is no real opening for a rival.
Very democratic.
Love how your truth gets dogpiled.
“truth” as in “truth social” lol
No, they’re right. The Democrat voter base wasn’t enthusiastic about Hillary Clinton in 2016, partly because they felt she had gone through a coronation rather than a proper primary. Democrats like to be involved in the process of picking the nominee, and they chafe when they feel the process isn’t fair.
It would be better for Kamala Harris if she has a legitimate competitor and has to go through a debate or two.
Harris is a good debater. She should be fine.
There needs to be an open convention. NO one voted for Harris as President, assuming the job is hers is usurping the democratic election process. I could have sworn we were told we need to elect a democrat to preserve democracy
You miss the part where many democrats are so terrified of the image that has been painted of Trump that they would vote for a resurrected Hitler if they were told he was wearing a blue button.
Democrats didn’t paint that image. Trump did.
When someone tells you who they are, believe them.
The Democrats are telling me that they are an oligarchy that only cares about keeping power.
The party candidate selection process has nothing to do with Democracy.
The parties themselves have nothing to do with democracy. There’s nothing in the constitution about Democrats or Republicans, or their parties.
All the parties are is a group of people that agree to put one name forward for their candidate. How they choose the candidate is entirely up to them, it didn’t used to be done via state wide primaries, it used to just be a bunch of old dudes at a convention picking someone.
The democracy part is that anyone is allowed to put their name on the ballot for president if they meet the basic criteria, usually a minimum number of voter signatures and a filing fee. This is done for each state they want their name to be on the ballot for.
You are legally correct, and morally wrong. If we had ranked choice voting it would be an entirely different situation.
As long as we are trapped in a two party system this is entirely unacceptable and frankly just cause for revolution.
I find it both hilarious and infuriating how supporters of the Democratic establishment make this argument when it suits them, then turn around and chastise third party voters. If our only real choice is to vote for one party or the other, then we either have control over who gets nominated or we live in a thinly veiled oligarchy.
They aren’t morally wrong. Just because something is a fact that they’re stating doesn’t mean they agree with it. Those are the rules of the game and they’re simply stating them.
In the context they are offering a legalistic justification to a moral issue. The Democrats are not the party of democracy if they don’t, at a minimum, have an open convention.
Mate, there isn’t enough time or words to even delve into this with you, but that’s not what morality is. Whether you agree with the current rules and legal system or not is not part of your morals when you’re simply stating the options legally.
LOL, yeah. You definitely don’t have the words. I’m guessing you haven’t studied much moral philosophy. If it helps, I didn’t accuse them of being immoral themselves.
