Make No Mistake Marianne Williamson Is Moving Forward

[Merrill]

Women are the largest voting bloc in the USA. Women need a women front and center 24/7. A candidate that will keep women and the nation as a whole in first place.

Make No Mistake Marianne Williamson Is Moving Forward

Marianne Williamson: “Anything Is Possible”Days after Marianne Williamson announced her 2024 presidential bid, The Nation’s John Nichols spoke with the candidate about why she’s making this run.

Marianne Williamson announced her presidential run on March 4 in Washington, making her the first prominent Democratic challenger to President Biden’s expected reelection bid.

The best-selling author, spiritual counselor, and unsuccessful 2020 presidential contender faces a daunting task at a point when prominent Democrats—including many of the president’s 2020 rivals—say they want him to run and win in 2024. As she was preparing for campaign swings in South Carolina and New Hampshire, I spoke with Williamson about why she’s making this run. —John Nichols


JOHN NICHOLS: You ran in a crowded field four years ago. Now, you have positioned yourself as perhaps the most prominent primary challenger to a sitting president.

Why did you decide to run again?

MARIANNE WILLIAMSON: My choice really doesn’t have to do with who’s in the field, or how crowded it is, or anything like that. I’m running because I think there are things that need to be said in this country, because I think that only an agenda of fundamental economic reform will beat the Republicans in 2024, and because I feel I can contribute.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/marianne-williamson-2024-race/

[Ocelot II]

1. Why is anyone paying the slightest attention to that crackpot?

[dflprincess]

4. Another nut we can thank Oprah for. Nt

[AZSkiffyGeek]

6. I've seen a lot of pro-Williamson activity on Twitter

Mostly crackpot rose Twitter types. They're getting destroyed, but they exist.

[MontanaMama]

8. I'm seeing plenty of pro-Marianne

stuff here on DU too.

[Hekate]

13. So am I. She is not our friend. She has zero government experience, not so much as city council.

Marianne Williamson is successful in one arena only — kinda like Donald Trump, only with warm fuzzies.

[JoanofArgh]

75. +1

Marianne Williamson will never win a primary and she knows it. She's running for other reasons.

[Demsrule86]

88. Yeah well likely Russian bots.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

95. Possibly

Seem to be a lot of environmental activists.

[tritsofme]

40. No one is, just a couple crackpots on the internet.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

64. The lady has no chance in the real world

I doubt that there will be any debates for the Democratic primary. This lady is not a democrat

[pnwmom]

116. Because a crackpot with 1 or 2% of the vote can swing the election to the R's. nt

[Hekate]

146. Which is why I have absolutely no patience for them any more, from Nader to Jill Stein to Marianne

… my attitude has become pretty much to hell with them all.

[pnwmom]

147. Me, too!

[redgreenandblue]

153. Except Marianne Williamson is a Democrat who intends to run in a Democratic primary.

What exactly prompts you to compare her Nader or Jill Stein?

[betsuni]

155. How does she support Democrats?

Neoliberals/status quo/corporatists/rigging/corrupt -- how is that supporting the Democratic Party?

[Demsrule86]

164. She is running against a Democratic incumbent president in a crucial year...which makes her

a traitor to our party in my book. We always lose when we have a challenger to an incumbent President.

[Hekate]

174. Anybody can register as anything they want. I doubt the woo lady has a single clue...

As I said, and will keep saying, like Trump she has garnered success in one field only, and her knowledge of government is as nonexistent as Trump’s — only with warm fuzzies.

By the way, Tulsi Gabbard also registered as a Democrat. She was raised by an authoritarian cultist to be a cultist, and veered far right as soon as her pose as a Dem didn’t work any more.

The Dem Party is a big tent, and we welcome all sorts of people. But when it comes to candidates, it behooves us to look closely.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

2. Is she behind the No Labels campaign that promises transparency but is darker than a moonless night?

[Hortensis]

30. :) Suspect she and Lieberman's spoilers will be

trying to poach from each other, and whoever else is running on a "just as long as the Democrats don't win" schtick disguised under cosmic woo-woo, centrist competence, or various types of anti-Democratic oppositionalists.

From a Lincoln Project member about Lieberman's group: “The only way you can justify this is if you really believe that it doesn’t really matter if it is Joe Biden or Donald Trump. So it is sort of a test. If you live in a world where it doesn’t matter, this is kind of harmless. If you live in a world where it does matter, it is dangerous.”

The group calls its effort an “insurance policy” against the major parties nominating two “unacceptable” candidates next year. Asked if President Biden, his former Senate colleague, would be unacceptable, Lieberman said the answer was uncertain.

Sen. Joe Manchin...and former Maryland governor Larry Hogan (R) are also supporters of the effort, and both said they have not ruled out participating in a No Labels presidential ticket, if it happens. “If enough Americans believe there is an option and the option is a threat to the extreme left and extreme right, it will be the greatest contribution to democracy, I believe,” Manchin said in an interview.

Scoundrels.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

34. Interesting. Thanks

Lieberman is a has-been.

[Tommy Carcetti]

3. Okay, well good luck with that?

I don't see it in the crystals for her, but if she still wants to move forward, that's her call.

[LiberalFighter]

29. Using the wrong crystals?

[BannonsLiver]

5. Space cadet.

🤦‍♂️

[rsdsharp]

7. Moonbeam Marianne may be moving forward,

but no one is following along.

[LiberalFighter]

27. One way of looking at it. Sort of like Branson slashing 85% of his Virgin shuttle.

[live love laugh]

9. Make no mistake Trump's being booked TUHDAY!!!

[Brother Buzz]

10. She's moving up in the polls, too - She busted through double digit ceiling, Baby!

https://www.newsweek.com/marianne-williamson-making-gains-against-joe-biden-new-poll-suggests-1791995

[Demsrule86]

94. We all know Newsweek is bullshit...and righty.

[Brother Buzz]

96. Is the 15% polling threshold for candidates to qualify for debates still in effect?

Might be a stretch for Newsweek to push it that far, no?

[Demsrule86]

97. Very true Brother...I think she goes nowhere...the GOP needs a spoiler to run against

Biden can and will win...but we remember 2016 and those years when a candidate (Ted Kennedy for example) ran against an incumbent president. and we lost. I despise Marianne an will never vote for her in a primary and she won't be in the General.

[Brother Buzz]

105. I question whether she even has the wherewithal to qualify for 50 primary races

I could be wrong, but I believe she'll stays in the race until her new book is released in September.

[Demsrule86]

165. I think you are correct...she will likely be humiliated in the primaries despite all the breathless

hype on this thread about how she is 'moving forward' and I think her shitty book is a big fat failure too.

[Marianne W]

110. It was 1% in 2020, I don't believe the 2024 criteria has been set

[Brother Buzz]

123. I guess I totally missed the change

May 2019

On the eve of a 2020 presidential election featuring over 20 significant Democratic contenders, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has upheld the use of poll standings to qualify for debate participation.

FEC regulations permit nonprofit corporations and press corporations to sponsor candidate debates so long as the sponsor “does not structure the debate[] to promote or advance one candidate over another” and “uses pre-established objective criteria to determine which candidates may participate in a debate.” Historically, the FEC has afforded debate sponsors wide discretion to set “objective criteria,” including the use of candidates’ poll standings.

The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) over several elections has sponsored presidential debates and, since 2000, has screened candidates according to three criteria: (1) evidence of the candidate’s constitutional eligibility to serve; (2) evidence of ballot access on enough state ballots to constitute a mathematical chance of winning the general election; and (3) support of at least 15% across five national polls.

-more-


https://www.wiley.law/newsletter-Federal-Court-Upholds-FEC-Debate-Regulation

[Marianne W]

134. There were about 20 Democrats in the first debate

[Brother Buzz]

136. And?

[tritsofme]

156. There is no criteria. Biden has no real challengers. He won't debate vanity candidates.

[Hekate]

11. "Neoliberalism" is the enemy? JHC, she's off to a lousy start, isn't she?

“ Neoliberalism has devastated not only our economy—creating the greatest income inequality in 100 years—it has infected every aspect of our culture with injustice and despair. ”

[Zeitghost]

70. It's a bad choice of terminology

But in economics, neo-liberalism is what most of us would call conservative economics. Free market, deregulation, etc.

[ProfessorGAC]

173. Thanks

It's a confusing term and lots of people have a problem deciphering it.
Good job.

[lame54]

12. The moon and the stars must have aligned

[OhNo-Really]

14. Odd. The profile of author profile says "no journal entries"'and

Latest journal entry April 4, 2023 🤷🏻‍♀️

How can “journal entries” be simultaneously listed as

None,
120 since 2007
And
Most recent April 4, 2023

My fav DU feature is “ignore”

[Doc Sportello]

46. Yeah I had questions too

Based on this and an earlier post.

[SharonClark]

142. Not odd, because the profile doesn't say that.

You seem to be confusing the number of journal entries with the number of posts.

[OhNo-Really]

158. There is no "posts" category. Just journals

And My comment above stands.

[SharonClark]

187. Then why does your profile display

Number of POSTS 3729?

[Merrill]

15. Women could own the USA government if they would vote......... Go for it!

Moderates to include Republicans for Choice, liberals, Green Party, Democrats, Progressive Democrats of America which is also the majority in the USA. All need to vote…. no more staying home.

Women are the largest single voting bloc in the USA. Women could own the USA government if they would vote. Women's Rights and Women's Right to choose need women at the forefront everyday.

Arrest all who are engaged in voter suppression / trying to squash the right to vote.

[Ocelot II]

19. This woman has no interest whatsoever in the candidacy of a loon like Williamson.

The fact that she is a woman does not elevate her beyond the level of crackpot.

[Hekate]

20. Marianne is successful in one arena only -- kinda like Donald Trump, only with warm fuzzies...

She is not our friend. She has zero government experience, not so much as city council.

[Cha]

28. Women of Color are the Largest Voting

Block and they're Voting For President Biden as am I.

Maryanne Williamson ain't nothing but a Gaslit Rf.

[mcar]

72. This +1000!

[Demsrule86]

89. All those independent parties would do is split the vote and elect the GOP types which is

Republican for choice, greens, and all the rest exist.

[SharonClark]

144. Are you implying that women don't vote

with your “no more staying home”?

Do you realize that women voters do not all vote the same? That some vote for the GQP candidates?

We need to get moderate and progressive people of all genders to support Dems. Marianne Williamson is not the person to do that.

[sheshe2]

145. Ah, no.

Women are the largest single voting bloc in the USA. Women could own the USA government if they would vote. Women's Rights and Women's Right to choose need women at the forefront everyday.

Black women are the largest Democratic voting block, Merrill. That is a fact. They have saved our asses more than once. It is time for the rest of the women to stand up and take responsibility for their bodies and our future.

[relayerbob]

16. If she wants to contribute

Why didn’t she attempt to actually work with Biden? Get involved in the actual government? And what exactly are her economic qualifications to determine what is fundamental economic reform? With no experience at all, why would we want to trust her to deal with Xi and Putin and DeSantis?

[Doc Sportello]

17. Please learn how to post from a source

I assume it's taken from an article in The Nation, although he does write for other publications and it could be from a podcast. There should be a link to that article. Also, there is a four paragraph limit on content from sources like The Nation.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=copyright

You had an earlier post on Covid with the same issue.

[Merrill]

22. comment noted ............

And I will keep paragraphs limited in the future ....

[Hekate]

39. You can edit your OP to add a link to your source, & indicate what is you & what is the author...

Otherwise this board stands in violation of copyright laws, which is pretty costly, and why it is in the TOS.

[Hekate]

41. Good catch, Doc

[Merrill]

18. MARIANNE WILLIAMSON is smart enough to be a president and she is smart enough to choose a cabinet

MARIANNE WILLIAMSON is smart enough to be a president and she is smart enough to choose a cabinet that will benefit the USA.

The office of president is not a one man army ............

She is no dummy.

[Ocelot II]

21. No, she isn't. She's a self-promoting goofball with no government experience.

If she was serious about a real political career she should run for some local office, although dogcatcher or park board might be too complicated for her.

[Merrill]

44. We do not happen to agree ........

Thus we can agree to disagree ............

BTW lots of politicians are elected with zero experience

[Ocelot II]

47. And shouldn't have been. Exhibit A: Donald Trump.

I wouldn't vote for Williamson on a bet.

[mcar]

74. Exhibit B: GW Bush

[Cha]

83. Yeah, Fucking trump.. that was A

Warning.. a Cautionary Tale.

[Demsrule86]

93. She is trying to cost us the election. And she has no experience and not enough smarts IMHO

to be president. She has lost every election she ever ran in...and is nothing but a spoiler.

[Hekate]

25. To reiterate: She has zero government experience, like Trump only with warm fuzzies

Look where that got us, Merrill.

The presidency is not for amateurs.

You keep pushing Marianne W and I’ll keep saying this.

[LiberalFighter]

26. Her last campaign attempt was a total failure. And will be again.

[Doc Sportello]

45. She's smart enough to con a number of people

With her bullshit woo and book selling campaign. Doesn't mean she is qualified to be President. Sounds like you're an acolyte.

[Hortensis]

56. But those we vote for really need to be "smart" in the many different ways

required by that enormous job, including being far too broadly knowledgeable to be ignorant before advisers.

We need them to be people of proven very good judgment and character. Not just sometimes.

Good judgement would have invested 5 minutes in honest, competent research would have saved Williamson from slipping down the anti-science autism-vaccines rabbit hole. And realized what it was.

Knowledgeable would not have started with an abnormal degree of ignorance that would require 5 minutes.

Good character would have kept her from spreading her very harmful ignorance conclusions to others.

No. But we have many who do have the right stuff.

[Caliman73]

62. She has some decent ideas, but not one whit of ability to be President.

I like some of what she has to say. If she is running to "have a conversation" then so be it. It is a conversation we need to have. If you think that she is in any way qualified to be President, don't know what I could say to help that.

She isn't a dummy but she is not equipped to be president either. There is an OCEAN of space in between those two levels of qualification.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

65. This lady has no chance of even getting into a debate with President Biden

This lady is a joke who is NOT being taken seriously

[Demsrule86]

90. No, she knows that all she would do is help the GOP win...she has no chance and she should

knock it off.

[Cha]

126. So you say.

[niyad]

159. One wonders how much you are getting paid to shill for her. Nobody in this thread has

questioned her intelligence. Only her qualifications and reasons for running. I, for one, found her "course in miracles" to be a lot of basic drivel.

[Renew Deal]

168. Is it just one that wonders?

[niyad]

170. Probably not.

[GoneOffShore]

186. Whatever makes your Velcro rip. But MW? She's not even a one trick pony.

[muriel_volestrangler]

197. No, she very clearly is a dummy. Probably more than anyone who's run for president recently

She's dumber than Trump, for instance. And he mused about taking bleach to cure Covid.

[grantcart]

207. She's smart enough to run for President so that she can raise political donations to pimp her books

and seminars.

This is not her first or even second political race. On the one time her name was on the ballot (2014) she barely broke double digits (13%) even though she had lots of money, name recognition and was well known in the 33rd district.

She is very smart to use the campaign system to fund her efforts to expand and enhance her brand.

Her followers not so much.

[LiberalFighter]

23. Bull. She won't make the debates.

[tritsofme]

38. There won't be debates. There are no real challengers, just goofballs like this.

[LiberalFighter]

42. Good point!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

66. I agree-there will be no democratic primary debates

This lady is NOT a serious candidate

[niyad]

189. Happy 19th DUnniversary to you!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

200. Thank you

[Bev54]

24. Women will not vote for her just because she is a woman, she needs to be qualified

and worthy of support.

[Hekate]

32. No kidding

Hillary got a bum rap and I would have voted for her with joy — but she was and is as qualified as it is possible to be.

I’d vote for Kamala Harris, too, and in fact did vote for her in California, another highly qualified woman.

But the woo-woo lady? That’s like voting for Jill Stein. What a waste of a vote.

[GoCubsGo]

33. Yes, you'd think they'd have learned by now that women don't automatically

vote for another woman solely because she's a woman. That attitude is insulting, to say the least. Marianne will be lucky if she gets half the support she got the last time she tried this stunt. Which was barely a blip on the radar.

[H2O Man]

35. Please stop splattering feces.

[dalton99a]

148. +1

[Kali]

36. ...

[tritsofme]

37. The only real question is who would be stupid enough to donate money

to such a pointless vanity campaign?

[DFW]

128. No one is that stupid. Some, however, might be that sly.

For example: Republicans who want to stir up dissent in the ranks where there is none. Maybe even Vladimir Vladimirovitch has a few rubles left over from the Ukraine war budget.

There are certainly enough smart people with evil intentions who would like for a "Störenfried" to derail a solid, unified Democratic campaign. The campaigns of 2016 and 2020 certainly demonstrated how distracting a candidate with no chance of victory, but outsized media attention, can disrupt the campaign of an obviously qualified, and obviously favored candidate. In 2016, it even worked, much to their surprise as much as ours. It will be many decades before the Republicans forget that. In 2016, they used the wrong candidate because they never thought their little scheme would work. Now that they know better, they will work to refine their tactic, not abandon it.

[Hekate]

133. Indeed. In re: Ralph Nader's part in defeating Al Gore in 2000. Pure Green Nader took money...

…from Republicans. God knows from whom else, but Mr. “Not a dime’s worth of difference between the Democrats and Republicans” surely played his part, didn’t he?

I am long since finished with fringe-left candidates who prey on the idealistic young and the disillusioned despite knowing full well they don’t have a snowball’s chance of winning.

[DFW]

150. That makes two of us!! N/T

[Demsrule86]

43. No one will vote for this faker...

[FSogol]

48. LOL.

[Merrill]

49. It's a good idea to never worship a politician ....

Joe Biden is far from perfect and I don't believe in sending back incumbents. They develop an attitude such as I can do no wrong.

NO ONE has yet provided any substance as to why Marianne Williamson should not run. She meets
the qualifications.

And no one knows exactly what she knows about government.

Yes Conservative Women vote against women as do conservative men ..................

[Hekate]

53. So, because you don't "worship" Biden, you think we do? That's not reasonable. You happy with Trump?

You happy with Dubya? Did they give you the results you craved? Are we further along protecting the environment and women’s rights?

You know what cost both Gore and Hillary their respective presidencies? FRINGE CANDIDATES FROM THE LEFT in precisely orchestrated districts.

Where have you been all these years since you first joined DU? In a cave?

[tritsofme]

57. lol, anyone who is a natural born citizen, 35, and a 14 years a resident meets the "qualifications"

So presumably, even you and I meet this extremely low bar.

She is a vanity candidate who is running only for self promotion purposes, why you are so taken by this charlatan is puzzling.

[Cha]

61. You don't even Know what President Joe

Biden has Accomplished for our County and the Planet.

No, "Incumbents" Don't develop an attitude they can do no wrong.".. you don't know PJB at All. He's for our Country and her People..

You haven't stated anything of Substance why MW should be potus.

[Ocelot II]

68. I don't worship Joe Biden but I respect his knowledge and experience

and how effective he has been at getting major legislation through a divided congress. Williamson has no government experience; she's a writer and purveyor of woo-based, cultish self-help books. We've already had a self-promoting moron in charge of our government - while she might be less malevolent than Trump I see no evidence that she'd be any more competent. But she does seem to have her own cult following.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

69. What are your feelings about Hillary Clinton?

I'm a big fan. How about you?

[mcar]

76. You seem pretty worshipful

of Ms. Williamson.

[lapucelle]

118. ,,,

Marianne Williamson says former candidates endorsing Biden was a 'coup'

Author and former Democratic candidate Marianne Williamson called it a "coup" that former candidates threw their support behind former Vice President Joe Biden.

In a since-deleted tweet, Williamson also went after pundits calling Biden's campaign a "resurrection."

snip================================================================

Williamson continued that rather than a resurrection, Biden's surge Tuesday night "was a coup. Russiagate was not a coup. Mueller was not a coup. Impeachment was not a coup."

"What happened yesterday was a coup," Williamson said, alluding to the wave of endorsements from the former candidates. "And we will push back."

She pushed out an additional tweet Tuesday night that the moderates did not “organically” fall "into place behind Biden today."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/03/04/marianne-williamson-candidates-endorsement-biden-coup/4949415002/

[niyad]

161. Thank you for the best laugh I have had this morning. You certainly appear

determined to earn your keep.

[Renew Deal]

178. Your argument is so 2008

I've never heard of anyone being accused of being a Biden worshiper. Thought he does have supporters that he's worked hard to earn.

[ExWhoDoesntCare]

202. And yet here you are

Propping up a known fraud with excessive and--dare I say it--worshipful praise.

Look in the mirror, tovarisch.

[liberal_mama]

50. I wouldn't consider voting for her unless her pandemic plan is very good n/t

[Johonny]

51. She's running to sell more books to suckers

[Merrill]

52. I prefer new faces as opposed to status quo politicians who often don't bring change

There is no way of knowing what’s going to be happening in the next few months, and I can’t let that kind of speculation guide my thinking.

JN: So, to your thinking, this campaign is not about Joe Biden but about the vision you hope to present?MW:Absolutely. This is about ending a 50-year aberrational chapter of American history and beginning a new one. Neoliberalism has devastated not only our economy—creating the greatest income inequality in 100 years—it has infected every aspect of our culture with injustice and despair.

It’s time for us to recognize that, cut the cord, and begin again. It’s going to take someone who is not of that machine to smash it.

JN: What made you decide to run in the Democratic primaries if your frustration is with the whole of the political machine?

MW: They are doing everything they can to invisabilize me.

They would have an even easier time doing that if I were running as a third-party candidate.

This way, for instance, I can call on the president to debate me and, if he refuses to do so, that exposes the undemocratic aspect in the corporatist elite within the Democratic Party.
Marianne Williamson: "Anything Is Possible"

Days after Marianne Williamson announced her 2024 presidential bid, The Nation’s John Nichols spoke with the candidate about why she’s making this run.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/marianne-williamson-2024-race/

[Ocelot II]

54. The fact she used the made-up word "invisibilize" is disqualifying right there.

Worse, though, is the fact that she's spewing meaningless bullshit. She has a "vision" but no policies. Donald Trump was a new face, not a career politician, and we saw how that worked out.

[womanofthehills]

103. "invisibilize" - (third-person singular simple present)

Verb

invisiblize (third-person singular simple present invisiblizes, present participle invisiblizing, simple past and past participle invisiblized)
(transitive, mostly, sociology) To make invisible; to marginalize so as to erase the presence or contributions of.
2002, Roger Beebe, ‎Denise Fulbrook, ‎Ben Saunders, Rock Over the Edge: Transformations in Popular Music Culture
[…] there is also the danger […] that such a critique recuperates gender in terms that quite literally invisiblize the very issues of race and ethnicity which, as Rolling Stone demonstrates, are crucial to an understanding […] of rock as a musical/cultural practice.

https://www.wordsense.eu/invisibilize/


Happened to me twice in my book club. Once - college prof of language told me “ psychopathy” wasn’t a word.

[Ocelot II]

107. Well fuck me, coulda sworn it was one of those made-up words where a perfectly good adjective

gets morphed into a clumsy verb. I stand corrected. But I still think Marianne Williamson is a dingbat.

[Cha]

86. I Want President Biden whose Face has

the qualifications and Experience to BEAT the Fucking Fascists like he did in 2020.

I want a WINNER.. That's NOT MW.

[highplainsdem]

55. LOLOL!

[Mr.Bill]

58. There are two types of people who run for president.

1. People who want to be president.

2. People who are selling a book and want their book tour to be paid for by campaign donations.

[Merrill]

59. Hell yes I intend to support Marianne Williamson .....

Though she is not the only one in my choices ==== there are two more.

[Just A Box Of Rain]

67. I thought you supported Jill Stein? Or am I mistaken?

[Hekate]

77. Let us make this perfectly clear: you support someone who is primarying the incumbent Democrat

Please correct me if I have that wrong, Merrill.

[mcar]

80. Joe Biden will be this party's nominee

DU has rules about supporting the Democratic nominee. Just saying.

[onenote]

60. She was moving forward in January 2019, until she stopped running a year later.

Before the first primary.

History is likely to repeat itself.

[mcar]

71. Not this woman

[LetMyPeopleVote]

73. This lady was abusive to her staffers and it is very clear that there will be no debates

This is a weak response Does anyone expect there to be any Democratic presidential debates this cycle? I am pretty sure that Willamson will not qualify for a debate

Link to tweet

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64984303?xtor=AL-72-%5Bpartner%5D-%5Bbbc.news.twitter%5D-%5Bheadline%5D-%5Bnews%5D-%5Bbizdev%5D-%5Bisapi%5D&at_medium=social&at_campaign_type=owned&at_link_id=0B2CEE02-C43D-11ED-A3CE-67F24744363C&at_link_type=web_link&at_bbc_team=editorial&at_link_origin=BBCWorld&at_ptr_name=twitter&at_campaign=Social_Flow&at_format=link

"If I can be a bitch at the office at times, I don't think anybody's happy about that," she said, "but I think anybody reading that can measure that against what is normal in politics."

"I'm not running for sainthood here," she continued. "I'm running for president.".....

But she acknowledged she may have room for personal growth.

"If I've been a tough boss lady, if I have some lessons to learn, which obviously maybe I do, then I hope that I will learn them," she said......

This year, however, the Democratic National Committee is unlikely to officially sanction any 2024 debates, depriving Ms Williamson of perhaps the highest-profile platform to reach the party's voters.

[Cha]

82. Thanks For Posting this behind

the Curtain Crap.

[Hekate]

84. It gets better and better....

Marianne Williamson alleges to have joined DU. See below.

[Cha]

137. Oh yeah? I was talking to

MW herself? Reply her tweet about trump & uninsured right back at her?

[Hekate]

138. Seems more like...

…the OP’s been cleaning out her sock drawer.

[Cha]

140. Yeah..

fishy.

[niyad]

166. Nah, there is a new poster with the handle "marianne w", says her name is judy p,

from Chicago.

[betsuni]

78. This is like when a huge international corporation markets a new product as all-natural organic

vegan gluten-free green but it's the same old sodium and sugar and preservatives.

[Marianne W]

79. ***Marianne Williamson's rise in polls echoes Bernie Sanders meteoric 2016***

Marianne Williamson, who declared her candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination on March 4, has reached ten percent in national polls less than one month after her announcement, when her support level was less than half that.

According to the FiveThirtyEight A-rated Echelon Insights March Omnibus Survey of likely voters, the campaign’s surge is due to Williamson’s message resonating with voters.

Even though most Democrats hold a favorable opinion of President Joe Biden, only one in four said that they want him to run for a second term according to a Monmouth University Poll of self-identified Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters.

There is a healthy appetite for a Biden primary challenger among Democrats, and right now, Williamson is the only one.

https://njtoday.news/2023/03/31/marianne-williamsons-rise-in-polls-echoes-bernie-sanders-meteoric-2016/

[Hekate]

81. Hi Marianne! Did Merrill send you over here? I hope you read the TOS before signing on...

…and that you understand that Democratic Underground supports Democratic officeholders, that is, Democratic incumbents, and we support Democratic candidates only if they are NOT running against Democratic incumbents.

Hope you enjoy the discussions!

[mcar]

87. ...

[betsuni]

92. ...

[Marianne W]

98. Thank you for the welcome, I've not met Merrill

The rule doesn't seem to forbid supporting a Democratic challenger against a Democratic incumbent in a Democratic primary? We wouldn't have folks like AOC without primary challenges!

[Hekate]

101. Did AOC primary an actual Democrat incumbent? Funny I don't remember that, but I don't follow...

…local politics across the 50 states, really. AOC is now “national.”

[Marianne W]

104. Yes! 10 term incumbent Joe Crowley

We're much better for it.

[Hekate]

108. Somehow, I think there's more to it than what you imply. More importantly, your doppleganger...

…intends to challenge a sitting Democratic POTUS in good standing, someone who has done only good for us since he beat Trump.

Were you happy with Trump? Did you ever bother to speak out against him in the way you are bashing Biden? Or do you save that for Democrats who are somehow not as pure as you want? Do you recognize how it was that Trump got to be POTUS despite losing the popular vote?

You should have some thoughts on that, because you and your doppleganger played your part. And this Board will not support you against an incumbent Democratic President.

[Marianne W]

120. Marianne has said we owe Biden a debt for defeating Trump

And everythng I've heard from her has been quite respectful. Too mild according to some supporters! She backed Biden in the 2020 general and would do so again in 2024, I'm quite sure. Same for me.

[Hekate]

121. Awwwww

[Hortensis]

210. Respectful?! I'm always insulted when she and those

who talk as she do (and draw the same admirers) describe what Democrats like me and those we elect believe in and strive for. I'm most offended of all by the hostile deceit narratives they spread everywhere about the party. Anyone who knows election and party history and follows elections can pick out unsubstantiated accusations and misrepresentations in every article.

The sophistry of the pretense that the voters who create, form and reform the evil Democratic establishment every 2 years are somehow wonderful and decent but just incredible fools who have no idea what they're doing is not just offensive. It's extremely disgusting that anyone could get away with it.

The party we create isn't all we want, for sure, but after 50 years of watching, my evaluation is that overall we draw good people, quality professionals, who are far, far more principled and aspiring than typical citizens. Just take a look at the alternatives. And don't pass on those who formed the anti-Democratic LW populist movement.

Americans' and our democracy's greatest asset is a party that organizes a majority of those who believe in government of, by and for the people.

We see what happens EVERY TIME WITHOUT FAIL the Democratic Party isn't given enough power to stop the opposition. And the advances that don't happen EVERY TIME WITHOUT FAIL that Democrats don't have the power to do what needs to be, often desperately.

What kind of operatives don't want people to know that? In any case, maybe look beyond the flattering, sweet frosting for what others find so offensive and concerning. You shouldn't have to look long.

[womanofthehills]

115. Crawley was so sure he would win, he didn't even bother to show up for their debate

Just a week before the election. He sent someone in his place.

Crawley was even being considered for next speaker of house.

AOC,with barely any money compared to Crawley, went door to door and the rest is history.

[Hekate]

117. She's got a great career ahead of her, too

[womanofthehills]

172. Agree - I love all the young/younger women in Congress now

Hoping Katie Porter becomes a senator.

[tritsofme]

91. Oh boy...now this is really getting funny!

[Cha]

99. Nah.. We Want Pres Joe Biden to run..

Link to tweet

[Cha]

113. There's a Healthy Appetite to WIN in

the GE Against Fascism and That is what Pres Joe Biden Will DO.

[lapucelle]

124. The data do not support the claim.

54% of those polled don't even know who Williams is, so it's actually 10% of the 46% of voters who have heard of her.

That makes her actual support 0.046%.

https://echelonin.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/March-2023-Omnibus-Crosstabs-EXTERNAL.pdf

[Cha]

127. Mahalo!

lol @ sea lions.

[lapucelle]

130. Mahalo, Cha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

0.046% is pretty sad.

[Cha]

132. Yes, the whole thing is..

I don't find it amusing at all.

Vanity Candidate when Our Very Democracy is at Stake.

Link to tweet

[Marianne W]

135. I don't think that's how it works

IF IDENTIFIES AS DEMOCRAT OR VOTES FOR DEMOCRATS MORE OFTEN THAN REPUBLICANS
[QParty=4-5 OR QPartyLean=3-4], ASK:
19. [Q2024WilliamsonBiden] If the 2024 Democratic presidential primaries were being held
today and you had to make a choice, for whom would you vote? [RANDOMIZE SCALE 1-4,
4-1]
(n=530)

JOE BIDEN, DEFINITELY/PROBABLY 73%

MARIANNE WILLIAMSON,DEFINITELY/PROBABLY 10%

1. Joe Biden, definitely 46%
2. Joe Biden, probably 28%
3. Marianne Williamson, probably 7%
4. Marianne Williamson, definitely 3%
5. Unsure 17%

https://echelonin.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/March-2023-Omnibus-Topline-EXTERNAL.pdf

[Hekate]

139. I think you are wrong

[Hermit-The-Prog]

152. Ain't you scared the woo will git ya for that?

[lapucelle]

154. Actually, that is how it works.

In addition the claim is made that

The campaign’s surge [sic] is due to Williamson’s message resonating with voters.

That's not in the data either.

[ecstatic]

149. lol! nt

[niyad]

163. So, dear judy p, are you a paid staffer for the "miracles" person?

[Marianne W]

169. Miracles like Resurrection after death?

[niyad]

171. You are, of course, free to believe, or not, however you choose. Do not project.

[Marianne W]

175. Biden believes in it, I do not

He is free to do so, of course. Folks have all kinds of religous and spiritual beliefs that are articles of faith. I don't see them as disqualifying for office.

[niyad]

177. Apparently not, since you support the "miracles" person. I find your

contradictions quite amusing for the nonce, but I am fairly certain that they will become yawningly tedious quite shortly. Do enjoy your, undoubtedly, brief stay.

[Marianne W]

188. No contradiction

Marianne and Biden both have religious and/or spiritual beliefs I do not share. I don't find that disqualifying for either.

[niyad]

191. You still have not answered whether you are a paid staffer for "miracles" gal. I

find that telling. Or do you get paid in rubles?

[Marianne W]

193. I am not

[niyad]

194. We understand completely.

[rzemanfl]

190. Bookmarking. n/t

[Brother Buzz]

196. It looks like that 10% is gonna shrink

After RFK Jr's announcement, an advanced poll indicates almost half of Marianne Williamson's support is migrating over to RFK Jr's camp.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

85. Too bad that neither Iowa nor New Hampshire will pay a meaningful role in the 2020 Dem primaries

Link to tweet

[ismnotwasm]

100. Jesus fucking Christ. No.

[FrankBooth]

102. Williamson is, was, and will be a complete non factor

in the upcoming election. She will have about as much impact on the race as your token green party or other 3rd party candidate will have. She can run if she wants to but she's irrelevant.

[LowerManhattanite]

106. LOL.

🎶”Crystals Non-Persuasive…Ahhhhh-huuunnnnh!”🎶

[Mr. Sparkle]

109. Merrill , are you a paid staffer of the Marianne Williamson campagn?

[Tom Kitten]

111. Yes, Marianne Williamson Is Moving Forward

Forward, not Backward!
Upward, not Forward!
And always Twirling. Twirling! Twirling towards the Future.

[Music Man]

143. LOL, classic reference :)

Not far off from a Marianne Williamson debate performance, really...

[lapucelle]

112. I read profiles.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=200592

[RandiFan1290]

176. Z O M B I E S !! !! !!

[Kali]

114. throwing away this 2007 account?

promoting a kook and insulting the President for two hides in one afternoon...

[Hekate]

119. I suspect this is a case of Sleeping Beauty rearranging their sock drawer before another long nap

It’s been entertaining, tho

[DemocraticPatriot]

122. Marianne WHO ??? "Prominent"? NO....

She has positioned herself as the candidate most likely to DAMAGE women's rights, if she were actually to damage President Joe Biden in the primaries---- which I doubt will happen. Who outside of the very well informed portion of the party has even heard of her? I barely have, myself.

I would compare her with the Republican congressman who challenged President Nixon's re-nomination in 1972... Mc-something I think, I can't even remember his name for sure... That didn't go far, and hardly anyone will remember that there even WAS such a challenge to Nixon

Nixon was the exception to the rule about "incumbents with a viable challenger lose for re-election"--

Oh WAIT, the word was "viable" and his challenger that year was not.

Neither is Marianne a "viable challenger". End of story.

[Cha]

129. TY!

[bronxiteforever]

125. Another fantasy candidate who wants to be POTUS

but has never held political office before, never balanced a budget with a legislative before, never negotiated a treaty with world leaders before and has never picked an appointee who had to be confirmed.

I am so tired of celebrity politicians who never had the guts and intestinal fortitude to serve in a retail political position. There is something of a coward about those types of candidates. An ego trip amateur hour is a recipe for failure. Retail politics is not something to be sneered at as beneath a person.

[Cha]

131. Vanity Candidate.

[bronxiteforever]

141. +100

[Earth-shine]

151. She seems to be on Fox news a lot, sometimes bashing Demoocrats.

https://www.foxnews.com/category/person/marianne-williamson

I'd take her over Trump. (This is called damning with faint praise.)

[betsuni]

157. The imaginary alliance of left and right anti-establishment populists.

It's ridiculous.

[bigtree]

160. I already sensed this in my chakra

...ooom.

[Demsrule86]

162. Trashing...appropriate to trash a thread about a soon to be former Democrat who runs against

an incumbent president.

[MineralMan]

167. Utter Nonsense!

She's no Jill Stein, after all...

[Renew Deal]

179. Williamson will never be the nominee. She could win the most delegates and will still not

be the nominee. Democrats would nominate someone else.

[Hekate]

181. Zero government experience, successful in only one arena. Like Trump, only with warm fuzzies...

Look where that got us.

The presidency is not for amateurs.

[Hekate]

185. Parse my statement more closely: she has warm fuzzies. He does not. Both are unqualified.

[Hekate]

182. Welcome to DU. I hope you read the TOS on your way in.

SMH

[niyad]

192. What flavour pizza do you like?

[mcar]

199. Why?

[rzemanfl]

198. I need to wash socks. BBL. n/t

[ExWhoDoesntCare]

201. The only thing this fraud is moving toward

Is padding her pocketbook with the dollars of gullible rubes, and quite likely Russian rubles as well.

Since she's very stupid, it took her a while to figure out that there's lots of money to be had from parting stupid people from their money via politics, but, now that she's figured it out, she'll be a perpetual go nowhere campaigner to enrich herself.

That's the only thing that con artist stands for--or ever has.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

203. LOL I do not see williamson mentioned in this polling

Link to tweet

[pinkstarburst]

204. We made a huge mistake

back in 2020 by allowing so many fringe candidates with zero chance of actually securing the nomination for president to elbow their way onto the debate stage.

There were 24 candidates in the first two debates, including this space cadet. Way too many. It was a ridiculous shouting match with people taking pot shots at Biden and other candidates who actually had a shot. We don't need that and I don't want her or Kennedy or Kanye West or Andrew Yang or anyone else who just wants their 5 minutes of fame on a stage with Biden for 2024.

The DNC needs to seriously reexamine this for 2024 and especially 2028 and have much higher thresholds for debate participation OR if they are going to let all these people who have zero shot of actually getting nominated on stage, rather than dividing the top 24 up into 12 and 12 shuffled randomly, they should have the lowest 16 by polling/fundraising numbers all together on the first night and the highest 8 based on polling and fundraising numbers together on stage on the second night. Stop pandering to the whiners who say everyone needs an equal opportunity in the debates. No, you don't. We all know full and well that there is going to be one nominee and most of those 24 never even get 1% in polling. It is harmful to have ridiculous debates where people like Williamson get to spout off woo woo nonsense about her book, or Julian Castro gets to shout cheap one liners about Biden's age.

I'm sure they won't change anything, but they should.

[Hortensis]

205. Agree! The Democratic Party has been dominated by ideologically stable

progressive liberalism for many decades now (even before the southern conservative faction finally mostly moved to the GOP 50 years ago). We of course embrace almost all ranges of ideology and special interests in our big tent that claim to support our core liberal principles. Among those principles are commitment to true equality of all and to representative government of, by and for the people.

As said, we need to set much higher standards for those we offer to the nation for high office. Some in 2020's crowd didn't meet even the minimum standards of integrity, competence, or character wanted by most voters, much less the highest, and some proved to not be committed to even very basic Democratic principles.

It's really simple: the candidates we allow to run on our ticket should represent the pro-democracy, liberal ideals and goals shared by more than 80 million Democratic voters and be of proven good character and judgement.

Liars need not apply. No Russian assets, hucksters of shiny objects, brand-polishers and cynical opportunists.

NO ONE WHOSE IDEOLOGY OR CAMPAIGN STRATEGY DEPENDS ON DECEIVING AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE AND/OR STIRRING UP DIVISIONS WITHIN THE PARTY. "Funny" how naturally those go together.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

206. I doubt that there will be any Democratic primary debates this cycle

[Hortensis]

209. Why wouldn't she? With her social media presence and speaking engagements,

she'll easily raise more than she needs just by shifting her messaging, and of course public figures can't buy the free and constant MSM exposure presidential candidates get. She'll get to promote whatever positions she espouses.

And the more she explains why liberal Democratic politics and politicians and the corrupt establishment must always fail the wonderful people who aspire to so much more, the more those who like that will click on her posts, watch her appearances, talk about her, buy her books, and donate.

Win, win, win, win, win.

Wonder if she'll repeat 2020 and finish up and drop out before the primaries start?

Last time she declared an "exploratory committee" in November 2018, then her candidacy on January 19, 2019 -- a year before the Democratic races got started -- publicly.

She dropped out on January 10, 2020, just as the competitive, and expensive primary races were about to take off and media coverage with them.

VP Biden announced his candidacy, btw, on April 25, 2020.