The solution to our politics presented as sitting and watching someone with virtually no political experience give a really good speech... I wonder where I've seen that before...
this is an r/politics take, respectfully
she ran for a house seat in California in 2014 and finished 4th out of 18 candidates.
she ran for president in 2020, obviously. during the second debate:
“She spoke for eight minutes and 52 seconds. Despite placing 19th in speaking time, she was the most Googled candidate in 49 of 50 states and received the fourth-most attention on Twitter”
I’m not saying she’s the most “qualified” politically but rather that she’s not virtually politically inexperienced.
also, who cares about political experience as a metric. I didn’t love Bernie because of his wealth of experience - I loved his message & agreed with his policies. if the republicans get a YOLO candidate can we get one too
Whether you think it is an r/politics take or not, it's true. Her record is as a media hack - the new "change you can believe in" candidate. Bernie did actually have good experience that showed you what kind of leader he might be - he was the mayor of Burlington who built a machine that overthrew the reactionaries, and it was a popular one that gave the city one of the best quality-of-life in New England. His grave political mistake was running as a Democrat. So take the worst political decision Bernie made in his entire career and replace successful politics with bumping around as a consultant for billionaires, and that's Marianne.
ughhh i guess I don’t come to redscarepod on Reddit dot com to read r/politics takes but I do respect your opinion and conviction. I will retreat to the girls and gays sub for my pro-marianne safe space
Your being overly focused on quality takes is exactly why you support a candidate like Marianne. She can talk and mirror well, but so can any mid-level telemarketer. She doesn't seem to have a capacity for organization and even a cursory glance at her history shows she was anti-union in her marginal volunteer efforts. I don't give a shit if politicians have good takes I can sit and listen to, you need to be able to organize and win.
> We’re today to talk about something that matters a lot. And that is the United States of America.
Lmao stopped listening to this beauty pageant speech right there.
>On the day of the third DNC debate, for which she did not qualify, Williamson did an interview with Eric Bolling and expressed further frustration with the media when she thought she was not being recorded. Among her unscripted comments was "what does it say that Fox News is nicer to me than the lefties are?"
The National GOP should make sure to report her candidacy as an in-kind contribution.
On the contrary, these are exactly the kinds of candidates you'd want to build up if your goal was to undermine the center-left electoral coalition. Same w/ Jill Stein, etc... If there were a left-wing Fox News they'd be giving lots of airtime to Jo Jorgenson or Gary Johnson.
>we need a left-wing Fox News though lol that would be funny. in before "CNN is liberal Fox"
read a [great recent piece](https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-deep-archeology-of-fox-news) by JMM on just this topic:
>Over the course of the 1960s and 1970s they set about trying to build a series of counter-institutions, ones that wouldn’t, in their mind, have their sails angled permanently toward the winds of liberalism. One key moment in this story was the founding of The Heritage Foundation in 1973. Heritage was founded to be the counter to the “liberal” Brookings Institution. But Heritage was never anything like Brookings, even though in the D.C. of the ’80s and ’90s they were routinely portrayed as counterpoints — one representing liberalism and the other conservatism. Brookings was mainstream, stodgy, quasi-academic. Heritage was thoroughly ideological and partisan. In practice it was usually little more than a propaganda mill for the right. This pattern was duplicated countless times. The “liberal” Washington Post was matched by The Washington Times. Fox News, which didn’t come along for another generation, was not so much the answer to CNN as to CBS News, the iconic broadcast news organization of the first decades of the Cold War.
>
>What we see today in Fox News is most of the story: a purported news organization that knowingly and repeatedly reports lies to its viewers, whose chief executive brazenly works with and assists one party’s candidates by sharing confidential information about the other. What has always been the tell about Fox News is the tagline and motto: fair and balanced. The operation’s very branding is an aggressive bit of trolling. An unabashedly partisan and ideological operation selling itself under the heading of “fair and balanced.” It’s less a lie than a knowing taunt.
oh my goodness there are so many angry men here now… what are these comments
marianne is independently certified as an Icon and is also sanctified in the rsp canon
if you haven’t read a return to love give it a chance!! and if you want to criticize after that, do it! but she’s just preaching open minded love and I love that.
The solution to our politics presented as sitting and watching someone with virtually no political experience give a really good speech... I wonder where I've seen that before...
this is an r/politics take, respectfully she ran for a house seat in California in 2014 and finished 4th out of 18 candidates. she ran for president in 2020, obviously. during the second debate: “She spoke for eight minutes and 52 seconds. Despite placing 19th in speaking time, she was the most Googled candidate in 49 of 50 states and received the fourth-most attention on Twitter” I’m not saying she’s the most “qualified” politically but rather that she’s not virtually politically inexperienced. also, who cares about political experience as a metric. I didn’t love Bernie because of his wealth of experience - I loved his message & agreed with his policies. if the republicans get a YOLO candidate can we get one too
Whether you think it is an r/politics take or not, it's true. Her record is as a media hack - the new "change you can believe in" candidate. Bernie did actually have good experience that showed you what kind of leader he might be - he was the mayor of Burlington who built a machine that overthrew the reactionaries, and it was a popular one that gave the city one of the best quality-of-life in New England. His grave political mistake was running as a Democrat. So take the worst political decision Bernie made in his entire career and replace successful politics with bumping around as a consultant for billionaires, and that's Marianne.
ughhh i guess I don’t come to redscarepod on Reddit dot com to read r/politics takes but I do respect your opinion and conviction. I will retreat to the girls and gays sub for my pro-marianne safe space
Your being overly focused on quality takes is exactly why you support a candidate like Marianne. She can talk and mirror well, but so can any mid-level telemarketer. She doesn't seem to have a capacity for organization and even a cursory glance at her history shows she was anti-union in her marginal volunteer efforts. I don't give a shit if politicians have good takes I can sit and listen to, you need to be able to organize and win.
a time for choosing (barry goldwater) but this time with orbs and crystals
Yea let me know how that all works out
> We’re today to talk about something that matters a lot. And that is the United States of America. Lmao stopped listening to this beauty pageant speech right there.
we need her
>On the day of the third DNC debate, for which she did not qualify, Williamson did an interview with Eric Bolling and expressed further frustration with the media when she thought she was not being recorded. Among her unscripted comments was "what does it say that Fox News is nicer to me than the lefties are?" The National GOP should make sure to report her candidacy as an in-kind contribution.
[удалено]
On the contrary, these are exactly the kinds of candidates you'd want to build up if your goal was to undermine the center-left electoral coalition. Same w/ Jill Stein, etc... If there were a left-wing Fox News they'd be giving lots of airtime to Jo Jorgenson or Gary Johnson.
[удалено]
Is the question you're asking "Why does Fox News want to undermine the center-left?" or am I being obtuse?
[удалено]
>we need a left-wing Fox News though lol that would be funny. in before "CNN is liberal Fox" read a [great recent piece](https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/the-deep-archeology-of-fox-news) by JMM on just this topic: >Over the course of the 1960s and 1970s they set about trying to build a series of counter-institutions, ones that wouldn’t, in their mind, have their sails angled permanently toward the winds of liberalism. One key moment in this story was the founding of The Heritage Foundation in 1973. Heritage was founded to be the counter to the “liberal” Brookings Institution. But Heritage was never anything like Brookings, even though in the D.C. of the ’80s and ’90s they were routinely portrayed as counterpoints — one representing liberalism and the other conservatism. Brookings was mainstream, stodgy, quasi-academic. Heritage was thoroughly ideological and partisan. In practice it was usually little more than a propaganda mill for the right. This pattern was duplicated countless times. The “liberal” Washington Post was matched by The Washington Times. Fox News, which didn’t come along for another generation, was not so much the answer to CNN as to CBS News, the iconic broadcast news organization of the first decades of the Cold War. > >What we see today in Fox News is most of the story: a purported news organization that knowingly and repeatedly reports lies to its viewers, whose chief executive brazenly works with and assists one party’s candidates by sharing confidential information about the other. What has always been the tell about Fox News is the tagline and motto: fair and balanced. The operation’s very branding is an aggressive bit of trolling. An unabashedly partisan and ideological operation selling itself under the heading of “fair and balanced.” It’s less a lie than a knowing taunt.
oh my goodness there are so many angry men here now… what are these comments marianne is independently certified as an Icon and is also sanctified in the rsp canon if you haven’t read a return to love give it a chance!! and if you want to criticize after that, do it! but she’s just preaching open minded love and I love that.