Marianne Williamson

Rank 20 of 47
|
Score 57
3/24/2024, 12:52:27 AM
X
In reply to:
A Legitimate Person
@GregGardner11
·
463d
@MooreForAChange @helencaddes @marwilliamson Biden may (or may not ) be weak, but he's electable. MW is not. She's a public intellectual gaining attention through her candidacy. I like her ideas, but without political talent (or even warmth) she's powerless to implement them, and dangerous to the election outcome.
🕊️Jacqueline Moore🕊️
@MooreForAChange
·
463d
@GregGardner11 @helencaddes @marwilliamson I understand. Lack of civic engagement among voting-aged Americans is a key cause of this effect of having 2 ineffective human beings among 100M people or so, to “choose” between for the country’s highest office.
A Legitimate Person
@GregGardner11
·
463d
@MooreForAChange @helencaddes @marwilliamson I'd personally focus more of my concern on Trump.
🕊️Jacqueline Moore🕊️
@MooreForAChange
·
463d
@GregGardner11 @helencaddes @marwilliamson Biden’s record is depressing, so your feeling is not surprising. His pandering for votes now after 3+ years that allowed the overturn of R v W to prevail; failed to publish the ERA; kowtows to donors of various ilks; and manipulates at every turn regarding Israel/Gaza = gross.
A Legitimate Person
@GregGardner11
·
463d
@helencaddes @marwilliamson Assuming you describe Biden fairly (your view is I think depressingly warped), only 1 of the 2 remaining choices will support Labor, oppose Dobbs, lower drug costs, relieve student debt, and STEP DOWN after his term. Now supporting MW's myopic candidacy opens the real Trump door.
Helen Caddes
@helencaddes
·
463d
@GregGardner11 @marwilliamson When you nominate an incrementalist, lukewarm career politician who refuses to implement any progressive policy that would actually show a tangible benefit for anyone, that literally ushers in fascism. It opens the door.

The statement is part of a conversation on Twitter that involves a discussion about political figures, their policies, and their impact on society. The tone of the statement is critical and implies a disagreement with the media's portrayal of a political campaign. The intent seems to be to highlight perceived media bias and to defend a political figure who the speaker believes has been unfairly treated by the political-media establishment. The content addresses the issue of media influence on political campaigns, which is a relevant topic in public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions, but it does express a strong disagreement without providing constructive engagement.
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others and does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it is more focused on criticizing the media's actions.
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in criticism but does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement attempts to use influence to highlight a perceived injustice, which could be seen as working for the betterment of society by advocating for fair media representation. [+1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform to express a viewpoint responsibly, although it could be argued that it lacks integrity by not engaging more constructively. [+1]