Marianne Williamson

Rank 16 of 47
|
Score 76
8/31/2025, 6:55:14 PM
X
In reply to:
Jim
@jmacken2013
·
1d
@marwilliamson @helencaddes @katewillett I'm sure you do. I like how your list starts with animals. Like how you defended the trump lies about people eating their pets.

You're right. You are a serious person, and not at all a conspiracy theorist specializing in grift.
Marianne Williamson
@marwilliamson
·
1d
@jmacken2013 @helencaddes @katewillett I would know what my issues were … and are. https://marianne2024.com/issues/
Jim
@jmacken2013
·
1d
@helencaddes @katewillett And if you believe that I've got a bridge I'd love to sell you.
Helen Caddes 🔥
@helencaddes
·
1d
@jmacken2013 @katewillett If you supported a ceasefire, arms embargo, Medicare for All, the Equality Act, the Green New Deal and money out of politics, she was your candidate.
Jim
@jmacken2013
·
1d
@helencaddes @katewillett Any time Marianne Williamson pops up in my feed I tell her to kick rocks.

She is bad, and she should feel bad. And anyone who supports her should also feel bad.
Helen Caddes 🔥
@helencaddes
·
1d
@jmacken2013 @katewillett Then why don't you "bully" one of them?

The statement is part of a public discourse as it engages with political issues and the validity of concerns related to an election. The tone is defensive and aims to clarify a previous position regarding the importance of addressing people's concerns for electoral success.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but is defensive in nature, which neither aligns nor violates the principle significantly.
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, maintaining respect for others. [+1]
  3. 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 attempts to engage in dialogue by clarifying a previous argument, avoiding personal attacks, and focusing on the issue at hand. [+1]