Posted on 07/31/2019 8:02:17 AM PDT by rktman
I’ll say it again, there is not a single candidate currently running that will beat Donald Trump in 2020. Not one. Unless someone steps up his or her game big league, Donald Trump is going to win a second term as president of the United States. Now, that being said, after tonight’s CNN Democratic debate, there had to have been a winner. I thought Sen. Bernie Sanders was one of them. He needed to be feisty, aggressive, and willing to attack. He did that, but he will need to destroy his best pal, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, to start a foundation from which he can reach the top of the 2020 field. It remains to be seen whether he’s willing to engage in that sort of campaign. Yet, that brings us to Marianne Williamson. She puts the “side” in the outsider. We’re in the era of the political outsider. And with Williamson, she’s way out there, but she also had the better moments of tonight’s debate, clinching some of the biggest applause lines, spikes in Google searches, and appeared to have what the others don’t: something new to offer.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Her background will almost certainly appeal to a much broader constituency than those of the other candidates. If selected, groomed and properly supported by the leftist machine she very well may emerge as a leader for P or VP.
In one narrow sense, it will be sad to see her lose.
Last night someone said she was offering 40 acres and a unicorn.
Reparations for something that nobody currently living had anything to do with is ridiculous. Just sorting out who in our present population was a descendant of a slave, and what percentage of ancestry they had from an enslaved person would be a mind boggling task.
And exactly how would reparations be calculated for someone who had a white parent whose family was present in the era of slavery? Do they get 1/2 reparations? Or nothing since their white ancestors cancel out their reparations due?
If you just try to think about the whole issue with anything other than unicorn logic it just doesn't make sense.
“Most of us will agree K.Harris can be quite charming and is attractive in her own way.”
You aren’t supposed to drink the bong water. She is as attractive and charming as a bitter ex-wife.
The more loony they are, the less likely they will be elected. Hopefully this Williamson can win or at least shake it up to the point of compete insanity.
Jeb was also a presence on that debate stage, in the Margaret Dumont role.
Trump’s making the nuts be the face of the DNC. That’s good for the RNC.
And he's making it impossible for Biden to distance himself from them.
That’s funny right there! I’m old enough to remember her.
Your home page is THE BEST!!!!!
Aye, laddy. I recall seeing that sign hanging on the wall somewhere years ago and have always been especially cautious in that regard (it wasn't then thought of as "bong water").
She is as attractive and charming as a bitter ex-wife.
Good point. But remember, we all are at risk of being conned by an accomplished artist given the proper setting. It certainly helps to have experienced an ex-wife to learn how to recognize any monster that may be clearly hiding in the portrait of what one thinks is a very desirable woman.
With determination and time it is possible to slay that monster - and, like a lion tamer, one learns the art along the way. {;^]
Courtesy note to Marianne: You have a wonderful background and would have been even more successful as a beautiful conservative woman.
I believe the media is interested in creating the nominees. Its why we have conservatives that aren’t conservative. The media likes to shoot down candidates like Reagan and Trump. These candidates have a mandate that is often against the swamp.
The swamp and the media have a symbiotic relationship. The media gets leaks from the swamp to publish. And the swamp gets the press they want. It allows the media or swamp to attack any candidate before they get into power. And they can even destroy a person in power.
While the people feel that they are in control of the government, thats not really true. Elections are controlled so that only acceptable candidates ever win the nominations. And the press puts their thumb on the scales so that one candidate has a huge advantage over the other. Often the media wants one candidate while the swamp picks the other. The Swamp wanted Romney and McCain. But the media wanted Obama. All the other candidates were rejected by one or the other. And we got to choose from two bad choices. This time it was supposed to be Clinton and Bush.
Trump upset the apple cart. He was supposed to go down or take others down first. But he won on his own while the swamp and the media fought with everything they had. They now wonder who is in charge. How did he do it. And how can he be stopped.
The question could be asked, how did the people get their candidate. Or it could be asked, whose candidate is he? Both are very cynical questions. They imply that the people should not get to choose their candidate, or that other people might get to choose the president. Maybe those people are Russians or Capitalists. Or just voters.
Funny how the democratic candidate who spoke the most incomprehensible gibberish was considered by viewers to be the clear winner. LOL Which, of course, means the more clear a democrat is about what they stand for and what they will do in power, the more it turns people off.
How did this nitwit qualify for the debates? Of course, one can argue that Beto and others on the stage are just as goofy if not more.
Gracias!
“Marianne Williamson wrote a book called A Course in Miracles...”
She didn’t write it, another woman did.
M W, as I understand it, teaches some kind of new age, wavy gravy courses using the book as a text.
I once tried to read it.
Wooooooooo.... (eye roll.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.