Candace Owens really believes everything she says
- Thread starter Professor Emeritus
- Start date
I think it's simpler. The grift pays her bills and provides her with a life she enjoys. Why wouldn't she go all in.
She's no different than Sinema
get these nets
Veteran
Yeah, grifting literally means conning people. Whether you believe any, or most of what you promote, the important point is to benefit by convincing others to believe.
There's a thread up of the OAN network being sued by two Black election workers in GA that they scapegoated as part of an election fraud conspiracy theory.
As part of their settlement, they were forced to RETRACT their story by running the ACTUAL findings by that state about election fraud allegations about those women.
When Tucker Carlson gets jammed up in court for running tenuous, debunked, or outright false stories , the defense was that "the show and his commentary are parody"
All these MFers are one in the same. And the ones not attached to corporations operate under even less rules/restrictions. CO likely made the exact same comments that OAN had to walk back, and probably still pushing that conspiracy theory.
Probably also still pushing whatever lie that Tucker had to juelz and shuck & Jive his way out of in court.
She will say and do anything her handlers tell her to repeat. Again, what else is she qualified to do?
Might as well hold a sign that says "Will grift for food"
Last edited:
null
...
AquaCityBoy
Veteran
c00ndance gonna c00n dance. 
She’s dumb as hell. Shows even more that all she does is parrot and serve as a useful idiot to the far right. That wake up call is going to be glorious.
Piff Perkins
Veteran
Doe she? She was anti-Trump and had various semi liberal views a few years ago and has been exposed about it. She's a grifter like most of these people. She also puts zero effort into her arguments and is incapable of debating the politics of black voters or "black interests."
Most of these people basically believe black history in America is:
-few years of slavery, wasn't that bad
-Republican president frees the slaves
-democrats were racist in the 60s!
-Obama made you victims!
That's the general timeline. It's embarrassing.
Most of these people basically believe black history in America is:
-few years of slavery, wasn't that bad
-Republican president frees the slaves
-democrats were racist in the 60s!
-Obama made you victims!
That's the general timeline. It's embarrassing.
Breh, it's annoying as fukk when people throw out their position without even reading the thread.
Your argument WAS my argument until I found out the actual timeline of the Social Autopsy blowup. This is what turned her conservative:
The Strange Tale of Social Autopsy, the Anti-Harassment Start-up That Descended Into Gamergate Trutherism
That article was written in April 2016, back when she WAS anti-Trump. Because of Social Autopsy she got harassed online and the harassment came the same day the liberals told her not to launch so she thought the liberals were faking to be conservatives attacking her, the conservatives fed into her conspiracy theory and told her yes, these liberals are evil and they attack people like you the moment you step out of line, she believed their bullshyt cause it fed into her conspiratorial mindset and started letting them teach her how to be a conservative. She went radio silent during that time and didn't even come out as conservative or start monetizing it until a year and a half later.
You think marrying a hardcore white conservative was part of the grift? Did he purposely marry a lying black liberal only pretending to be conservative or did he get the wool pulled over his eyes by love? Why is it that the people who spend time with her and interview her, whether they're liberal or conservative, all agree that she comes off as sincere and completely believes what she is saying?
Piff Perkins
Veteran
I've heard her make that claim before actually. I'm saying I don't believe her. I think there are quite a few black figures in social media or just life who realize the "black conservative" grift is one of the best ways to immediately garner popularity and money. As a grift it's better than trying to become a prosperity pastor lol. There's something incredibly disingenuous about the arguments made, the image present, and the way these black characters get trotted out on a near quarterly basis. Not to mention the white grifters who were once anti Trump who are now his biggest supporters. I'm sure many would say they sound sincere too. All the money/views on the right is going to MAGA, anti-woke and manosphere shyt right now. If you aren't on that wave you quickly adapt to get the $$$.
I literally don't believe anything she says and her villain origin story isn't compelling to me. That's just my opinion though. When I watch that Rogan interview it becomes clear this a person who is bullshytting and gets away with it because she never speaks with people who push back.
Yet again you're completely ignoring everything that's been posted. You didn't even click on the article did you? That article isn't Candace Owens describing her origin story, it's the Social Autopsy blowup being reported on as it was happening.
Let me break it down again cause you don't seem to be following:
1. In April 2016 Candace Owens had a liberal public persona and Social Autopsy was an essentially liberal project.
2. When Social Autopsy collapsed, Candace Owens immediately blamed liberals in real time for reasons that have already been explained and centered around her tendency for conspiratorial thought.
3. Owens was immediately courted by conservatives due to her public attack on liberals, and started getting books and ideas from them, but kept silent publicly and didn't start promoting conservatism publicly or monetizing her views until late 2017, nearly 1.5 years later.
That's proof that your claim her "origin story" is made up has no weight. The article I posted essentially proves that her origin story is accurate. Claiming that she just realized the Black Conservative grift was the way to make money doesn't match up with the order of events - if she was aiming for the Black Conservative grift, then why was she trying to launch Social Autopsy in the first place?
It kind of seems like a stretch that someone would change literally all their political views for such a petty reason. I mean I couldn't see myself changing my base views on gun control, universal healthcare, climate change, abortion, etc. just because of a petty disagreement with somebody or because of questionable claims about a conspiracy theory against me.
Maybe I just don't understand the mentality of conspiracy theorists, but my take is that she was always an opportunist, and simply realized that being on the right was more profitable at some point.
She didn't switch all her positions at that moment. She switched sides at that moment because she became convinced liberals were evil and persecuting her and some conservatives befriended her. Then switched her positions over the next 18 months as the conservatives who had befriended her groomed her and fed her books and papers on all the issues that within that atmosphere of anger were more convincing than anything she had read.
This perfectly matches psych research on how most people's positions change. David Brooks covers this in "The Social Animal". Very few people choose their positions one-by-one on the merits. Instead, they latch onto someone they admire, and slowly change their positions to match over time. They convince themselves that they've chosen rationally, but really they're just conforming to their new social atmosphere. It can be distasteful but it's by far the most common way change happens.
get these nets
Veteran
In a sad coincidence, the topic of the panel mentioned above ,White Supremacist Terrorism, played out today in Buffalo, NY.
We will mourn the dead, and reflect on yet another targeted attack against Black people by open terrorists, and try to come terms with where we are going as a country.
And likely before the deceased are buried, this low life slimeball Candace will crawl out of her rat hole and repeat the same callous dismissive comments and tone about this incident that she did on the panel. Not because she believes a single word of it, but because that is what her designated role is.
