- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Candace Owens' entire act explained
Posted on 8/15/26 at 4:24 pm
Posted on 8/15/26 at 4:24 pm
Candace Owens' entire act makes a lot more sense once you stop asking whether she's "controlled" or whether every position is some calculated grift.
I don't know what she actually believes privately. I just know the pattern is incredibly consistent.
First she was the **Black female conservative** saying what Black people supposedly weren't allowed to say.
Then she became the **conservative willing to stand up to Israel** and say what establishment conservatives supposedly weren't allowed to say.
Now it's the same formula again:
**Establish an identity ? find the contrarian position inside that identity ? make the "forbidden" claim ? turn the backlash into proof that you're independent ? repeat.**
That's why the Andrew Wilson debate was so revealing.
Andrew opened by basically saying, *If I misrepresent your position, correct me. I don't want to straw-man you.*
That was a gift. Candace was making the affirmative claims. The burden of proof was on **her**, and he was inviting her to define her own position.
Instead, she immediately started arguing that she hadn't really taken those positions.
Then why are we having the debate?
You've spent months making extraordinary claims and insinuations, agreed to a $300,000 debate about them, and when your opponent says, "Fine, you tell me exactly what you believe," suddenly nobody is allowed to pin you down.
To me, she lost right there.
But her audience saw the opposite.
I saw: **She's avoiding the burden of proof.**
They saw: **There she goes again — not letting the establishment frame her!**
And that's the whole business model.
Criticism becomes proof you're over the target.
Questions become attempts to silence you.
An opponent saying "I don't know" becomes evidence you're right.
At that point you're not really debating facts anymore. You're performing rebellion for an audience that has already decided rebellion itself is evidence.
**Candace doesn't have to prove she's right. She just has to make her audience feel like somebody doesn't want her saying it.**
I don't know what she actually believes privately. I just know the pattern is incredibly consistent.
First she was the **Black female conservative** saying what Black people supposedly weren't allowed to say.
Then she became the **conservative willing to stand up to Israel** and say what establishment conservatives supposedly weren't allowed to say.
Now it's the same formula again:
**Establish an identity ? find the contrarian position inside that identity ? make the "forbidden" claim ? turn the backlash into proof that you're independent ? repeat.**
That's why the Andrew Wilson debate was so revealing.
Andrew opened by basically saying, *If I misrepresent your position, correct me. I don't want to straw-man you.*
That was a gift. Candace was making the affirmative claims. The burden of proof was on **her**, and he was inviting her to define her own position.
Instead, she immediately started arguing that she hadn't really taken those positions.
Then why are we having the debate?
You've spent months making extraordinary claims and insinuations, agreed to a $300,000 debate about them, and when your opponent says, "Fine, you tell me exactly what you believe," suddenly nobody is allowed to pin you down.
To me, she lost right there.
But her audience saw the opposite.
I saw: **She's avoiding the burden of proof.**
They saw: **There she goes again — not letting the establishment frame her!**
And that's the whole business model.
Criticism becomes proof you're over the target.
Questions become attempts to silence you.
An opponent saying "I don't know" becomes evidence you're right.
At that point you're not really debating facts anymore. You're performing rebellion for an audience that has already decided rebellion itself is evidence.
**Candace doesn't have to prove she's right. She just has to make her audience feel like somebody doesn't want her saying it.**
Posted on 8/15/26 at 4:29 pm to Ebridg3
Nailed it.
Unfortunately I see a lot of those types of things on the right- the over the target, being silenced, etc..
Almost like she’s supposed to be a caricature so the entirety of the right can be easily dismissed. Not just her either- but this thread is about her.
Which takes me to the start of your post… yes, I think she’s controlled, specifically to make many on the right look crazy.
Unfortunately I see a lot of those types of things on the right- the over the target, being silenced, etc..
Almost like she’s supposed to be a caricature so the entirety of the right can be easily dismissed. Not just her either- but this thread is about her.
Which takes me to the start of your post… yes, I think she’s controlled, specifically to make many on the right look crazy.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 4:29 pm to Ebridg3
She was fired by some Jews and is now being paid by a Canadian Muslim. Thats all there is to it, she’s a whore.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 4:33 pm to Madking
quote:
She was fired by some Jews and is now being paid by a Canadian Muslim.
Yep
Its not hard to find the receipts in the current internet era.
Candace Owens suffering the Nikah process would be internet gold.
This post was edited on 8/15/26 at 4:36 pm
Posted on 8/15/26 at 4:35 pm to Ebridg3
The Waterboy explained to Vicky Valencort this concept about astrologers...exactly what Candace's business model is.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 4:53 pm to Ebridg3
AI? Really? At least make an effort to remove the tell-tale em dashes and double asterisks
This post was edited on 8/15/26 at 4:54 pm
Posted on 8/15/26 at 4:56 pm to Everysingletimeberg9
quote:
This board had a hard on for her not very long ago
Conservatives have a token problem. Women, minority, religious minorities… it’s a documented problem.
Kinda like that Arday dude… so happy to have someone “different” on our side, there’s not a lot of scrutiny.
Candy was a triple pointer- woman, black, pretty.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 5:00 pm to Ebridg3
Blows my mind she thought there was medicine in prescription glasses.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 5:00 pm to Ebridg3
quote:
They saw: **There she goes again — not letting the establishment frame her!**
Not being constrained by pre-established rules or taking accountability for anything.
Seems to be in her wheelhouse. Both as a woman & a professional nagger.
This post was edited on 8/15/26 at 5:02 pm
Posted on 8/15/26 at 5:29 pm to theunknownknight
quote:
AI? Really? At least make an effort to remove the tell-tale em dashes and double asterisks
Why would I not use AI to rewrite my points into a cohesive statement that's easier to understand?
or do you think i said.. "hey ai, write me a post talking smack about candace owens"
and it.. just.. came up with that?
I'm sitting here burning through Fable, Sol 5.6 and Grok 4.6 usage with all 3 clients on my PC... it just seems like a no brainer for me to copy and paste something into AI and say "im posting this into a message board clean it up" and just copy and paste that...
I really don't understand the whole taboo thing about AI. I had someone who just contacted me yesterday because they were put in charge of AI implementation at their company.. and, wanted advice..
needless to say, they wanted to gatekeep it from their employees, etc etc.. but they now understand they need to use it.. I suppose without getting into it.. it just seems very boomer like to have an issue with AI.
I buy it for my kids as well.. there's a difference between telling it to write your paper and having it help explain things to you, having it do research for you, helping you with your outline, and make sure your paper is gramatically correct...
I mean, you can already hit Alt +I on anything you type in windows, and AI will re-write it for you. I just have a better AI than Co-pilot doing mine.
I dunno.. ill probably get down voted into oblivion but it just blows my mind how people look at it.. its like "hey, at least cover up the fact that you used a calculator.. write your work down on paper.. even if you used a calculator..
just makes no sense.. and it looks a lot better than this garbage format that I type <----
This post was edited on 8/15/26 at 5:39 pm
Posted on 8/15/26 at 5:35 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
Conservatives have a token problem. Women, minority, religious minorities
No sir. It a core belief.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 5:42 pm to Everysingletimeberg9
quote:
This board had a hard on for her not very long ago now she's telling the truth like Tucker and it's persona non grata so predictable
They turned the very minute she criticized Trump.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 6:26 pm to SelaTiger
quote:
They turned the very minute she criticized Trump.
Who is "they?"
Posted on 8/15/26 at 6:35 pm to Everysingletimeberg9
quote:
Well it's not hard to criticize him is it? he's a Jew owned conman and 180 degrees the opposite of anything we might have expected he'd possibly do to take this government in a different direction
Hi Bob

This post was edited on 8/15/26 at 6:37 pm
Posted on 8/15/26 at 6:35 pm to SelaTiger
Negatory. I thought she was batshit crazy way back, she was said to be a VP .
She lost favor got fired (I think Charlie Kirk warned off team Trump) Then.... to force a spotlight she hung with Ye. That failed and her Democrat came out again.
She lost favor got fired (I think Charlie Kirk warned off team Trump) Then.... to force a spotlight she hung with Ye. That failed and her Democrat came out again.
This post was edited on 8/15/26 at 6:39 pm
Posted on 8/15/26 at 6:41 pm to theunknownknight
I don't think AI would use asterisks to highlight. It's actually a spot on post no matter who wrote it.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 6:49 pm to SallysHuman
You guys are some strange frickers.
Posted on 8/15/26 at 7:17 pm to cajunangelle
quote:
I don't think AI would use asterisks to highlight. It's actually a spot on post no matter who wrote it.
The double asterisk is how it communicates bold when copied and pasted
Posted on 8/15/26 at 7:29 pm to Ebridg3
You haven’t provided a single argument as to why shes wrong. You simply say shes anti George Floyd, shes anti Israel, and she’s anti fed slop. What is it exactly you’re saying that matters? Why do people on this board get so triggered by anything against what Fox News says is fact? I sure hope some of you can see beyond what you’re told to believe.
Popular
Back to top
9











