Democratic Presidential Candidate Accuses Party Officials of 'Rigging' 2024 for Biden: 'They Don't Even Pretend Anymore'
Maverick Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson on Sunday said the Democratic National Committee is rigging the 2024 primary season to ensure President Joe Biden secures the party’s nomination.
Williamson, an author and self-help guru, entered the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination process in 2019, but her candidacy never connected with voters. She ended her campaign in January 2020.
She formally announced her 2024 candidacy on Saturday. A day later, she appeared on ABC News’ “This Week” and spoke about her commitment to a public debate on the issues.
“This is a democracy,” Williamson said. “This is not about what I think is wrong. Obviously, I believe the American people should be offered an agenda for genuine, fundamental economic reform. And it should be the voters who decide. It should not be the DNC that decides. It should be the voters who decide. That is what a democracy is.”
According to an ABC News transcript of her full comments, she added, “This is not 100 years ago when a bunch of men smoking cigars get to sit around a table and decide the nominee.”
Asked if Biden should debate her, the candidate said, “He certainly should debate me. It’s called democracy. And I’m running as well.”
Williamson lashed out at the Democratic Party for changes it made to the schedule of primaries for 2024 that put South Carolina first, moving ahead of the New Hampshire primary and robbing Iowa of its status as the first Democratic contest.
“This is a democracy. This is the thing. The DNC should not be rigging this system. They don’t even pretend anymore. They’re not even covert about their — their swaying the, the primary season. They’re very overt about it,” she said.
According to the transcript, Williamson said the party ditched New Hampshire for South Carolina because Biden “did very well in South Carolina. They’re not even — you know this, I know this, they know this. And they’re not even pretending otherwise.”
Earlier in the interview, she said people within the system try to portray her as a longshot.
“So the system that is now saying that I’m unserious, I’m not credible, or I’m a long shot is the very system that protects and maintains this idea that only those whose careers have been entrenched within the system that drove us into a ditch should possibly be considered qualified to lead us out of that ditch,” Williamson said.
“My qualification is not that I know how to perpetuate that system. My qualification is that I know how to disrupt it. And that is what we need,” she said.
The 70-year-old guru, who gained fame as a guest on “The Oprah Winfrey Show,” announced her return in an interview with Northwestern University’s Medill on the Hill, saying, “People who run the government are divided into two categories, those who either don’t care to fix it or do not have the spine to fix it. And neither category should be running this country.”
During debates in the summer of 2019, Williamson’s comments drew attention for being off of the beaten path of political phraseology. During a debate in Detroit, she said she was “going to harness love for political purposes,” according to USA Today.
In an October 2019 Op-Ed in The Washington Post, she savaged the Democratic Party.
“Party bosses think they know better, claiming the right through money and establishment power to wage what amounts to an insidious assault on one of the most important aspects of our democratic process: selecting the presidential nominee,” Williamson wrote.
“The old days of political backroom deals, where a few insiders determined who the candidate would be, are back. They didn’t really go away at all; they’re simply repackaged now, standing right in front of us, rebranding themselves as an ‘open process.’ Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you: faux democracy,” she wrote.
She later equated proposals coming from her rivals as “the stale alternative of political leftovers, prepackaged as bromides with all the vitality and richness of spoiled food.”
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.