Detailed Breakdown:

1. Initial Smear Campaign Against Kamala Harris:
   The speaker recalls how Candace Owens was paid to run a large smear campaign against Kamala Harris, particularly during the 2020 election cycle. Owens made numerous videos criticizing Harris, urging people not to vote for her. The speaker criticizes the strategy, pointing out that Owens’ goal seemed to be to harm Harris’ political image while positioning herself favorably within conservative circles.
2. Backtracking and Shifting Allegiances:
   The speaker points out that Candace Owens has now shifted her stance, partially blaming Christianity for why she no longer supports Donald Trump. The speaker dismisses this reasoning, claiming that it’s not genuinely a religious concern, but rather a financial one. Owens is allegedly upset because she is no longer receiving the financial benefits she once did. The suggestion is that she thought aligning with Trump and attacking Kamala Harris would elevate her career, but she did not get the rewards she expected.
3. The Reality of Proximity to Power for Black Women:
   A significant point made by the speaker is that Owens, despite being a Black woman, believed she would be treated differently within the political elite. The speaker highlights that Black women—especially ones like Owens—are often used as tools in political campaigns but rarely receive the positions or rewards promised to them. Owens, according to the speaker, was not the exception but rather the rule in that regard. The statement suggests that no matter how much proximity Owens gained to whiteness or political power, her race would still ultimately limit the opportunities available to her.
4. The Broken Promises of Trump’s Administration:
   The speaker notes that Trump promised positions to many individuals—Owens included—but ultimately, Owens never received the seat she thought she would be given in Trump’s administration. The speaker emphasizes that no Black person, particularly no Black woman, was ever going to get a meaningful position of power under Trump, and Owens was naïve to believe that she would be an exception to this rule.
5. Revisiting the Past for Financial Gain:
   After being snubbed by the Trump administration, Owens allegedly tried to re-enter the blogging and media world to rekindle the success she had during the election period. The speaker suggests that Owens is now desperate to recapture the money and influence she had, but her time in the political spotlight has passed. This is framed as an attempt to return to the well after having been abandoned by the very forces she once championed.
6. Owens’ Role in the Conservative Movement:
   The speaker suggests that Owens was paid for her role in amplifying the conservative narrative, particularly during the election when she attacked Kamala Harris and other progressive figures. The speaker criticizes this as a transactional role, where Owens did the bidding of conservative media and figures but ultimately failed to gain the political influence she expected.

Deep Analysis:

1. The Smear Campaign and the Role of Candace Owens:
   Owens’ involvement in a smear campaign against Kamala Harris represents a larger strategy often used by conservative figures to discredit political opponents, particularly Black women who rise to prominence in political and social spheres. The targeted attack on Harris—who, as the first female, Black, and South Asian vice president, represents a significant cultural milestone—is a calculated effort to undercut not just her but the values she represents. Owens, as a prominent Black conservative figure, became a vehicle for these attacks, aligning herself with political forces that framed themselves as champions of traditional values. This collaboration is described as a “job” she was paid to do, reducing her to a mere pawn in a political game.
2. The Illusion of Power and Influence for Black Women:
   One of the key insights of this narrative is the illusion of power that Owens may have believed she would gain by supporting Trump and attacking Harris. The speaker makes a crucial point that Black women, despite any efforts to align themselves with whiteness or the dominant political order, will never be given the same rewards or status. This phenomenon is part of a larger pattern where Black women are often used for political purposes but excluded from true positions of power. Owens, with her close ties to conservative figures and media, believed that she could be an exception, but the reality is that her race, no matter how much she aligned with the political elite, meant that systemic exclusion was inevitable.
3. Financial Motivations Over Ideological Shifts:
   The speaker argues that Owens’ ideological shift away from Trump has little to do with genuine Christian values or moral concerns. Rather, it is framed as an economic decision born out of frustration over not being compensated as promised. The speaker’s argument hinges on the idea that Owens is more interested in financial gain than authentic political or moral convictions. This backtracking is seen as opportunistic—Owens is attempting to reclaim the influence and income she lost when Trump did not fulfill his promises to her. In this sense, her shift is viewed not as an ideological awakening but as a reaction to personal failure.
4. The Tragic Disillusionment of Proximity to Power:
   Owens represents the tragic reality for many individuals who believe they can ascend through proximity to power, especially in the political sphere. The speaker portrays Owens as a person who believed she could manipulate her connection to powerful, conservative figures and whiteness to secure a seat at the table—only to be discarded when her usefulness waned. The disillusionment of being denied a place in Trump’s administration illustrates how Black individuals, particularly Black women, are often pushed aside once they have been used to further political agendas. The critique here is that no amount of alignment with powerful forces will change the fundamental racial dynamics that govern such systems.
5. Owens’ Attempt to Rekindle Media Success:
   The speaker suggests that Owens is now trying to go back to her roots in media and blogging, desperate to reignite the financial success she had during the election period. This pursuit is framed as a self-serving attempt to rebuild her career after having been used and discarded by the Trump administration. This is seen as a humbling fall from grace, highlighting the precarious nature of political alignment for figures like Owens, who base their careers on serving political interests that ultimately have little loyalty to them.
6. The Limitations of Conservative Narratives for Black Women:
   Owens’ experience illustrates a larger truth about the relationship between Black women and the conservative movement. While Owens gained prominence through her anti-progressive rhetoric and alignment with conservative ideals, her experience underscores the limitations placed on her as a Black woman within a political movement that often exploits racial divisions without ever fully empowering Black individuals. In many ways, her story mirrors the tokenism faced by Black women who, despite their involvement in conservative politics, remain marginalized and excluded from true positions of power and influence.

Conclusion:

This analysis presents a complex portrait of Candace Owens as both a product of and a player within a conservative political framework that uses and discards individuals, particularly Black women. Owens’ story is a cautionary tale of proximity to power, financial motivations, and racial dynamics that limit the opportunities available to Black women in conservative circles. Ultimately, her disillusionment and attempt to rekindle her media success represent a broader pattern of exploitation within political systems that fail to recognize the true value of Black women’s contributions. This narrative serves as both a critique of Owens’ choices and an exploration of the structural inequalities that persist in American politics.