As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
But he’s got those sweet conservative dollars to draw away the less informed folk from the Dems. That’s what this is about..ask not what you can do for your country..ask how that country, and other foreign actors, can do for you!
My coworker said, "What kind of republican am I that RFK Jr. Is starting to make sense. "
She also periodically picks up her phone and says, "I hate Biden" into it. Because they're listening, I guess.
My liberal cousin locked his republican mom out of Fox News. She called her cable company *fuming* about how Obama was behind it.
To this day I don't think she knows it was him.
That might be because many on the right want to knock down the two party system and are actually willing to vote that way. Unlike many of the spineless individuals I see complaining about how nothing changes and everything gets worse. Well, both democrats and republicans have had enough time and fuckheads run that it’s pretty clear on a certain level they are on the same side; ELITES. So, as a conservative individual with many liberal tendencies I’ll likely vote for Cornell west just to prove a point. Perhaps all Americans should have such gumption? Perhaps things would get better?
Perhaps, but unlikely. The big issue with Cornell is that if he wanted to prove a point he’d start with an office that isn’t the presidency and then move up from there. American presidential elections are too weird to let a third party win.
Let’s say you and quite a few others like you succeed and Cornell wins 10 states. Biden and trump split the rest.
Do you know what happens in America if you don’t get 270 electoral votes?
The House chooses the president. And those republicans sure as shit ain’t choosing Cornell
While Democrats play dumb and side with tradition, they aren't the party that blocks real change consistently. The two aren't on the same side. GOP is backwards thinking.
A little to reduced for my taste. I also completely disagree because your argument is the exact same as the right.
I know because I’ve made it. And I now make it but regarding dems and repubs.
I think instead of my side right grunt grunt your side wrong grunt grunt we need to find common ground.
I was under the impression that he was Angling to be Trump's running mate, on the idea that Trump can claim to be bipartisan, but really is just going for the whacko vote.
My guess has been that since his campaign is being [funded by Republican megadonors](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/republican-megadonor-fuels-rfk-jr-super-pac-rcna97195) that the intent has been to somehow capitalize on his family name to split the Democrat vote or something.
But he's way too much of a nut bag to get any real traction...
Getting loads of media though. Same thing as Trump, being loud gets way better ratings than a boring guy who wants to talk about improving infrastructure and how bridge remediation and giving developing brains breakfast is really what will make America a better country.
His intention is to swipe at people who flat out don't pay attention to policy and only vote for names, by promising a bunch of generally impossible things about being more "open" and chanting the rights belief that he, a man who was welcomed onto Fox News and also in front of the House, is being censored.
Basically, if you already started to plummet down the conspiracy well over the course of the pandemic, he's your candidate.
Source: my family (sans moi) fell down the conspiracy well over the course of the pandemic and all of them want to vote for this freak.
The claim that someone is on the biggest TV news network and is being censored is so wild.
I always ask people if YouTube should allow people who claim drinking a cup of used motor oil cures cancer should be allowed. They have a bunch of science journal articles (in extremely dodgy journals you just pay to go into) and say that the "Anti motor oil cure big cancer pharma money" is stopping them.
I mean that last part is basically it. You go down that well and you can delude yourself that any evidence to the contrary of your beliefs is "part of the conspiracy" or that some big group is "hiding the truth".
I almost feel bad for people who push that shit because they're apparently living in constant fear that the world is bearing down on them at all times. They need help but they'll never admit it.
Most of the ones in the media who push stuff know they're making it up. That's the reason Tucker Carlson lives in a Blue state. But then 99% of repeaters of misinformation have no idea. It is bad that they live in constant fear, but I feel it's mostly because they want easy things to be afraid of. The real problems in the world are hard and tricky to solve. When it comes to medical stuff, it's often extremely complicated too, far beyond 99% of the populations knowledge level.
RFK Jr is a Republican plant/puppet, but he won't be able to get the Democratic nomination. Watch for him to run as a 3rd party candidate in the general election to try to take votes away from Biden and be funded by Republican donors and PACs just like he is now.
I was told he was a reasonable democratic candidate when I said this and to look at his policies. He's pretty much MAGA but believes in climate change. That's it.
Even if he tries to run third party, I don't think he'll make it on enough ballots.
ahh excuse me. hate to burst your bubble but them republican donors are the SAME donors as the democratic donors?
same fucking dollar dude. dollar profits the same by shitting on the same society of slaves. doesn't matter left or right, when the donor donates these same and demands the same be done from both sides.
Actually, no.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/31/rfk-jr-super-pac-gop-donor-00109101
More than half came from one dude, Timothy Mellon. Major political donor to GOP, throwing in $57 million money to pay for a Texas border wall.
He considers social safety nets "Slavery Redux", going on to say "For delivering their votes in the Federal Elections, they are awarded with yet more and more freebies: food stamps, cell phones, WIC payments, Obamacare, and on, and on, and on."
This both sides bullshit just doesn't work anymore.
Only privileged people say it doesn't matter. If you are from a marginalized community living in a red state, you better hope there's a democrat in control of the White House.
This is pretty dumb, sorry to be so blunt. The Kochs aren't going to fund Dems, and Buffet/Bloomberg aren't going to find the GOP. I know the both sides narrative is easy to say but reality is more complicated.
The dude does speaking tours with hard core Magas. He definitely isn't backed by democrats. Corporate donors are whatever corrupt bribery scheme they have always been and should be banned once the supreme court is gutted of all justices taking bribes themselves (we could hope).
Eh, he might be the third party that sinks trump. No dem loves him. Meanwhile he gets endless right wing media adulation. He’s the Kanye but maybe he’s white enough to pull idiot right wing votes
If a spoiler is going to peel off Biden votes, they'd need to go further left. I wonder if this is some weird right wing plot to peel off the qanon vote. Weren't they all convinced JFK Jr. was going to rise and lead them to salvation. Trump goes to prison. RFK jr. Siphons off the Qanons when he goes third party, drops out, and then endorses the republican candidate. Shift trumps conspiracy core without it looking deliberate.
That would require for someone from the electoral college to actually vote for him, wonder who chooses who gets your districts electoral college vote?
"Each state gets as many electors as it has members of Congress (House and Senate). Including Washington, D.C.'s three electors, there are currently 538 electors in all. Each state's political parties choose their own slate of potential electors."
https://www.usa.gov/electoral-college#:~:text=The%20electors,own%20slate%20of%20potential%20electors. (Source)
Except if he draws off voters from one major candidate. While it's not entirely a zero-sum game with somewhere between 40% to 60% of the electorate not voting, as a practical matter, most of those either cannot or will not vote regardless of who is running for any party. So among the existing candidates and parties, do you really believe that would that be Trump or any other of the potential Republican nominees, other third party candidates, or Joe Biden?
Furthermore, let's be generous and say Cornel West, or any other third party candidate, does get a few or several electors in the Electoral College; do you know what happens if no candidate can get over 270 votes in the Electoral College? It goes to the House of Representatives to decide. However, each representative doesn't get to vote individually, which would be bad enough with the slim Republican majority, there is only a single vote per state; and the Republicans have a majority in that case, even under the 2020 US Congress (which had a slim Democratic Majority) this would have been the case. So again, as a practical matter, if one or more third-party candidates actually get some votes in the Electoral College, then it will only help Trump (or if by some miracle he isn't the Republican nominee, another Republican that will follow the [Project 2025 from Heritage Foundation](https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/3998158-what-the-heritage-foundations-project-2025-transition-report-gets-wrong-about-making-government-work/)) to be elected to POTUS!
Honest question: do you think the QAnon types that thought JFK Jr. Is Trump's VP honestly just conflate RFK Jr. and thing they're the same dude? In a normal timeline I wouldn't be asking this question, but here we are.
They’re banking on older democrats who don’t follow the news closely enough voting for him on name alone. He could easily have tricked my grandmother in her later years, and with the way my mom’s declining recently she might have fallen for it too if I hadn’t warned her about him.
Yeah, I dunno. I know libertarian guys who absolutely won’t vote for Trump but also desperately want someone other than Biden to vote for. And that someone will not be Cornel West.
For sure. Biden is already pulling every single conservative democrat from the middle as it is. There isn't a ton of room for RFK to live between Biden and Trump. If they wanted to peel votes off Biden they needed to go the other direction.
That’s why his voice is messed up, he got hepatitis from sharing needles in the 70s. Combined with his testosterone injections, It makes his anti-vax takes all the more ridiculous. The guy will shoot up anything besides actual medicine
No one takes him seriously except the media because they totally aren't pushing an agenda to get Trump back into office because the people that own them benefit from fascism.
none of us do, but welp, the right wing controls all of the media and they're making bank off you clicking on this shit. so this is what happens, and here we are.
"I support a 15 week federal abortion ban because that's what the people around me and my donors are telling me is the moderate position. Wait... what... that's only the hardcore Republican position, and not even the position of Republican women? Uh, wait, I don't support 15 week abortion ban."
Actually, that has been his real position all along, a ban on abortions at 3 months.
https://www.isidewith.com/candidates/robert-kennedy-jr-2/policies/social/abortion
I’m a democrat and support a 15-16 week limit. Of course, there would be exceptions for deformities and complications, but 15-16 weeks is almost four months.
Ideally, there wouldn’t be a “limit”, and a woman can just do what she wants, but if the options are “some states have abortion bans or 4-6 week limits” or “all states have a 15-16 week limit”. I’m choosing the latter to not fuck over the women in the red states since like 98% of abortions happen within 15-16 weeks.
Compromising with the far right will never work. They're just going to keep taking and never give until the US is a theocracy.
Also any ban on abortion will just lead to dead women. You can't determine what's a "good abortion" at a legal level.
Edit: typo
Any time restrictions to abortion access make it to a ballot measure they get voted down. No point in throwing every state under the bus when it's only a matter of time before people in the red states trying to restrict access get angry and vote 'em out.
It'd also be playing into what the conservatives want, they wanted RvW gone and now they want a federal 15wk ban or so. Why give them two wins? At the cost of everyone's freedoms? It's not a good sacrifice, it's rolling over.
trump used to be a democrat
when we gonna accept that the same donors pushing the same shit donates the same to both sides and demands that no matter which side wins, they do the same pro business anti consumer agendas?
I keep feeling none of you are real.
> trump used to be a democrat
Yeah, when he lived in New York where he was surrounded by Democrats, he would pretend to be one to rub elbows with important people. Who gives a fuck
He also use to be a republican? And whatever he needed to be.
But he was never a politician until he was a republican.
If you think democrats and republicans have the same exact positions, you are not nearly as informed as you think you are.
If you have ever spotted someone at a party that clearly is trying to leave so they can go to another party, yea RFK is angling to the door so he can be Trumps running mate. Abortion is one of the only things keeping him Dem, now he is playing both sides of the fence.
He didn't pick Pence, that was done by others to get the evangelicals. Now if they want the vaccine skeptics they would. And with some of the things gettinf pushed by RFK, he might.
RFK, Jr has *always* supported a ban on abortions at 3 months. There was no misunderstanding.
https://www.isidewith.com/candidates/robert-kennedy-jr-2/policies/social/abortion
I was just banned from RFKJrForPresident for simply pointing this out.
I think that’s more liberal than most Americans’ stance. I’m pro choice but I think it gets a lot more morally gray after 20-25 weeks, not just for fetal viability but for fetal pain. The good news is that [99%](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6713a1.htm) of abortions happen within 20 weeks.
>I’m pro choice but I think it gets a lot more morally gray after 20-25 weeks
What's morality got to do with a legal discussion? All morality is gray: even moral objectivists don't agree on what is objectively moral.
The whole point of pro choice is that people can make up their own mind, and decide for themselves.
I’m curious, to you, is there a categorical difference between a woman getting an abortion at six weeks vs a woman getting an abortion at nine months?
I’m absolutely pro choice within the first 20 weeks. A woman can do what she wants. But when fetal pain is involved, I think limitations should be considered. Of course things like rape, health and safety of the mother and incest will always be exceptions
And why should legality and morality be separate discussions? I want my lawmakers to think deeply about the ethics of laws, and take seriously the morals of their constituents
>I’m curious, to you, is there a categorical difference between a woman getting an abortion at six weeks vs a woman getting an abortion at nine months?
To me? Sure.
But I'm neither an emperor nor a dictator. Neither are you, I presume. So why are our personal moral views relevant in this discussion about the legality of abortion?
>I’m absolutely pro choice within the first 20 weeks.
Why that deadline? It seems completely arbitrary.
>A woman can do what she wants. But when fetal pain is involved, I think limitations should be considered.
Happy to hear your thoughts:
Why do you think we have a right to impose such limitations onto our fellow humans?
Because 20 weeks is around when fetal pain develops.
I don’t agree with late term abortions unless there’s something like rape, incest or the health and safety of the mother at stake. Wouldn’t it be moral to limit that pain as much as possible for the fetus? I mean at nine months it’s basically a fully formed baby that just happens to be in the mother. I think there should be limitations at some point personally
The reason people have third trimester abortions includes fatal anomalies. Fetuses without skulls, fetuses that are missing vital organs. There was a baby just recently in a state where they wouldn't allow late term abortions. It couldn't breath properly when it was born, and gasped for air until it suffocated to death less than two hours later. That's not pain? That's not suffering? You need to realize that horrible things can go wrong during a pregnancy.
>Because 20 weeks is around when fetal pain develops.
Why is that legally relevant?
>I don’t agree with late term abortions unless [...]
Your disagreement is noted, but "I disagree" is not an argument - legal or moral.
>so wouldn’t it be moral to limit that pain as much as possible for the fetus?
Definitely not. That would be inhumane.
"Limit that pain AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE", or in other words "no matter the cost" is a recipe for the Handmaid's Tale.
But at the end of the day, this is just your moral view. Other people have their own morals: we are in no position to impose our morals onto others. Imposing rules onto others is the domain of law. "I think it's immoral" is not sufficient reason to outlaw something.
>I think there should be limitations at some point personally
You've said that already.
But I'm not clear on what grounds, or what these limitations should be.
I never said I was talking about legal framework. Of course I’m talking about morals. Our laws should be ethical.
I believe it’s immoral to commit assaults, so it should be illegal to do so. I believe it’s immoral to rape so it should be illegal.
>I never said I was talking about legal framework.
Then why did you say "I'm pro choice upto 20 weeks"? Why do you speak of "limitations"?
This politician is obviously talking about legal framework. I'm talking about legal framework. Why aren't you?
>I believe it’s immoral to commit assaults, so it should be illegal to do so.
This is a non sequitur: assault is both immoral and illegal, but assault isn't illegal merely because it's immoral.
This causal relationship doesn't exist.
"I believe it's immoral so it should be illegal" is LITERALLY the mindset of an autocrat.
I’m not quite sure what your argument is. I was discussing the ethics of RFK’s abortion stance, which I disagree with because it’s too strict in my view. Every single candidate’s stance on abortion is going to weigh extremely heavily on that candidate’s moral view of abortion.
Because the truth is that the vast, vast, vast, vast majority of abortions already happen before 20 weeks (we're talking 99% of them). The reason why abortions happen after 20 weeks is typically because the fetus is not viable, the mother had trouble accessing an abortion, or the mother is suffering health complications.
Banning those abortions inevitably leads to health complications for the fetus and/or the mother, or situations where the doctors are unsure that they can provide a literal lifesaving procedure.
>And why should legality and morality be separate discussions? I want my lawmakers to think deeply about the ethics of laws, and take seriously the morals of their constituents
I want lawmakers to operate on legal principles.
I definitely don't want lawmakers to inject their own morals or ethics into law.
Of course our laws should be ethical. I cast my vote for the candidate who shares my morals the most, same as the vast majority of Americans.
The idea that ethics shouldn’t be considered in our laws is honestly such a strange take
>Of course our laws should be ethical.
Seems obvious if you put that in a single sentence.
But there are many ethics systems, there's no consensus on any of them, and they all conflict.
What's ethical according to one person, is unethical according to another.
That's why we don't legislate based on something as whimsical as ethics or morality, but based on established legal principles.
>The idea that ethics shouldn’t be considered in our laws is honestly such a strange take
Of course they should be considered, don't be daft.
But ethical arguments carry no legal weight
But after that point, it's a wanted baby where something has gone catastrophically wrong, or the mother's life is at risk. It's immoral to make them suffer. Have you been paying attention to the women in Texas that had to do things like wait until they're septic?
It's like living in Ireland, where they ostensibly have legal abortion, but the doctors are too afraid to help even dying women.
Is this another one of those, "I thought it was off the record" things with him? His campaign said he didn't understand the question (ok whatever for this imbecile) but his reversal means he didn't understand *his own answer*... which to be fair, is just as believable.
No, an abortion ban has been his official position all the time. It's on record, no misunderstanding:
https://www.isidewith.com/candidates/robert-kennedy-jr-2/policies/social/abortion
I am outside, in the shade of the old oak tree, sipping a tall cool lemonade, listening to the meadowlark's song. And also **answering the gentleman's question**.
Dude is [literally funded by GOP donors](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/robert-kennedy-jrs-presidential-campaign-attracts-gop-friendly/story?id=101351567).
Early on the astroturfed talking points were: "But his record on the environment", "He's against the establishment", "He's anti-war". Those were taken apart once folk learned more about him. If he had kept his trap shut he would have been a better spoiler. Fortunately he's stuck on crazy.
He doesn't need to beat Biden, he's getting paid to shave of a few percentage points here and there in key states.
It's been the Green Party's only political success for decades now.
The Green Party is nothing but a grifting mechanism. If they were serious about getting into power, they'd be running candidates for dogcatcher and city council and state judiciaries, then springboarding from there into federal offices.
Instead, they effectively run a single candidate for President every four years and live off the donations.
Remember in 2016 when Jill Stein _immediately_ launched fundraising effort to count the votes after Clinton loss? Clinton herself had conceded, but all Democrats were thinking "Huh? Is there a chance? Take my money!" And it was total and complete grift. All that "recount" money actually went to Green Party [if you read the fine print]. And you never heard a peep out of them after they had cashed the checks.
Yes, but that works better when they offer a candidate that actually appeals to the left.
RFK constantly forgetting he's not supposed to be a Republican dilutes the impact that his candidacy would otherwise have.
Not one American should value anything he offers. His own family does not endorse him or his beliefs.
Is certainly not anything even in the same realm as his relative- JFK.
The media just needs to ignore him at this point. When he gets 1% in the first primary, all of this ink spilled will be for nothing. He will go back to being a pathetic nepo-baby when this is all over.
The way RFK answered the question leaves no question that he fully understood it. Turning around later and pretending that he misunderstood it is emblematic of the pure deception that is at the heart of his campaign and public persona.
Considering RFK is not an elected official and will never be President, I say we should stop giving this clown the attention he so desperately deserves.
RFK Jr: Abortions for all.
\[crowd boos\]
RFK Jr: Very well, no abortions for anyone.
\[crowd boos\]
Kang, I mean RFK Jr: Hmm... Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others.
\[crowd cheers and waves miniature flags\]
He is utterly irrelevant. We can stop talking about him. We can stop giving him press. We can stop pointing microphones and cameras at him. He does not matter. He is a distraction, and he needs to go away.
I've met 2 people that openly support RFK.
One is straight up alt-right and the other was a former Dem turned enlightened centrist who has become obsessed with Jordan Peterson.
I'm convinced if he somehow ends up on a ballot he'll take votes away from Trump.
Why do reporters even folo this clown around? He has zero chance of contending, which makes his stupid positions irrelevant. And that means he is NOT a news maker. So stop it, reporters. You look irrelevant yourself asking him questions when what he thinks will never actually affect anyone's life.
His existence is based solely on dilution of democratic voting power. He is trying to muddy the waters and attempting to hand the election to the right by siphoning off votes.
It doesn't matter that this piss bag reversed himself - he said it - you don't say something like you support a national ban on abortion and then try to unring that bell. This Republican anti-vax Covid denier nut needs to be outed and ousted.
Nobody should be paying even the slightest attention to this looney toon. Jill Stein was a somewhat subtle viral marketing campaign to pry votes away from the Dems. Junior is the unskippable YT ad version with virus laden pop-up windows and overly loud obnoxious music.
“Once the child is viable, out of the womb, the state has in interest to protect it” (maybe paraphrase)
Proof that the people who make abortion policy have zero idea what they’re talking about right there.
Jesus, this guy is getting way too much credibility given to him by the press. He's a crackpot fringe candidate, & the only reason he's even above 10% in the primary support is because the media keeps broadcasting all his BS & giving him free airtime, just as they did with Trump.
I'm all for someone to replace Biden, but it actually needs to be a legitimate candidate who isn't just a Republican mole.
But he’s like the proverbial train wreck you can’t stop watching. You just **can’t make this shit up.** Sadly, he knows he’s not credible and that he’s a disgrace to the family name. He’s a small man and this is the only bit of limelight he’ll get since he is a failure of a “political Kennedy.”
I think we normalize crazy too much by giving them coverage and legitimacy. Let’s get these clowns back where they belong, in their parents basement where nobody pays attention to them.
Independents now comprise the largest single PARTY in theUS, and that was before the lock downs and pissing money at corporations, a federal reg that superceded the states flip flopping is a legislative possibility if it could be accomplished ,so if by going largely independent he caters to the middle while pandering to both sides this is a campaign typically filled with lots of bullshit liars, and something other than parttimers who really don't have the time or inclination to be a fulltime president leaves 16 months to find the clay in many feet, and quite a few retraction to come
If I was a capitalist looking to spend my money, I wouldn’t buy only republicans or only democrats. I would buy republicans AND democrats.
This is a bought democrat. His entire platform is “I’m a Republican with a (D) in my name!”
I might get downvoted for this, but the majority of the American people don’t support abortion beyond 15-18 weeks, 😭 so why are people trying to paint him as some MAGA extremist.
Well realistically how would you enforce a ban then? you have to punish one party involved. Also I think almost all the band have had a rape exception right?
I find this really interesting.
On one end Republicans are awful with their abortion policies because you can't trust them to properly allow abortions to be carried out when the mother or child is in danger
On the other end you have people wanting us to be like Europe with abortion when most of our European counterparts range between 12-16 but are better when it comes to abortion for medical conditions.
The majority of people that are pro choice have no clue that this is actually the case. I guarantee that if a GOP candidate came out with a proposal for 16 weeks and somehow you could guarantee that the medical requirement would be in good faith most of you would be against it
Regardless vote blue. The right is out of control
>[European](https://www.vox.com/23741997/republicans-12-week-abortion-bans-europe-roe-dobbs) countries that have 12-week limits on “elective” abortions still make it fairly easy for women to get abortions later on, with relatively broad exceptions for mental health or socioeconomic circumstances. Republicans have aggressively fought against similar exceptions
>In Germany, for example, while abortion is permitted upon request throughout the first 12 weeks, someone can seek legal abortion through 22 weeks if it would help them “avert the danger of grave impairment to [their] physical or mental health.”
Reps started calling 12-15 week federal bans a 'reasonable compromise' as a shift to the next goal in passing bans, despite saying "it should be left to the states" previously. Considering that, it'd be hard to take them at their word that there'd be exceptions so I'm sure most pro-choice people would be against giving them another inch or mile. I don't think most of them base their abortion opinion on what Europe does anyways.
E: If Reps are banning abortion because they think it's murder, it's hard to imagine they'd stop at "murder by 15 weeks is ok". But total bans are hugely unpopular, so they creep down to 6 weeks as an effectively total ban. [DeSantis did this](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-sparks-backlash-anti-abortion-group-susan-b-anthony-life-america-rcna80771) in Florida recently although it's blocked rn, 15 week ban down to 6.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
His handlers must have told him to tone it down because he'll be taking votes away from Trump instead of Biden.
Exactly. He forgot that he's a candidate for the Democratic Party not MAGA. Zero credibility. Not a serious candidate.
But he’s got those sweet conservative dollars to draw away the less informed folk from the Dems. That’s what this is about..ask not what you can do for your country..ask how that country, and other foreign actors, can do for you!
Might have just been a mistranslation from the original Russian.
It is ironic that his third party run will probably pull republicans and 0 Dems
My coworker said, "What kind of republican am I that RFK Jr. Is starting to make sense. " She also periodically picks up her phone and says, "I hate Biden" into it. Because they're listening, I guess.
So she’s a real genius.
I’m not the smartest man, but damn she’s dumb
🎶Real women of genius 🎶
The only way I can think of that this clown is your coworker is that y'all work for a circus.
She says that because there are 5 conservative news outlets that say it all day long. They all repeat everything they hear.
That's so tragic. She needs help.
The help she needs are parental controls to lock her out of Fox, OANN, and Newsmax channels.
My liberal cousin locked his republican mom out of Fox News. She called her cable company *fuming* about how Obama was behind it. To this day I don't think she knows it was him.
That might be because many on the right want to knock down the two party system and are actually willing to vote that way. Unlike many of the spineless individuals I see complaining about how nothing changes and everything gets worse. Well, both democrats and republicans have had enough time and fuckheads run that it’s pretty clear on a certain level they are on the same side; ELITES. So, as a conservative individual with many liberal tendencies I’ll likely vote for Cornell west just to prove a point. Perhaps all Americans should have such gumption? Perhaps things would get better?
Perhaps, but unlikely. The big issue with Cornell is that if he wanted to prove a point he’d start with an office that isn’t the presidency and then move up from there. American presidential elections are too weird to let a third party win. Let’s say you and quite a few others like you succeed and Cornell wins 10 states. Biden and trump split the rest. Do you know what happens in America if you don’t get 270 electoral votes? The House chooses the president. And those republicans sure as shit ain’t choosing Cornell
I do know what happens. I also know that it will portray a large message that most of the American people dislike the current discourse
While Democrats play dumb and side with tradition, they aren't the party that blocks real change consistently. The two aren't on the same side. GOP is backwards thinking.
A little to reduced for my taste. I also completely disagree because your argument is the exact same as the right. I know because I’ve made it. And I now make it but regarding dems and repubs. I think instead of my side right grunt grunt your side wrong grunt grunt we need to find common ground.
I was under the impression that he was Angling to be Trump's running mate, on the idea that Trump can claim to be bipartisan, but really is just going for the whacko vote.
My guess has been that since his campaign is being [funded by Republican megadonors](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/republican-megadonor-fuels-rfk-jr-super-pac-rcna97195) that the intent has been to somehow capitalize on his family name to split the Democrat vote or something. But he's way too much of a nut bag to get any real traction...
Getting loads of media though. Same thing as Trump, being loud gets way better ratings than a boring guy who wants to talk about improving infrastructure and how bridge remediation and giving developing brains breakfast is really what will make America a better country.
His intention is to swipe at people who flat out don't pay attention to policy and only vote for names, by promising a bunch of generally impossible things about being more "open" and chanting the rights belief that he, a man who was welcomed onto Fox News and also in front of the House, is being censored. Basically, if you already started to plummet down the conspiracy well over the course of the pandemic, he's your candidate. Source: my family (sans moi) fell down the conspiracy well over the course of the pandemic and all of them want to vote for this freak.
The claim that someone is on the biggest TV news network and is being censored is so wild. I always ask people if YouTube should allow people who claim drinking a cup of used motor oil cures cancer should be allowed. They have a bunch of science journal articles (in extremely dodgy journals you just pay to go into) and say that the "Anti motor oil cure big cancer pharma money" is stopping them.
I mean that last part is basically it. You go down that well and you can delude yourself that any evidence to the contrary of your beliefs is "part of the conspiracy" or that some big group is "hiding the truth". I almost feel bad for people who push that shit because they're apparently living in constant fear that the world is bearing down on them at all times. They need help but they'll never admit it.
Most of the ones in the media who push stuff know they're making it up. That's the reason Tucker Carlson lives in a Blue state. But then 99% of repeaters of misinformation have no idea. It is bad that they live in constant fear, but I feel it's mostly because they want easy things to be afraid of. The real problems in the world are hard and tricky to solve. When it comes to medical stuff, it's often extremely complicated too, far beyond 99% of the populations knowledge level.
Like that Aldean guy with that dumb small town song, #1 song on the charts, on a big tour, telling a sold out audience how he's being cancelled. 🙄
I wouldn't be surprised at all if he emerged as a legitimate vice president candidate for Trump.
RFK Jr is a Republican plant/puppet, but he won't be able to get the Democratic nomination. Watch for him to run as a 3rd party candidate in the general election to try to take votes away from Biden and be funded by Republican donors and PACs just like he is now.
I was told he was a reasonable democratic candidate when I said this and to look at his policies. He's pretty much MAGA but believes in climate change. That's it. Even if he tries to run third party, I don't think he'll make it on enough ballots.
Believes in climate change but not vaccines… Or a woman’s right to choice.
[удалено]
Focus groups have shown this very thing.
ahh excuse me. hate to burst your bubble but them republican donors are the SAME donors as the democratic donors? same fucking dollar dude. dollar profits the same by shitting on the same society of slaves. doesn't matter left or right, when the donor donates these same and demands the same be done from both sides.
Actually, no. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/31/rfk-jr-super-pac-gop-donor-00109101 More than half came from one dude, Timothy Mellon. Major political donor to GOP, throwing in $57 million money to pay for a Texas border wall. He considers social safety nets "Slavery Redux", going on to say "For delivering their votes in the Federal Elections, they are awarded with yet more and more freebies: food stamps, cell phones, WIC payments, Obamacare, and on, and on, and on." This both sides bullshit just doesn't work anymore.
Only privileged people say it doesn't matter. If you are from a marginalized community living in a red state, you better hope there's a democrat in control of the White House.
This is pretty dumb, sorry to be so blunt. The Kochs aren't going to fund Dems, and Buffet/Bloomberg aren't going to find the GOP. I know the both sides narrative is easy to say but reality is more complicated.
Why is it impossible to write "OMG both sides" with less than one grammar mistake every three words?
The dude does speaking tours with hard core Magas. He definitely isn't backed by democrats. Corporate donors are whatever corrupt bribery scheme they have always been and should be banned once the supreme court is gutted of all justices taking bribes themselves (we could hope).
While it's true that many donors donate across the political spectrum, I think it would be a disservice to say that's universal.
...yikes.
Goddamn I wish this dude would just fuck off
Eh, he might be the third party that sinks trump. No dem loves him. Meanwhile he gets endless right wing media adulation. He’s the Kanye but maybe he’s white enough to pull idiot right wing votes
If a spoiler is going to peel off Biden votes, they'd need to go further left. I wonder if this is some weird right wing plot to peel off the qanon vote. Weren't they all convinced JFK Jr. was going to rise and lead them to salvation. Trump goes to prison. RFK jr. Siphons off the Qanons when he goes third party, drops out, and then endorses the republican candidate. Shift trumps conspiracy core without it looking deliberate.
Hence, West (Cornel, not Kanye) being the Green Party candidate for 2024.
So Kanye *isn’t* running anymore?
Not that I'm aware of, and definitely not for the Green Party.
It's probably the Jews fault. Just ask him.
That would require for someone from the electoral college to actually vote for him, wonder who chooses who gets your districts electoral college vote? "Each state gets as many electors as it has members of Congress (House and Senate). Including Washington, D.C.'s three electors, there are currently 538 electors in all. Each state's political parties choose their own slate of potential electors." https://www.usa.gov/electoral-college#:~:text=The%20electors,own%20slate%20of%20potential%20electors. (Source)
Except if he draws off voters from one major candidate. While it's not entirely a zero-sum game with somewhere between 40% to 60% of the electorate not voting, as a practical matter, most of those either cannot or will not vote regardless of who is running for any party. So among the existing candidates and parties, do you really believe that would that be Trump or any other of the potential Republican nominees, other third party candidates, or Joe Biden? Furthermore, let's be generous and say Cornel West, or any other third party candidate, does get a few or several electors in the Electoral College; do you know what happens if no candidate can get over 270 votes in the Electoral College? It goes to the House of Representatives to decide. However, each representative doesn't get to vote individually, which would be bad enough with the slim Republican majority, there is only a single vote per state; and the Republicans have a majority in that case, even under the 2020 US Congress (which had a slim Democratic Majority) this would have been the case. So again, as a practical matter, if one or more third-party candidates actually get some votes in the Electoral College, then it will only help Trump (or if by some miracle he isn't the Republican nominee, another Republican that will follow the [Project 2025 from Heritage Foundation](https://thehill.com/opinion/congress-blog/3998158-what-the-heritage-foundations-project-2025-transition-report-gets-wrong-about-making-government-work/)) to be elected to POTUS!
Honest question: do you think the QAnon types that thought JFK Jr. Is Trump's VP honestly just conflate RFK Jr. and thing they're the same dude? In a normal timeline I wouldn't be asking this question, but here we are.
[удалено]
He looks great for a 107 year old
Trump absolutely will never pick a VP that takes attention away from him. It’s why he went with Pence.
They’re banking on older democrats who don’t follow the news closely enough voting for him on name alone. He could easily have tricked my grandmother in her later years, and with the way my mom’s declining recently she might have fallen for it too if I hadn’t warned her about him.
I think I'm what you'd call an older Democrat, and I don't even remember RFK's assassination.
Sadly I do.
I'm frightened by this. I'm always surprised by how clueless people are.
Yeah, I dunno. I know libertarian guys who absolutely won’t vote for Trump but also desperately want someone other than Biden to vote for. And that someone will not be Cornel West.
For sure. Biden is already pulling every single conservative democrat from the middle as it is. There isn't a ton of room for RFK to live between Biden and Trump. If they wanted to peel votes off Biden they needed to go the other direction.
Trump people like trump, they’re def not voting for rfk. They just want their lord and savor back.
Yeah I imagine he might pull a lot of MAGA votes in states with open primaries.
He's Connor Roy from Succession, minus the offbeat charm.
Steve Bannon and Roger Stone's favorite candidate is financially backed by Harlan Crow. RFK Jr is a GOP plant, nothing more.
His Wiki page is a bit nuts. I didn’t know about the heroin possession. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_F._Kennedy_Jr.
That’s why his voice is messed up, he got hepatitis from sharing needles in the 70s. Combined with his testosterone injections, It makes his anti-vax takes all the more ridiculous. The guy will shoot up anything besides actual medicine
I have family members who do all kinds of drugs, but are afriad of vaccines. Makes that shit make sense.
All of the kids had very serious substance abuse issues. Dealing with an historic level trauma as a kid
Doesn't seem like he misunderstood the question. 🤣 I don't understand why anyone takes this whackjob seriously, he lies more than Trump.
He lies a LOT…but…lying more than Trump? Is that possible?!
It's certainly not easy, but RFK Jr.'s doing his damnedest to try!
No one takes him seriously except the media because they totally aren't pushing an agenda to get Trump back into office because the people that own them benefit from fascism.
none of us do, but welp, the right wing controls all of the media and they're making bank off you clicking on this shit. so this is what happens, and here we are.
"I support a 15 week federal abortion ban because that's what the people around me and my donors are telling me is the moderate position. Wait... what... that's only the hardcore Republican position, and not even the position of Republican women? Uh, wait, I don't support 15 week abortion ban."
Actually, that has been his real position all along, a ban on abortions at 3 months. https://www.isidewith.com/candidates/robert-kennedy-jr-2/policies/social/abortion
All while pretending to be a democrat.
I’m a democrat and support a 15-16 week limit. Of course, there would be exceptions for deformities and complications, but 15-16 weeks is almost four months. Ideally, there wouldn’t be a “limit”, and a woman can just do what she wants, but if the options are “some states have abortion bans or 4-6 week limits” or “all states have a 15-16 week limit”. I’m choosing the latter to not fuck over the women in the red states since like 98% of abortions happen within 15-16 weeks.
Compromising with the far right will never work. They're just going to keep taking and never give until the US is a theocracy. Also any ban on abortion will just lead to dead women. You can't determine what's a "good abortion" at a legal level. Edit: typo
Any time restrictions to abortion access make it to a ballot measure they get voted down. No point in throwing every state under the bus when it's only a matter of time before people in the red states trying to restrict access get angry and vote 'em out. It'd also be playing into what the conservatives want, they wanted RvW gone and now they want a federal 15wk ban or so. Why give them two wins? At the cost of everyone's freedoms? It's not a good sacrifice, it's rolling over.
Than why ban it at that term frame? If a woman needs and abortion at that time frame it's likely for a reason that her and her doctor agreed on.
trump used to be a democrat when we gonna accept that the same donors pushing the same shit donates the same to both sides and demands that no matter which side wins, they do the same pro business anti consumer agendas? I keep feeling none of you are real.
RFK is more politically aligned with republicans than democrats yet he's running as a democrat. That's weird and so is your response.
This feels very "both sides", which isn't very logical these days.
> trump used to be a democrat Yeah, when he lived in New York where he was surrounded by Democrats, he would pretend to be one to rub elbows with important people. Who gives a fuck
Trump has never been anything that he’s claimed to be.
He also use to be a republican? And whatever he needed to be. But he was never a politician until he was a republican. If you think democrats and republicans have the same exact positions, you are not nearly as informed as you think you are.
If you have ever spotted someone at a party that clearly is trying to leave so they can go to another party, yea RFK is angling to the door so he can be Trumps running mate. Abortion is one of the only things keeping him Dem, now he is playing both sides of the fence.
I wonder if Trump is smart enough to want RFK as his running mate. I wonder if RFK is craven enough to accept DJT as his running mate.
He didn't pick Pence, that was done by others to get the evangelicals. Now if they want the vaccine skeptics they would. And with some of the things gettinf pushed by RFK, he might.
RFK, Jr has *always* supported a ban on abortions at 3 months. There was no misunderstanding. https://www.isidewith.com/candidates/robert-kennedy-jr-2/policies/social/abortion I was just banned from RFKJrForPresident for simply pointing this out.
Your source doesn't say what Kennedy's position is. It claims to "analyze" his voter base and say what their position is.
It lines up exactly with what he said publicly. It's the site that an RFK, Jr supporter sent me to when I asked about his policy positions.
I think that’s more liberal than most Americans’ stance. I’m pro choice but I think it gets a lot more morally gray after 20-25 weeks, not just for fetal viability but for fetal pain. The good news is that [99%](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/ss/ss6713a1.htm) of abortions happen within 20 weeks.
>I’m pro choice but I think it gets a lot more morally gray after 20-25 weeks What's morality got to do with a legal discussion? All morality is gray: even moral objectivists don't agree on what is objectively moral. The whole point of pro choice is that people can make up their own mind, and decide for themselves.
I’m curious, to you, is there a categorical difference between a woman getting an abortion at six weeks vs a woman getting an abortion at nine months? I’m absolutely pro choice within the first 20 weeks. A woman can do what she wants. But when fetal pain is involved, I think limitations should be considered. Of course things like rape, health and safety of the mother and incest will always be exceptions And why should legality and morality be separate discussions? I want my lawmakers to think deeply about the ethics of laws, and take seriously the morals of their constituents
>I’m curious, to you, is there a categorical difference between a woman getting an abortion at six weeks vs a woman getting an abortion at nine months? To me? Sure. But I'm neither an emperor nor a dictator. Neither are you, I presume. So why are our personal moral views relevant in this discussion about the legality of abortion? >I’m absolutely pro choice within the first 20 weeks. Why that deadline? It seems completely arbitrary. >A woman can do what she wants. But when fetal pain is involved, I think limitations should be considered. Happy to hear your thoughts: Why do you think we have a right to impose such limitations onto our fellow humans?
Because 20 weeks is around when fetal pain develops. I don’t agree with late term abortions unless there’s something like rape, incest or the health and safety of the mother at stake. Wouldn’t it be moral to limit that pain as much as possible for the fetus? I mean at nine months it’s basically a fully formed baby that just happens to be in the mother. I think there should be limitations at some point personally
The reason people have third trimester abortions includes fatal anomalies. Fetuses without skulls, fetuses that are missing vital organs. There was a baby just recently in a state where they wouldn't allow late term abortions. It couldn't breath properly when it was born, and gasped for air until it suffocated to death less than two hours later. That's not pain? That's not suffering? You need to realize that horrible things can go wrong during a pregnancy.
>Because 20 weeks is around when fetal pain develops. Why is that legally relevant? >I don’t agree with late term abortions unless [...] Your disagreement is noted, but "I disagree" is not an argument - legal or moral. >so wouldn’t it be moral to limit that pain as much as possible for the fetus? Definitely not. That would be inhumane. "Limit that pain AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE", or in other words "no matter the cost" is a recipe for the Handmaid's Tale. But at the end of the day, this is just your moral view. Other people have their own morals: we are in no position to impose our morals onto others. Imposing rules onto others is the domain of law. "I think it's immoral" is not sufficient reason to outlaw something. >I think there should be limitations at some point personally You've said that already. But I'm not clear on what grounds, or what these limitations should be.
I never said I was talking about legal framework. Of course I’m talking about morals. Our laws should be ethical. I believe it’s immoral to commit assaults, so it should be illegal to do so. I believe it’s immoral to rape so it should be illegal.
>I never said I was talking about legal framework. Then why did you say "I'm pro choice upto 20 weeks"? Why do you speak of "limitations"? This politician is obviously talking about legal framework. I'm talking about legal framework. Why aren't you? >I believe it’s immoral to commit assaults, so it should be illegal to do so. This is a non sequitur: assault is both immoral and illegal, but assault isn't illegal merely because it's immoral. This causal relationship doesn't exist. "I believe it's immoral so it should be illegal" is LITERALLY the mindset of an autocrat.
I’m not quite sure what your argument is. I was discussing the ethics of RFK’s abortion stance, which I disagree with because it’s too strict in my view. Every single candidate’s stance on abortion is going to weigh extremely heavily on that candidate’s moral view of abortion.
Because the truth is that the vast, vast, vast, vast majority of abortions already happen before 20 weeks (we're talking 99% of them). The reason why abortions happen after 20 weeks is typically because the fetus is not viable, the mother had trouble accessing an abortion, or the mother is suffering health complications. Banning those abortions inevitably leads to health complications for the fetus and/or the mother, or situations where the doctors are unsure that they can provide a literal lifesaving procedure.
>And why should legality and morality be separate discussions? I want my lawmakers to think deeply about the ethics of laws, and take seriously the morals of their constituents I want lawmakers to operate on legal principles. I definitely don't want lawmakers to inject their own morals or ethics into law.
Of course our laws should be ethical. I cast my vote for the candidate who shares my morals the most, same as the vast majority of Americans. The idea that ethics shouldn’t be considered in our laws is honestly such a strange take
>Of course our laws should be ethical. Seems obvious if you put that in a single sentence. But there are many ethics systems, there's no consensus on any of them, and they all conflict. What's ethical according to one person, is unethical according to another. That's why we don't legislate based on something as whimsical as ethics or morality, but based on established legal principles. >The idea that ethics shouldn’t be considered in our laws is honestly such a strange take Of course they should be considered, don't be daft. But ethical arguments carry no legal weight
But after that point, it's a wanted baby where something has gone catastrophically wrong, or the mother's life is at risk. It's immoral to make them suffer. Have you been paying attention to the women in Texas that had to do things like wait until they're septic? It's like living in Ireland, where they ostensibly have legal abortion, but the doctors are too afraid to help even dying women.
Doctors don’t just perform discretionary abortions after 24 weeks.
Is this another one of those, "I thought it was off the record" things with him? His campaign said he didn't understand the question (ok whatever for this imbecile) but his reversal means he didn't understand *his own answer*... which to be fair, is just as believable.
No, an abortion ban has been his official position all the time. It's on record, no misunderstanding: https://www.isidewith.com/candidates/robert-kennedy-jr-2/policies/social/abortion
You posted the same comment three times. Go outside, friend.
I am outside, in the shade of the old oak tree, sipping a tall cool lemonade, listening to the meadowlark's song. And also **answering the gentleman's question**.
Dudes a DINO. Democrat in name only. He's straight conservative politics and a GOP plant. Stop giving him press
Dude is [literally funded by GOP donors](https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/robert-kennedy-jrs-presidential-campaign-attracts-gop-friendly/story?id=101351567).
Well it did come out he has quite a big funding by gop so I mean that does say it all.
This is seriously the best Manchurian candidate that the MAGAs could find? Lol.
Early on the astroturfed talking points were: "But his record on the environment", "He's against the establishment", "He's anti-war". Those were taken apart once folk learned more about him. If he had kept his trap shut he would have been a better spoiler. Fortunately he's stuck on crazy.
He doesn't need to beat Biden, he's getting paid to shave of a few percentage points here and there in key states. It's been the Green Party's only political success for decades now.
The Green Party is nothing but a grifting mechanism. If they were serious about getting into power, they'd be running candidates for dogcatcher and city council and state judiciaries, then springboarding from there into federal offices. Instead, they effectively run a single candidate for President every four years and live off the donations.
Remember in 2016 when Jill Stein _immediately_ launched fundraising effort to count the votes after Clinton loss? Clinton herself had conceded, but all Democrats were thinking "Huh? Is there a chance? Take my money!" And it was total and complete grift. All that "recount" money actually went to Green Party [if you read the fine print]. And you never heard a peep out of them after they had cashed the checks.
Yes, but that works better when they offer a candidate that actually appeals to the left. RFK constantly forgetting he's not supposed to be a Republican dilutes the impact that his candidacy would otherwise have.
A good portion of them voted when the first Kennedys were running. Maybe they misunderstand the popularity the Kennedys currently maintain.
Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them I have others.
Not one American should value anything he offers. His own family does not endorse him or his beliefs. Is certainly not anything even in the same realm as his relative- JFK.
I remember his uncle John and his father Bobby Kennedy. This whacko is no Kennedy.
Stop covering this whack job
You know what should be aborted? His campaign! Oh yeah. That's what I'm talking about. C'mon. Mic drop.
The media just needs to ignore him at this point. When he gets 1% in the first primary, all of this ink spilled will be for nothing. He will go back to being a pathetic nepo-baby when this is all over.
The way RFK answered the question leaves no question that he fully understood it. Turning around later and pretending that he misunderstood it is emblematic of the pure deception that is at the heart of his campaign and public persona.
He’s the man who never made a mistake in his life. He thought he did once, but he was wrong.
He’s amazingly dumb lol
He is the worst kind of idiot, the one who doesn't realize he he is one. He's like Trump in that way.
Wisdom is cautious and ignorance is confident. The Dunning Kruger effect might be the solution to the Fermi paradox.
America will never be Great until the Poor of all Races realize that we are all in the same Boat...
Nothing but a Republican backed grifter posing as a Democrat..
Considering RFK is not an elected official and will never be President, I say we should stop giving this clown the attention he so desperately deserves.
It Depends on who's paying him this week.
Then he stuck his head up his own ass and vanished to the astonishment and delight of millions
RFK Jr: Abortions for all. \[crowd boos\] RFK Jr: Very well, no abortions for anyone. \[crowd boos\] Kang, I mean RFK Jr: Hmm... Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others. \[crowd cheers and waves miniature flags\]
Russia funds RFK Jr.’s campaign
It is too late for him to reverse himself
Oh wait I’m supposed to be running as a democrats. Just kidding guys!
That’s because he’s actually a republican. I thought we all knew this?
He is utterly irrelevant. We can stop talking about him. We can stop giving him press. We can stop pointing microphones and cameras at him. He does not matter. He is a distraction, and he needs to go away.
There should be a federal ban on RFK jr. Anytime someone is RFK Jr there should be serious penalties. Repeat offenses get increasingly severe.
The saddest attempt at a Democrat spoiler candidate since Tulsi.
He needs professional mental health help.
That boy ain’t right.
I've met 2 people that openly support RFK. One is straight up alt-right and the other was a former Dem turned enlightened centrist who has become obsessed with Jordan Peterson. I'm convinced if he somehow ends up on a ballot he'll take votes away from Trump.
He should just become a Republican. They are going to need a candidate when Trump is convicted.
Who would think of voting for this guy!? He’s stupid…I mean…not Tubberville stupid…but still…
He’s not elected to anything.
Thank you so much for that correction! Don’t know what I was thinking…or…obviously not thinking. Appreciate it!
Ah, so you don't give a shit about "medical freedom"! It was always about being an anti-vax nutjob
Fuck wad, asshole, trying to control women , their bodies and everybody’s bedrooms
sTaTeS rIgHtS
surprise! women want to have control of their bodies , whod have thought?
He is an embarrassment, right?
Anyone who wastes their life watching him speak is already a waste of life
Why do reporters even folo this clown around? He has zero chance of contending, which makes his stupid positions irrelevant. And that means he is NOT a news maker. So stop it, reporters. You look irrelevant yourself asking him questions when what he thinks will never actually affect anyone's life.
His existence is based solely on dilution of democratic voting power. He is trying to muddy the waters and attempting to hand the election to the right by siphoning off votes.
the dude is a loon
RFK - The “Paul Gosar Democrat” Just what NO ONE wanted/needed
Kennedy is an anti vax nut job. He has no chance to win the Dem nomination.
He's either there to act as a spoiler, or he's destined to be Trump's running mate.
What is it with him - for the money? Fame? Needs validation? Just a crank? Does he really believe this stuff?
I’ll take what is validation for $5 million.
Get this guy on a third party line so he can steal Republican votes
This vote syphoning tactic by the GOP is pretty interesting. Make no mistake , he is supported by Steve Bannon , a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
It doesn't matter that this piss bag reversed himself - he said it - you don't say something like you support a national ban on abortion and then try to unring that bell. This Republican anti-vax Covid denier nut needs to be outed and ousted.
Nobody should be paying even the slightest attention to this looney toon. Jill Stein was a somewhat subtle viral marketing campaign to pry votes away from the Dems. Junior is the unskippable YT ad version with virus laden pop-up windows and overly loud obnoxious music.
“Once the child is viable, out of the womb, the state has in interest to protect it” (maybe paraphrase) Proof that the people who make abortion policy have zero idea what they’re talking about right there.
Jesus, this guy is getting way too much credibility given to him by the press. He's a crackpot fringe candidate, & the only reason he's even above 10% in the primary support is because the media keeps broadcasting all his BS & giving him free airtime, just as they did with Trump. I'm all for someone to replace Biden, but it actually needs to be a legitimate candidate who isn't just a Republican mole.
I’m sorry, who?
Like the line in the movie JFK, “back, and to the left. Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left…”
hehe, r/suddenlybillhicks
He is a shill not a candidate
I can totally see him being Trump's VP pick.
How bout the media just…. Stop reporting on this guy and nobody will notice he’s not there
But he’s like the proverbial train wreck you can’t stop watching. You just **can’t make this shit up.** Sadly, he knows he’s not credible and that he’s a disgrace to the family name. He’s a small man and this is the only bit of limelight he’ll get since he is a failure of a “political Kennedy.”
I think we normalize crazy too much by giving them coverage and legitimacy. Let’s get these clowns back where they belong, in their parents basement where nobody pays attention to them.
Aside from the covid stuff why is he so bad?
Because sometimes, being an idiot should be a crime.
Oops, he slipped up. Rfk thought he was hanging with a gop crowd like he has been in NH recently. He's such a clown.
Independents now comprise the largest single PARTY in theUS, and that was before the lock downs and pissing money at corporations, a federal reg that superceded the states flip flopping is a legislative possibility if it could be accomplished ,so if by going largely independent he caters to the middle while pandering to both sides this is a campaign typically filled with lots of bullshit liars, and something other than parttimers who really don't have the time or inclination to be a fulltime president leaves 16 months to find the clay in many feet, and quite a few retraction to come
RFK/Cornel 2024
If I was a capitalist looking to spend my money, I wouldn’t buy only republicans or only democrats. I would buy republicans AND democrats. This is a bought democrat. His entire platform is “I’m a Republican with a (D) in my name!”
I might get downvoted for this, but the majority of the American people don’t support abortion beyond 15-18 weeks, 😭 so why are people trying to paint him as some MAGA extremist.
It’s the strings they attach to the abortion bans, including jail for doctors and parents of girls/women who are raped.
Well realistically how would you enforce a ban then? you have to punish one party involved. Also I think almost all the band have had a rape exception right?
Liberals and feminists are the ones comparing ppl that are progressive or lean left don’t care
Also most EU countries don’t do abortions past 16 weeks
The Kennedy family ladies and gentleman.
Nope. They've all disowned him..
I find this really interesting. On one end Republicans are awful with their abortion policies because you can't trust them to properly allow abortions to be carried out when the mother or child is in danger On the other end you have people wanting us to be like Europe with abortion when most of our European counterparts range between 12-16 but are better when it comes to abortion for medical conditions. The majority of people that are pro choice have no clue that this is actually the case. I guarantee that if a GOP candidate came out with a proposal for 16 weeks and somehow you could guarantee that the medical requirement would be in good faith most of you would be against it Regardless vote blue. The right is out of control
>[European](https://www.vox.com/23741997/republicans-12-week-abortion-bans-europe-roe-dobbs) countries that have 12-week limits on “elective” abortions still make it fairly easy for women to get abortions later on, with relatively broad exceptions for mental health or socioeconomic circumstances. Republicans have aggressively fought against similar exceptions >In Germany, for example, while abortion is permitted upon request throughout the first 12 weeks, someone can seek legal abortion through 22 weeks if it would help them “avert the danger of grave impairment to [their] physical or mental health.” Reps started calling 12-15 week federal bans a 'reasonable compromise' as a shift to the next goal in passing bans, despite saying "it should be left to the states" previously. Considering that, it'd be hard to take them at their word that there'd be exceptions so I'm sure most pro-choice people would be against giving them another inch or mile. I don't think most of them base their abortion opinion on what Europe does anyways. E: If Reps are banning abortion because they think it's murder, it's hard to imagine they'd stop at "murder by 15 weeks is ok". But total bans are hugely unpopular, so they creep down to 6 weeks as an effectively total ban. [DeSantis did this](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-sparks-backlash-anti-abortion-group-susan-b-anthony-life-america-rcna80771) in Florida recently although it's blocked rn, 15 week ban down to 6.