politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
To the surprise of no one.
I don't know about that. He has been heavily funded by right-wing sources in the hopes of spoiling for Biden.
He's being funded but he's not fooling anyone I know. Maybe it's my bubble but up here in the North East no one even talks about him.
Funding doesn't mean shit, you still have to actually convince people. Literally all he has to offer that democrats might view as a "positive" is that he's a Kennedy. That's it. He's solely banking on the hope that dems will be too stupid to consider anything about him other than his fucking last name. Problem with that is, that level of unquestionable devotion to a political entity is solidly a republican trait nowadays.
The yoga antivax crowd is a pretty confusing one. They're as anti science as Trump, but consider themselves to belong on the political left. So it's not as obvious as one might immediately think.
I highly doubt the lefty anti-vax community have any numbers that peak above statistical anomaly. Bernie had way more support than the Paltrow freaks and we all still got railroaded.
Bernie was actually trying to win though. RFK is just trying to be a spoiler.
I tend to agree, but then again I would have said the same thing about the Tea Party some years ago. And in presidential elections it could very much be decided on the margins, which is why people are concerned. At Jr. events there tend to be a solid number of people who consider themselves Obama era democrats.
I figure the people that were/are constantly talking up someone like DeSadist as some kind of white knight for the New Donnie-Free Republican Party are either deeply deluded about his chances, or are keeping him groomed in case the nepo baby suddenly dies or is incapacitated due to his age and deeply unhealthy lifestyle.
I think you might need to breathe with your stomach.
Poor people who have barely learned to read, let alone critically, are great stooges. And Obama was economically right.
I think there's also a great element of mental illness involved. RFK Jr. was neither illiterate or stupid, he just went over the edge at some point. I suspect the same is true for many of his (potential) voters.
Right. Complex trauma is evident, in politicians and their voters. Fwiw, I was referencing the voters. Most politicians had a decent education.
I am always a bit offended by the inclusion of yoga here. I do yoga as a way to stay in shape, and flexible, but I am in no way antivax. In my social bubble there are many like me. Is this stereotype really still warranted?
I see the frustration - I have nothing against yoga at all! I just think there are two very different types of vaccine sceptics, and that they can effectively be sorted by their attitudes to yoga. I don't think there's any correlation between being pro yoga and being anti vaccine. :)
Socially left, scientifically right?
they're not even socially left anymore considering the brainrot of transphobia
i think it's due to historically coming from the anti gmo earth crunchy group (i say this as someone who is pretty earth crunchy but not anti vaxx or gmo).
I think there's a risk of people discovering actual truths that are not widely promoted that they tend to overdo it a bit and obsess over finding truths everywhere.
RFK's background makes sense in that regard - both as a Kennedy and as a climate lawyer. No wonder he lost trust (and/or his mind).
dunno about that. this says there's more crazies out there than last time around.