this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
49 points (93.0% liked)

politics

18852 readers
4205 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Here's the article

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Trump just absolutely champing at the bit trying to get the news cycle back on him and then RFK jr. pops out of a cake screaming, “A DECADE AGO I STAGED THE MURDER OF A BEAR CUB IN CENTRAL PARK!!!”

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Tfw Wormo-Man out-crazies your entirely-reliant-on-shock-value campaign

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

The baby bear pelt circumstance robbed from him years ago?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

To undermine America.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Brainworms is rich people speak for cocaine abuse.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

But in his case it damn well appears to be both, given his long history of drug abuse AND love for eating very questionable meat.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

To normalize his insanity.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 month ago

Whatever the worms tell him

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Without reading the article I'm going to guess rancid meat.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I can't bear to reveal the answer.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

It IS rancid meat, isn't it?

[–] [email protected] 84 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

To split the vote in hopes of helping Trump get into office so he can secure a cushy position with little responsibility and lots of pay.

What else would they talk about on the phone?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago

What else would they talk about on the phone?

Adderall and blow?

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I was a little worried about him taking Biden votes before, but I'm not sure Harris is going to lose any votes to RFK.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't know how recent his numbers were, but John Oliver did his latest show on RFK and the numbers were pretty alarming. Add Jill Stein to the mix too and it's a bit worrisome.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Are we sure he's splitting votes from Harris instead of trump? He seems more appealing to the not completely insane Republicans to me.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I see it more as appealing to independent/undecided voters. Disenfranchised, disillusioned and dissatisfied people who aren't satisfied with the two party system. If you're even considering voting Trump at this stage I don't see much changing your mind. I think a lot of these voters would have either voted Kamala or not voted at all given only 2 candidates, but Stein and RFK are giving them a black hole to toss their vote into instead.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

"Elsewhere, an April CNN poll showed Kennedy with a much higher favorable rating among Trump voters (42% favorable vs. 16% unfavorable) than among Biden voters (19% favorable vs. 53% unfavorable), while a Politico analysis revealed that Kennedy has raised about twice as much money from 2020 Trump donors than from 2020 Biden donors." (source from end of June).

So more Trump voters are looking at and donating to RFK than Biden (at the time) voters. I'd be interested to see new numbers with Harris as the candiate.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 month ago

New Yorker - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for New Yorker:

MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/08/12/robert-f-kennedy-jr-profile-presidential-campaign
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support