Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Have any of you noticed flocks of Kennedy supporters gathering ballot access signatures over the past couple of weeks in your areas? In my midwestern city, the streets are teeming with them—one every couple of blocks downtown and one darned near every 50 feet in the major parks. It’s an impressive operation, only slightly marred by some similar tactics to those laid out here. Not one, for example, has mentioned Kennedy’s name when asking me to sign. Their approach is always “Will you sign to ensure ballot access for the Independent party this coming November?” You have to actually read the petition to figure out it’s for Kennedy.
Apparently they are running out of money, so I wonder how far he will get since many campaigns traditionally bulk out signature collection with paid canvassers. His website lists over half the states as "in progress" and even a good chunk of the completed ones aren't yet officially approved.
More options
Context Copy link
Besides the obvious that Kennedy is not yet decrepit or senile, and is not Trump, what would cause people to prefer him? I've read at least one damning review of him from a source I've no reason to distrust.
The whole article is a good case study for the 'modus tollens' discussion upthread -- the author seems to hate him for being anti-vax, anti-gmo, anti-pest/herbicide, and the fact that (horrors) "Andrew Huberman, Joe Rogan, Elon Musk, and Aaron Rodgers are all buddies with RFK Jr."
I should think that these views are all popular (and pretty well correlated, to boot) in a proportion of the population roughly equivalent to his polling numbers!
More options
Context Copy link
his main supporter base is "leftist" leaning people who care about the covid hysteria, covid injections, pharma system corruption, medical system corruption, food industrial complex corruption, military industrial complex corruption, and some other anti-establishment positions
originally, a large component of his supporter base were also anti-war but his support for Israeli war on Gazans caused heavy attrition among those people
I recognize that name and she had a horrendous record of being wrong on pretty much every COVID topic and her opinion on giving the covid injection to children and pregnant women should remove her from being taken seriously
for e.g., her apologetics w/re the laughable garbage masquerading as "data analysis" during the covid hysteria
She's an immunologist. You're going to have to go a bit further to convince me that she shouldn't be taken seriously than to say that you remember she was laughable. I realize there is a pretty strong anti-COVID-vaccination crowd here.
an immunologist who got pretty much every topic wrong in the most public test of her field in our lifetimes
I didn't post to convince you to not take her seriously, her record does that for me, but to mention there are reasons to distrust her: she has a record of being wrong about many of the topics she is using to damn RFK
I am not sure which errors you're referring to and it would be helpful if you would point me in the right direction.
I already mentioned an error: she told parents to give their children the covid injection and pregnant mothers to take the covid injection which is simply not defensible. Incompetence is the only excuse then and it's simply not defensible now. Neither groups were ever in danger from COVID and this was a well-known fact supported by reams of data when the covid injection came to the general public let alone to children months later. Any risk in comparison is too much risk in that context even if one was to turn a blind eye towards the curated data being published or the better data being slow-walked by the CDC and pharmaceutical companies which showed the injection was at least as harmful as the most harmful "vaccines" previously pushed on the public.
She pushed masks, any masks, as effective at stopping covid transmission using very bad studies, she moved from that bailey to other masks are effective even if cloth ones aren't that effective, she pushed the droplets theory of transmission even as data showed that was almost certainly not the case, then moved on to maybe double masking or even triple masking is effective, and then on to a mix-and-match approach with multiple different types. She carefully moved along with the CDC motte-and-bailey lies as they manufactured and used garbage "studies" to support those talking points, being careful to never be ahead of any of their retreats to a new motte.
While others were losing jobs, careers, and even licenses being right about covid topics, Andrea Love was pushing CDC talking points to launch a popsci career in media on the back of bullying the people who were right all along.
This sort of person deserves outright disdain and it's shameful she doesn't have to wear a scarlet letter constantly reminding people of what type of person she when it actually mattered.
I didn't follow her or know who she was during any of that period and thus am not familiar with any of the claims you're making. I assume you're content that I'll look all this up, which maybe I'll do later. As I say I am aware there are a lot of zealots regarding the COVID debacle here. Does this mean you dismiss her criticisms of RFK Jr?
why would you ask or expect someone to spend dozens of minutes putting together a cited dossier about some random lady you found on the internet about topics you're only vaguely interested in?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
He’s an anti-establishment but not socially conservative candidate. That leads to lots of his supporters treating him as a black box they can paint their own ideas on.
That's a very apt way of putting into words my own suspicions, but I keep thinking there must be more out there, something I've missed or have misapprehended.
The Kennedy name takes him pretty far among the anti-establishment-but-doesn’t-want-church-types-running-things crowd, as well.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link