Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He is an election denier. Attempting a coup is "questioning election results"?

He clearly wants trump to win and that is his role here. Trump cannot win on his own without a spoiler to try to help him. I can see why rfks family can't stand him.

He's right. As much as Democrats love to scream, "Thread to Democracy!" Joe and his administration are the real threats.

Anonymous wrote:

He is an election denier. Attempting a coup is "questioning election results"?

He clearly wants trump to win and that is his role here. Trump cannot win on his own without a spoiler to try to help him. I can see why rfks family can't stand him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a D and am voting RFK with enthusiasm.

“I’m a moderate dem…”
“I’m an independent…”
“I’m a liberal dem…”

Guess what? I’m a R and am voting Biden with enthusiasm.

I lean R, but can't vote for Trump, so will vote for RFKJr with enthusiasm. My best-case outcome is he wins enough electoral college votes to prevent anyone from getting 270, though I doubt that will happen.

You realize that the outcome of that will be a Trump presidency, right? The House (even if controlled by Dems) would almost certainly vote for Trump.

Yes. Run a better candidate. My vote for Kennedy is not an endorsement of anything he stands for, because I don’t expect him to win, and I don't care if he does or doesn’t. It’s an expression of deep disappointment with both the Ds and Rs for running two tremendously terrible candidates.

“What about me?! I deserve to have everything exactly as I want it! Screw all the people who would be hurt under a GOP regime, screw the end of democracy - I’m disappointed. No, wait - I’m deeply disappointed.”

Am I supposed to vote in my own best interest? Or in the interest of others? I'm confused, because the D posters on here frequently explain that R voters are voting against their interest. Which I took to mean I should vote in my own best interest. My own best interest, right now, is joining with what appears to be approx 10% of the country in voting third party as a "none-of-the-above" style vote.

You summed it up perfectly “Run a better candidate” it’s really that simple. They’re just mad because that’s the solution to their “the sky is falling” problem. Instead, they’ll attack you and those sending a message. You’re the enemy of the day. Do t worry tomorrow it’ll be someone else.

What good do you think the message sent will do other than make you feel like you told ‘em.

If either the D or R party loses and the consensus opinion within that party is because RFKJr was a spoiler candidate, the “good” it would do is have that party find ways to reach those voters.

That is a very flawed analysis. It just teaches the GOP and the Dems to get their big donors to fund and use spoiler candidates to help win elections.

Great. More choices. And when the main parties keep getting burned by this tactic, maybe we eventually get ranked choice voting.

If by choice you mean spoiler that has zero chance to be president and is intended to function as a spoiler to help trump than sure.

RFK Jr. will pull in more registered Republican voters than Dem voters so calling him a spoiler that will help Trump is nonsensical.

This is not what the polling is showing currently.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a D and am voting RFK with enthusiasm.

“I’m a moderate dem…”
“I’m an independent…”
“I’m a liberal dem…”

Guess what? I’m a R and am voting Biden with enthusiasm.

I lean R, but can't vote for Trump, so will vote for RFKJr with enthusiasm. My best-case outcome is he wins enough electoral college votes to prevent anyone from getting 270, though I doubt that will happen.

You realize that the outcome of that will be a Trump presidency, right? The House (even if controlled by Dems) would almost certainly vote for Trump.

Yes. Run a better candidate. My vote for Kennedy is not an endorsement of anything he stands for, because I don’t expect him to win, and I don't care if he does or doesn’t. It’s an expression of deep disappointment with both the Ds and Rs for running two tremendously terrible candidates.

“What about me?! I deserve to have everything exactly as I want it! Screw all the people who would be hurt under a GOP regime, screw the end of democracy - I’m disappointed. No, wait - I’m deeply disappointed.”

Am I supposed to vote in my own best interest? Or in the interest of others? I'm confused, because the D posters on here frequently explain that R voters are voting against their interest. Which I took to mean I should vote in my own best interest. My own best interest, right now, is joining with what appears to be approx 10% of the country in voting third party as a "none-of-the-above" style vote.

You summed it up perfectly “Run a better candidate” it’s really that simple. They’re just mad because that’s the solution to their “the sky is falling” problem. Instead, they’ll attack you and those sending a message. You’re the enemy of the day. Do t worry tomorrow it’ll be someone else.

What good do you think the message sent will do other than make you feel like you told ‘em.

If either the D or R party loses and the consensus opinion within that party is because RFKJr was a spoiler candidate, the “good” it would do is have that party find ways to reach those voters.

Did that work when Nader put Bush into the White House? Did it help our nation ultimately to have GWB in the WH?

I see the conundrum for the Democrats. […]

Enjoy the game. We'll see what happens in November.

The Democrats have the big tent. They truly do try to keep everyone happy. The GOP just kicks out all the “RINOs.”

And it is not a game; this is why the GOP is just flat out evil. Democracy is on the line. Every time a Republican is in office, terrible damage is done to the US.

The Ds did not and have not acted like democracy was on the line. Instead, they spent two years trying to pass the social welfare provisions of the BBBA; if democracy were "on the line," those were critical years to backfill with legislation to protect transitions of power. Instead, the Ds were acting like it was business as usual and it was their time to jam through as much social welfare legislation as they could.

I agree that the Rs have kicked out the RINOs, the types of candidates I might otherwise support. Ergo . . . I have my protest vote.

Are you kidding me? Dems passed the Inflation Reduction Act, Chips and Science Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. Things that America needs because the rest of the world is kicking our butts.

Yeah... because the Green New Deal under different monikers is the *most* important thing to make sure that the rest of the world doesn't kick our butts.

To be fair, under Biden, both our renewable energy portfolio and fossil fuel production are at all time highs. Expanding into more renewables decreases the US dependence on Oil and allows the US to get out from under the thumb of kowtowing to Russian and Saudi demands, all while spurring our economy and creating exportable supplies and knowledge to the rest of the world. So ya, it does help make sure the rest of the world doesn't kick our butts.

Anonymous wrote:RFK Jr: Your family called. They want their name back. You can leave it quietly on the porch. You can still show up at the reunion.

Maybe not this reunion though.

RFK Jr: Your family called. They want their name back. You can leave it quietly on the porch. You can still show up at the reunion.

Anonymous wrote:

And someone with deep pockets is probably paying him to play Nader in 2024.

If he had a computer automated voice, would it help me understand him better ?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a D and am voting RFK with enthusiasm.

“I’m a moderate dem…”
“I’m an independent…”
“I’m a liberal dem…”

Guess what? I’m a R and am voting Biden with enthusiasm.

I lean R, but can't vote for Trump, so will vote for RFKJr with enthusiasm. My best-case outcome is he wins enough electoral college votes to prevent anyone from getting 270, though I doubt that will happen.

You realize that the outcome of that will be a Trump presidency, right? The House (even if controlled by Dems) would almost certainly vote for Trump.

Yes. Run a better candidate. My vote for Kennedy is not an endorsement of anything he stands for, because I don’t expect him to win, and I don't care if he does or doesn’t. It’s an expression of deep disappointment with both the Ds and Rs for running two tremendously terrible candidates.

“What about me?! I deserve to have everything exactly as I want it! Screw all the people who would be hurt under a GOP regime, screw the end of democracy - I’m disappointed. No, wait - I’m deeply disappointed.”

Am I supposed to vote in my own best interest? Or in the interest of others? I'm confused, because the D posters on here frequently explain that R voters are voting against their interest. Which I took to mean I should vote in my own best interest. My own best interest, right now, is joining with what appears to be approx 10% of the country in voting third party as a "none-of-the-above" style vote.

You summed it up perfectly “Run a better candidate” it’s really that simple. They’re just mad because that’s the solution to their “the sky is falling” problem. Instead, they’ll attack you and those sending a message. You’re the enemy of the day. Do t worry tomorrow it’ll be someone else.

What good do you think the message sent will do other than make you feel like you told ‘em.

If either the D or R party loses and the consensus opinion within that party is because RFKJr was a spoiler candidate, the “good” it would do is have that party find ways to reach those voters.

That is a very flawed analysis. It just teaches the GOP and the Dems to get their big donors to fund and use spoiler candidates to help win elections.

Great. More choices. And when the main parties keep getting burned by this tactic, maybe we eventually get ranked choice voting.

If by choice you mean spoiler that has zero chance to be president and is intended to function as a spoiler to help trump than sure.

RFK Jr. will pull in more registered Republican voters than Dem voters so calling him a spoiler that will help Trump is nonsensical.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RFK’s running mate seems like a twice divorced gold digger with a penchant for using money earned from her divorces to pay for philanthropic activity to bolster her image and ego. Also, she seems like a burning man attending wing nut who would buy expensive nonsense products, like, vaginal eggs from the Goop. She’s just not a serious person. And RFK has been essentially disowned by his entire family for being such an unserious nut bag.

Who gives a crap what she puts in her vagina. She keep her and every other politician out of everyone else's bodily decisions including if they need IVF... none of her darn business.

Her foundation is focused on women's reproductive longevity research. She believes sunlight exposure could help women in their 50s conceive "naturally." She is extremely anti-IVF and argues it is
"one of the biggest lies that's being told about women's health today" and in the wake of Roe v. Wade and Alabama's Supreme Court ruling I find those views incredibly abhorrent, anti-woman and anti-family.
She's not a medical doctor, expert or anything else; she's just rich because she married a billionaire and can now throw her money at "researching" insane things. Her decision to be the running mate of RFK, Jr., someone who spouts ridiculous and occasionally racist conspiracy theories, speaks a lot about her judgement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dems have not moved left on policy. What a weird thing to assert. Nader didn’t do anything except usher in the Iraq war by getting Bush elected.

And a third party vote will yield nothing but women with a lifetime of decreasing rights and protections.

I’d like to point out that Republican posters on this page are constantly blurring the lines between threads and against arguing points that no one is making and it feels like it’s being done in a very calculated way. Paid or not I don’t know, but it feels deliberate. Check which thread you’re in before replying and be aware that skulduggery is afoot.

If Dems have not moved left on policy, why in the world are Dems afraid of losing votes to RFKJr? Do you think RFKJr sits to the left of Biden and he might peel off some of the progressive vote?!?

There are certainly anti vaxxers on the left, are you unaware of that?

Any third party candidate is going to play spoiler to some degree and in a close race that might get you a GWB in the White House. Or a DJT. If you don’t care if Trump has a second (and then goes for a third) term well that says a lot about you and your priorities and what you don’t care about (SCOTUS and other lifetime judicial picks, abortion rights, environmental regulation, blowing up the deficit with tax cuts to the rich, cozying up to autocrats and dictators, pardoning of J6 criminals, incompetency and corruption in every cabinet and the WH, people like Steve Bannon as presidential advisors, etc.).

The thing with trying to shame people is that it only works on people that are already part of the group; it doesn't do any good to attract new people into the group. It's a tool that religions use to police their membership. Folks can reasonably prioritize different issues; it's why there's a roughly 50/50 split of Ds and Rs (and why the main parties don't capture 100% of potential voters, because some people simply prioritize issues in a different way).

There is nowhere near a 50/50 split of Democrats and Republicans.

A couple years old, but what I found during a quick google search:

https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2021/11/PP_2021.11.09_political-typology_00-01.png?w=620

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a D and am voting RFK with enthusiasm.

“I’m a moderate dem…”
“I’m an independent…”
“I’m a liberal dem…”

Guess what? I’m a R and am voting Biden with enthusiasm.

I lean R, but can't vote for Trump, so will vote for RFKJr with enthusiasm. My best-case outcome is he wins enough electoral college votes to prevent anyone from getting 270, though I doubt that will happen.

You realize that the outcome of that will be a Trump presidency, right? The House (even if controlled by Dems) would almost certainly vote for Trump.

Yes. Run a better candidate. My vote for Kennedy is not an endorsement of anything he stands for, because I don’t expect him to win, and I don't care if he does or doesn’t. It’s an expression of deep disappointment with both the Ds and Rs for running two tremendously terrible candidates.

“What about me?! I deserve to have everything exactly as I want it! Screw all the people who would be hurt under a GOP regime, screw the end of democracy - I’m disappointed. No, wait - I’m deeply disappointed.”

Am I supposed to vote in my own best interest? Or in the interest of others? I'm confused, because the D posters on here frequently explain that R voters are voting against their interest. Which I took to mean I should vote in my own best interest. My own best interest, right now, is joining with what appears to be approx 10% of the country in voting third party as a "none-of-the-above" style vote.

You summed it up perfectly “Run a better candidate” it’s really that simple. They’re just mad because that’s the solution to their “the sky is falling” problem. Instead, they’ll attack you and those sending a message. You’re the enemy of the day. Do t worry tomorrow it’ll be someone else.

What good do you think the message sent will do other than make you feel like you told ‘em.

If either the D or R party loses and the consensus opinion within that party is because RFKJr was a spoiler candidate, the “good” it would do is have that party find ways to reach those voters.

Did that work when Nader put Bush into the White House? Did it help our nation ultimately to have GWB in the WH?

I see the conundrum for the Democrats. […]

Enjoy the game. We'll see what happens in November.

The Democrats have the big tent. They truly do try to keep everyone happy. The GOP just kicks out all the “RINOs.”

And it is not a game; this is why the GOP is just flat out evil. Democracy is on the line. Every time a Republican is in office, terrible damage is done to the US.

The Ds did not and have not acted like democracy was on the line. Instead, they spent two years trying to pass the social welfare provisions of the BBBA; if democracy were "on the line," those were critical years to backfill with legislation to protect transitions of power. Instead, the Ds were acting like it was business as usual and it was their time to jam through as much social welfare legislation as they could.

I agree that the Rs have kicked out the RINOs, the types of candidates I might otherwise support. Ergo . . . I have my protest vote.

Are you kidding me? Dems passed the Inflation Reduction Act, Chips and Science Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. Things that America needs because the rest of the world is kicking our butts.

Yeah... because the Green New Deal under different monikers is the *most* important thing to make sure that the rest of the world doesn't kick our butts.

They didn't pass the Green New Deal. Completely different legislation. Educate yourself. Are you suggesting that climate change doesn't exist or that we don't need to bring technology back to the US through the Chips and Science Act? Are you suggesting that our infrastructure does not need to be addressed?

I wonder if that pp is one of the “disaffected liberals” who claims to be voting for RFK. I have met a few liberals who have lost hope about the environment being fixed, but none who think climate change is made up.