this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
150 points (96.3% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2310 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
 

Kennedy has been funded by a bunch of billionaires who thought his name would funnel votes away from Biden. But the brain worms mad him weird enough that Democratic voters aren't willing to vote for him in significant numbers.

top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lennybird 38 points 3 months ago

Oof. They realized they were spoiling the vote for Republicans more than Democrats and their little plan backfired hahaha!

[–] AtomicTacoSauce 37 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] PenguinMage 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

(Shit)birds of a feather flock together.

[–] AtomicTacoSauce 2 points 3 months ago

RIP Mr. Lahey.

[–] Numenor 31 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I love how these articles never even name RFK Jr's running name. No one knows her or her name,. If the article had said "Alisha Glacer" everyone would have been like "who?"

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

It’s the name of his brain worm

[–] DirkMcCallahan 21 points 3 months ago
[–] Lauchs 13 points 3 months ago (3 children)

This is actually pretty worrying. A lot of polls show Harris doing better with RFK and co on the ballot. From split polling, seems like RFK was pulling supporters from both camps but at a 3:1 ratio of trumpers. If even half of those go back to trump that'd be really bad news.

[–] FlowVoid 15 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Recent polls I've seen show Harris doing as well or better without RFK.

Yougov 8/14-16: Harris +2 with RFK, +3 without RFK

Outward Intelligence 8/11-15: Harris +6 with or without RFK

Emerson College 8/12-14: Harris +4 with or without RFK

Ipsos 8/9-13: Harris +3 with RFK, +4 without RFK

[–] Lauchs 5 points 3 months ago

Totally fair, thanks for sharing and I love that you brought the receipts! I'm thinking of the last NYT/Sienna poll (which is kind of the gold standard) I recall. Should dive in again now that polling is a little more settled!

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

Yeah, it doesn't matter for her.

[–] PenguinMage 4 points 3 months ago

My step mother was planning on voting for RFK dad is full on trump... now it's two trumps... I only cancel 1 of my family =/

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

Polls are useless. Just go vote everyone!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

Hopefully Kennedy doesn't get fuck... in the end he's just a Trump toady.

[–] Etterra 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] ChowJeeBai 1 points 3 months ago

About to endorse a whiner.

[–] Nuke_the_whales 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Who even is his running mate? I have no idea about her

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

She married one of the Google founders for a few years, divorced him, and walked away with billion-dollar kind of money. Kennedy wanted her as a running mate because he figured she'd fund the campaign.

[–] Ghostalmedia 6 points 3 months ago

He already tried to sell his voters to Harris. https://youtu.be/cpiAjK_6XGc

Looks like Trump’s buy’n.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Damn, Dementia DonOLD is going to be doing great with the additional three votes they're going to bring.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

Nicole Shanahan seems to fit the definition of a psychopath.

[–] Pappabosley 2 points 3 months ago

I kinda assumed this was part of their plan. Rope along some Republicans who are too moderate(?) for Trump, then ditch at the last minute and tell them they have to vote for Trump now. Gives less chance that they'll have time to sway to Dems or other 3rd party candidates

[–] CharlesDarwin 2 points 3 months ago

their independent presidential bid was not likely to end in victory

Given the way elections are run in this country, running third party is only going to be about being a spoiler. You are never going to win.

As for voting: voting third party is always going to be just throwing your vote away. You might as well set fire to your ballot.

[–] CharlesDarwin 1 points 3 months ago