The stance puts Kennedy — who’s mounting long shot bid to unseat President Joe Biden as the Democratic standard bearer in 2024 — out of step with most of his party.
The stance puts Kennedy — who’s mounting long shot bid to unseat President Joe Biden as the Democratic standard bearer in 2024 — out of step with most of his party.
It’s not my job to explain repeatedly how RFK is a spoiler candidate. It’s not my job to handhold every asshat that says “well what about…” because they lack the ability to think critically or use reason.
I’m tired of explaining why the right wing is fucking evil. Only the willfully ignorant subscribe to their BS at this point. You’ll never convince someone of a point if they’re arguing in bad faith, you’ll just waste your time.
If it’s that important to you, feel free to engage and have a good conversation with them.
Rfk is a dem primary candidate, so how can he be a spoiler candidate at this point in the race? Maybe I am the asshat misunderstanding what you mean by spoiler candidate, but that’s nonsense to me. You may well be convinced. I’m not, so I wonder what it is that convinced you.
He’s a “dem primary candidate” the same way Bloomberg was in 2016 eh?
He’s a milquetoast ruling-class elite, practically American royalty. He’s there to water down the democratic field by diluting it with pseudo-rightwing talking points, to spoil the field (by taking up space, airtime, attention, etc) for a further left candidate all while being a nice safe neo-liberal carrying the same water they all do. Give him enough time and he’d probably start talking about supply side economics.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/15/rfk-fundraising-republicans-00106481
https://electionscience.org/library/the-spoiler-effect/
I don’t think it’s a bad thing to throw out more policy goals to measure what the Dem base wants. It sounds like you see it as taking away attention. I see it as battling it out to find better policy sets for the nominee to run on. Battle of ideas is the liberal thing to do in my mind. Besides, what is he taking away attention from? What do you think is more important than figuring out what the Dem base will rally and vote for? On the politico article, he gets 100k out of the known 4.3mil from candidates that donated to republicans in prior elections. That’s less than 2.5%. Is that the issue for you? That some people who donated one way are now donating another way? I don’t understand that notion. Wouldn’t you want to be able to convince people to switch sides? Or are you saying the fact that he’s only convinced a mere 2.5% shows he’s entirely unconvincing to the purple voters base? Unless I’m missing something the definition you provided on spoiler effect isn’t applicable because he won’t be on the ballot if he loses the primary.
I don’t believe he has anything to offer, I don’t believe he’s put forth any policy worth talking about to the Democratic party at all and haven’t heard any policy out of his mouth that I wouldn’t expect to hear from a Republican. He’s vocally anti-vax and anti-choice, two non-starters for me and many on the left, the right seems to like them; maybe he should try talking to them. Additionally, and this is is a perfect example of it, I think we need to get all the old-money Ivy League ruling-class blueblood network out of office and out of government. He needs to go relax with his wealth and family name on an island somewhere and let the citizenry get to the business of running the country before we start to look a little closer at his funding and consider the traditional solution to the dilettante aristocracy.
The definition doesn’t say anything about it needing to be a primary, a candidate with questionable intentions can easily spoil coalitions built during caucusing. I feel like you’re just arguing in bad faith at this point or perhaps you’re an RFK Jr supporter or just stubborn, either way have a nice night.