The Democrats need an effective communicator that really connects with people.
I'm excited for this ticket, not because I'm Minnesotan, but because the country desperately needs Waltz, on television, at least as much as MAGAs have been. His rational and relatable mind is a remedy to the years of maddening bullshit that have been blasting us lower and lower to the depths.
I was so jaded by the Democrats and their inability to escape their ivory tower of power and even attempt to relate to me, that I was firmly resolved to vote RFK this election.
Now they offer a glimmer of hope. Here's hoping the tides are changing and they actually have conviction behind their normally hollow words. Biden has achieved some progressive agendas, and thankfully he released his grip to let others continue his surprising work.
RFK is terrible.
Last Week Tonight did a whole hour on him on Sunday. It’s on YouTube.
———
It has video clips from interviews where he himself brings up that he was friends with Epstein, OJ, and Bill Cosby. When he himself was accused with rape, his response was “I’m not a church boy” and “more might come out.”
There are also video clips showing how on more liberal interviews he says with vaccines he’s open to changing his mind (and even apologizing) if he’s introduced to new facts showing they’re safe. But then he routinely goes on conservative shows and tells them that vaccines are not safe and that he goes up to random people in the park to tell them not to vaccinate their kids.
He also went to Samoa and influenced the death of over 80 people by inspiring a fear of vaccines. (Last Week Tonight shows photos of him there and the welcoming ceremony they put on for him.) But when asked about Samoa, he denies even going there.
I felt so bad for john oliver watching that episode, airing right after the news broke of RFK abandoning a dead bear cub in Central Park 10 years ago. The downside of pre-recording the day before I guess. Can't wait for the follow up next week.
Don't vote for RFK
Ok that just sounds whacky and made up. At best a mischaracterization of some obscure situation.
So he and some friends found roadkill and thought it would be funny to put it in a park to give the appearance that a NY bicyclist ran it over and left it? That's supposed to make me not vote for the person?
To me that says he has a sense of humor, strange as it may be. But how is that supposed to turn me off compared to grabbing women by the pussy or approaching young women from behind and smelling their hair and pecking at them publicly? I'll take dark humor over fucked up shit any day.
Come back when you have a video of RFK doing anything as grizzly as the two formerly leading candidates. Brain worms are fairly common and only support his claim that he's an avid outdoorsman. Again, how is that something to disqualify a candidate, when the next two are both literally and publicly out of their minds?
I don't care to debate about it. You said it sounded wacky, which it is, and made up, which it isn't.
Cool, then I don't care either.
I did end up watching that episode. The part where Jon called him a red-pilled Smokey the Bear was really funny.
The accusation wasn't of rape but sexual assault, which is quite different, though no less wrong.
The show makes the distinction of mainstream and not. Not sure the real difference is liberal versus conservative.
And the Samoa situation is really strange, but I don't think Robert went around and told locals to not vaccinate. I said in another comment that he has something to answer for here, but saying he is responsible seems like speculation, given the evidence as presented.
He's a Kennedy, I'm sure he's been around a great number of people. But of all the interviews I've seen, both before and after his intention to run for president, I never heard him refer to those people as his friends. He had rational reasons for his relationship as far as Epstein goes. I don't have any reason to believe he was a child rapist.
As far as the other two, all I can say is that famous people tend to talk to other famous people at parties. It doesn't mean RFK approves of their behavior or character. If you have evidence of the contrary I'm all ears. Cherry picked sounds bytes don't impress me so you don't have to bother with that.
Also I'm not saying he's the pinnacle of greatness. He only had to top Trump and Biden, and that's not hard to do this election. There were other Democrats I would have gladly voted for but the DNC and Biden didn't give me the chance.
Don't care about down votes, but at least have the guts to support your decision. I'm putting my thoughts out there, you can refute them just the same.
Glad you changed your mind but RFK literally caused babies to die in Samoa in an anti MMR vaccine campaign he called an experiment.
I don't see how that could be possible, but if you can explain I'll keep an open mind.
Sorry it took so long to get back at you but here's a link from a quick search. Honestly I think it's minimizing his influence even in that article but it should explain.
No worries, I really appreciate your follow-up.
I agree with Robert's professed view that vaccines should have enhanced safety protocols to ensure positive health outcomes. Specifically, a long term study on ingredients and so forth. This, he claims, stems from the staggering increase in child health issues in the past forty years. It makes perfect sense to want to use US health institutions to research possible causes and get to the bottom of it. I don't trust monied interests, but I do trust the scientific method.
However, scaremongering is wrong, and that appears to be what caused the issue. It isn't perfectly clear that Robert directly has blood on his hands, but it does seem like the company he kept at the time has done some damage, and so he at least has something to answer for here.
Thanks again for getting back to me on this.
His issue was specifically with mercury. Which was in medically insignificant amounts at the time and is no longer used.
The medical consensus on the increase in childhood issues over the past forty years is that it's not really in increase. It's an increase in diagnosis. 40 years ago most kids who had an autism spectrum issue were undiagnosed and remain so to this day.
However what we do have on our hands are measles outbreaks and polio on the horizon due to vaccine skepticism. I saw a study yesterday on Lemmy showing that 31% of Republicans think vaccines are worse than the diseases they prevent, which is total insanity. Few seem to understand herd immunity or even really the purpose of vaccination.
I think it's because we haven't seen children dying large numbers due to measles and all the people who were crippled for life by polio are dead. Because we vaccinated almost everyone. Now that it's a distant memory people question what the vaccines are for.
I can see how the advance/change of criteria can lead to an increase in diagnosis. But I don't think it's merely a perception that has evolved. Cancer rates in youth are rising significantly. The recommended age for common cancer screens are being lowered to reflect the change.
There was a time when the use of lead was perfectly normal and the flight to eliminate it for public safety was deemed as fringe. Likewise, I feel that we have new kinds of pollutants affecting our health and I have a keen interest in knowing what's safe and what isn't, now that I have children to care for.
I see vaccinations as one of humanity's greatest achievements. mRNA technology is exciting to me. But just like scaremongering upsets me, so does hasty policy making and social policing.
That said, my family is fully up to date on vaccination schedules. But I have worries that if we let our guards down and only take in facts on authority, we'll give way to corruption due to our unquestioning nature. This is in no way limited to vaccines, in fact I hardly question vaccines at all. I'm mostly interested in industrial pollution and Robert has extensive experience in this area. That's why I favored him, as a figure who lived to expose industrial and government corruption at the cost of human health.
The Democrats need an effective communicator that really connects with people.
I'm excited for this ticket, not because I'm Minnesotan, but because the country desperately needs Waltz, on television, at least as much as MAGAs have been. His rational and relatable mind is a remedy to the years of maddening bullshit that have been blasting us lower and lower to the depths.
I was so jaded by the Democrats and their inability to escape their ivory tower of power and even attempt to relate to me, that I was firmly resolved to vote RFK this election.
Now they offer a glimmer of hope. Here's hoping the tides are changing and they actually have conviction behind their normally hollow words. Biden has achieved some progressive agendas, and thankfully he released his grip to let others continue his surprising work.
RFK is terrible.
Last Week Tonight did a whole hour on him on Sunday. It’s on YouTube.
———
It has video clips from interviews where he himself brings up that he was friends with Epstein, OJ, and Bill Cosby. When he himself was accused with rape, his response was “I’m not a church boy” and “more might come out.”
There are also video clips showing how on more liberal interviews he says with vaccines he’s open to changing his mind (and even apologizing) if he’s introduced to new facts showing they’re safe. But then he routinely goes on conservative shows and tells them that vaccines are not safe and that he goes up to random people in the park to tell them not to vaccinate their kids.
He also went to Samoa and influenced the death of over 80 people by inspiring a fear of vaccines. (Last Week Tonight shows photos of him there and the welcoming ceremony they put on for him.) But when asked about Samoa, he denies even going there.
I felt so bad for john oliver watching that episode, airing right after the news broke of RFK abandoning a dead bear cub in Central Park 10 years ago. The downside of pre-recording the day before I guess. Can't wait for the follow up next week.
Don't vote for RFK
Ok that just sounds whacky and made up. At best a mischaracterization of some obscure situation.
It's straight from RFK's mouth.
Boy do I have some news for you: https://apnews.com/article/robert-kennedy-rfk-bear-cub-central-park-f7e6cba9aa19dc2066a8d9c543974a97
Also, incase you haven't heard: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/08/us/rfk-jr-brain-health-memory-loss.html
So he and some friends found roadkill and thought it would be funny to put it in a park to give the appearance that a NY bicyclist ran it over and left it? That's supposed to make me not vote for the person?
To me that says he has a sense of humor, strange as it may be. But how is that supposed to turn me off compared to grabbing women by the pussy or approaching young women from behind and smelling their hair and pecking at them publicly? I'll take dark humor over fucked up shit any day.
Come back when you have a video of RFK doing anything as grizzly as the two formerly leading candidates. Brain worms are fairly common and only support his claim that he's an avid outdoorsman. Again, how is that something to disqualify a candidate, when the next two are both literally and publicly out of their minds?
I don't care to debate about it. You said it sounded wacky, which it is, and made up, which it isn't.
Cool, then I don't care either.
I did end up watching that episode. The part where Jon called him a red-pilled Smokey the Bear was really funny.
The accusation wasn't of rape but sexual assault, which is quite different, though no less wrong.
The show makes the distinction of mainstream and not. Not sure the real difference is liberal versus conservative.
And the Samoa situation is really strange, but I don't think Robert went around and told locals to not vaccinate. I said in another comment that he has something to answer for here, but saying he is responsible seems like speculation, given the evidence as presented.
He's a Kennedy, I'm sure he's been around a great number of people. But of all the interviews I've seen, both before and after his intention to run for president, I never heard him refer to those people as his friends. He had rational reasons for his relationship as far as Epstein goes. I don't have any reason to believe he was a child rapist.
As far as the other two, all I can say is that famous people tend to talk to other famous people at parties. It doesn't mean RFK approves of their behavior or character. If you have evidence of the contrary I'm all ears. Cherry picked sounds bytes don't impress me so you don't have to bother with that.
Also I'm not saying he's the pinnacle of greatness. He only had to top Trump and Biden, and that's not hard to do this election. There were other Democrats I would have gladly voted for but the DNC and Biden didn't give me the chance.
Don't care about down votes, but at least have the guts to support your decision. I'm putting my thoughts out there, you can refute them just the same.
Glad you changed your mind but RFK literally caused babies to die in Samoa in an anti MMR vaccine campaign he called an experiment.
I don't see how that could be possible, but if you can explain I'll keep an open mind.
Sorry it took so long to get back at you but here's a link from a quick search. Honestly I think it's minimizing his influence even in that article but it should explain.
No worries, I really appreciate your follow-up.
I agree with Robert's professed view that vaccines should have enhanced safety protocols to ensure positive health outcomes. Specifically, a long term study on ingredients and so forth. This, he claims, stems from the staggering increase in child health issues in the past forty years. It makes perfect sense to want to use US health institutions to research possible causes and get to the bottom of it. I don't trust monied interests, but I do trust the scientific method.
However, scaremongering is wrong, and that appears to be what caused the issue. It isn't perfectly clear that Robert directly has blood on his hands, but it does seem like the company he kept at the time has done some damage, and so he at least has something to answer for here.
Thanks again for getting back to me on this.
His issue was specifically with mercury. Which was in medically insignificant amounts at the time and is no longer used.
The medical consensus on the increase in childhood issues over the past forty years is that it's not really in increase. It's an increase in diagnosis. 40 years ago most kids who had an autism spectrum issue were undiagnosed and remain so to this day.
However what we do have on our hands are measles outbreaks and polio on the horizon due to vaccine skepticism. I saw a study yesterday on Lemmy showing that 31% of Republicans think vaccines are worse than the diseases they prevent, which is total insanity. Few seem to understand herd immunity or even really the purpose of vaccination.
I think it's because we haven't seen children dying large numbers due to measles and all the people who were crippled for life by polio are dead. Because we vaccinated almost everyone. Now that it's a distant memory people question what the vaccines are for.
I can see how the advance/change of criteria can lead to an increase in diagnosis. But I don't think it's merely a perception that has evolved. Cancer rates in youth are rising significantly. The recommended age for common cancer screens are being lowered to reflect the change.
There was a time when the use of lead was perfectly normal and the flight to eliminate it for public safety was deemed as fringe. Likewise, I feel that we have new kinds of pollutants affecting our health and I have a keen interest in knowing what's safe and what isn't, now that I have children to care for.
I see vaccinations as one of humanity's greatest achievements. mRNA technology is exciting to me. But just like scaremongering upsets me, so does hasty policy making and social policing.
That said, my family is fully up to date on vaccination schedules. But I have worries that if we let our guards down and only take in facts on authority, we'll give way to corruption due to our unquestioning nature. This is in no way limited to vaccines, in fact I hardly question vaccines at all. I'm mostly interested in industrial pollution and Robert has extensive experience in this area. That's why I favored him, as a figure who lived to expose industrial and government corruption at the cost of human health.