Robert F. Kennedy Jr. launches unlikely presidential bid as a Democrat

food for thought.

RFK had work for Joe McCarthy

In 1952, shortly after graduating from UVA, Bobby Kennedy got one of his first jobs thanks to an old family friend,
Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy. McCarthy, who had vacationed with the Kennedy family, agreed to hire the young lawyer to work on his Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations examining possible communists infiltration of the U.S. government.​

 

food for thought.

In 1952, shortly after graduating from UVA, Kennedy got one of his first jobs thanks to an old family friend, Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy.

McCarthy, who had vacationed with the Kennedy family, agreed to hire the young lawyer to work on his Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations
examining possible communists infiltration of the U.S. government.​

 

I appreciate your kind words because I similarly respect your positions, and I learn from your posts.

IA and NH were definitely messes. Again, I'm not giving them any sort of divinity. And again, I'm not opposed with changing up the order. My issue is why it's being changed. I don't think Congressman Clyburn is trying to spin up a conspiracy (This isn't something I created; I'm repeating what others who are part in the Democratic party have said). I think Clyburn is just telling the truth as he saw it. And it makes sense. It's logical. To me, at least. It doesn't require 12 layers of conspiracies or anything. "SC is was great for Biden in 2020; IA and NH were not; let's put SC first." And again, this is what Clyburn admitted to (and supported). It's what the 2020 Biden delegate I quoted earlier said as well (though he opposed it).

Make Nevada first if you want to most closely represent your voters. Make SC first if you want to give Biden a boost. To think things just happened to play out this way requires more faith than I can muster.

I will admit my bias is that I am distrustful of establishment politicians and institutions. So that is no doubt coloring my perspective. That said, I'm not anti-Biden, and currently consider him the best President of my lifetime (though that is an extremely low bar).

 

If his name wasn't Kennedy nobody would know who this guy is.

He should stay a nothing.

 

Fair enough. I just wouldn’t overthink it too much on the decision making. The point is the Dems want to win. Biden in 2020 after Super Tuesday cleaned up on the electorate that ended up deciding the election (black voters from metro areas of swing states, suburban women, etc) and the DNC was reactionary in the re-org of the primaries.

I think of it less of rigging the primaries for Biden as much as I think of them “rigging” the primaries to show early if he right guy/woman is the candidate to draw a straight with the swing states.

Democrats want to win the election. They are not rigging it for Biden as much as they are “rigging” it for the 2020 Biden electorate to make it easier for them.

Nothing nefarious about that.

 

Joe Rogan, Tucker Carlson and their mouthbreathing fans (who somehow now love RFKJr, because reasons?) talking **** about Peter Hotez is one of the worst, dumbest, things I've ever seen or heard.

Why do you people worship these morons?

 

...like keeps to like, I've heard.

Great minds don't always think alike, either.

But dumb ones do...

 

thing about guys like RFK and Rogan is attempting to shame them into silence doesn't work (having eff you money helps)

they simply do not give af about affirmation from elites

he's a nuisance now, but if his poll numbers start rising, the three letter agencies and DNC will get involved

 

OK then, you and Rogan can go do Rogan things, like a simple person doing simple things.

Good deal. Carry on.

 

That’s some disingenuous BS right there from someone who tries to claim he’s not a right wing crank.

What pediatrician much less Dr. Hotez have ever said that diet and nutrition are not important? This is such a stupid debate that only stupid people are having with their stupid friends.

Rogan is doing a wonderful job though of promoting a 3rd party candidate who is likely to siphon off hundreds of thousand if not millions of Trump votes. Smart move Steve Bannon… who is the guy getting his “campaign” funded and propped up. Steve Bannon is smarter than some on the right but he’s still pretty freaking stupid. If people like you love RFK then that’s a problem for Trump and the GOP in 2024.

 

Why Robert Kennedy Jr.’s 2024 Bid Is a Headache for Biden
The unexpected polling strength of an anti-vaccine activist with a celebrated Democratic lineage points to the president’s weaknesses, which his team is aiming to shore up.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/19/us/politics/rfk-jr-biden-democrats.html

excerpt:

Yet some of Mr. Biden’s allies say they worry that the president’s still-nascent campaign does not fully grasp the depth of its problems with Democratic voters, who have consistently told pollsters they would prefer that Mr. Biden not seek re-election. Voters remain uneasy about inflation and his stewardship of the economy.

***
Surveys have suggested that large numbers of Democratic voters are willing to tell pollsters they would take anyone over Mr. Biden. A poll from a Baltimore TV station last week found that 41 percent of Maryland Democrats preferred their governor, Wes Moore, over Mr. Biden, even though Mr. Moore is backing the president’s re-election.

Yet if Mr. Kennedy manages to maintain this level of support, he could cause Mr. Biden embarrassment in the primaries.

“Could Bobby Kennedy catch a spark? Maybe,” said Michael Novogratz, a billionaire Democratic donor who supported Mr. Biden in 2020 but has pledged not to back any candidate older than 72. “He’s alienated himself because of some of the anti-vax positions, but he is a bright man, articulate, eloquent, connected, has the Kennedy name and would pull a lot of the Trump voters.”
​

more at the link

 

No... this guy isn't a loon...

 

related

https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/do-it-on-debating-prominent-skeptics

Do it! On Debating Prominent Skeptics
Making sense of the Twitter kerfuffle among Hotez, Rogan, Musk, Cuban
ROGER PIELKE JR.
JUN 19, 2023

Over the past few days, Twitter has been abuzz with debate over a debate. Here’s how The Independent characterized the episode:

It sounds like the beginning of a bad joke – but a renowned medical expert, a comedian, a billionaire and a Kennedy are all embroiled in a bizarre Twitter exchange about covid vaccines stoked by the platform’s owner himself.

I won’t give the full tick-tock, but in a nutshell, Joe Rogan, the world’s most popular podcaster, last week had Robert Kennedy on his show to discuss his skepticism over the efficacy and safety of vaccines. Other topics covered in the podcast were how Wi-Fi might melt your brain and how chemicals in water turn kids trans.

No one would have mistaken the show for a scientific conference, but it is representative of how many people think about these issues. Consider that Kennedy, who is running for the Democratic nomination for president, currently has the highest favorability rating of all presidential candidates, Democrat or Republican. Whether his views are accurate or not (and to be clear, many of his views are not accurate), they are prominent and likely to become more so.

Enter Dr. Peter Hotez, a distinguished scientist and prolific media commenter on what he calls “anti-science.” In response to the Rogan/Kennedy podcast, Hotez Tweeted to his 400,000+ Twitter followers that the podcast was “nonsense” and “misinformation.”

Rogan responded to Hotez with a demand that he come onto his show and debate Kennedy, offering $100,000 to a charity of Hotez’s choice. Hotez refused the offer (asking instead in a since-deleted Tweet for a $50 million endowment). Elon Musk jumped in to support Rogan — billionaire Mark Cuban entered the discussion to defend Hotez. And off we went.

***
Hotez, along with many scientists and journalists, responded to the kerfuffle by saying scientists don’t debate cranks. Scientific debates don’t occur on podcasts, they say, but in peer-reviewed journals and staid academic conferences. Giving cranks airtime, they say, only legitimizes their fringe views.

As a B-level public intellectual myself, I’ve had many occasions to face the challenge of dealing with prominent people who hold contrarian, skeptical, and even outright wrong views in my areas of expertise. Based on my experiences, I think Hotez and those who have rallied around his “do not debate” stance are missing a huge opportunity here. Hotez should not only take Rogan up on his offer, he should also welcome it — and here are three reasons why.

1. Hotez is already debating Kennedy

Hotez has engaged Kennedy’s anti-vax views on many occasions, including in his book, Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel's Autism: My Journey as a Vaccine Scientist, Pediatrician, and Autism Dad. For Hotez, a choice over whether or not to engage Kennedy’s fringe views has already been decided in the affirmative. Hotez chose to respond publicly to Rogan’s podcast with Kennedy by calling it “misinformation.”

Guess what? With Hotez’s claims about Kennedy’s view — and I think Hotez is right here — he has also created an obligation to engage. Those he was criticizing took him seriously and responded as we might expect they would, by challenging him to a public debate over those ideas.

The question now for Hotez is not whether to engage what he believes to be “anti-science” but how. Hotez has absolutely no objections to showing up on friendly cable news channels CNN and MSNBC. He is an incredibly skilled communicator, telegenic and brilliant. He should know that you can’t swim without getting wet.

Scientists are pushed these days to engage in “science communication.” Refusing perhaps the largest public platform that Hotez has ever been offered to debate the subjects on which he is a global expert with those he has most vehemently criticized is to step back from “science communication.” It may not be comfortable engaging with those who traffic in misinformation, but once we commit to “science communication,” obligations follow.

2. Hotez knows much more than Kennedy (and Rogan) and is a highly skilled communicator

We all know that public debates are not won and lost based on who better understands current science. Of course not. There is a significant element of presentation and drama in any public communication, including “science communication.”

Look at Hotez above on CNN. He knows all about the importance of imagery and symbolism. The lab coat, bow tie, and the carefully staged props behind him — he is not just a medical expert, but a communication expert. He has vast experience speaking to the public in quick media hits, and he does it very well.

Had Joe Rogan been calling out a brilliant scientist with no media experience, or a scientist with a lot of media appearances but little actual knowledge, I’d come down on the side of recommending that a highly visible, public debate would be a bad idea. But if not Hotez — then who?

3. Debate is good for democracy, and in fact it is necessary

I often think about the following quote from the late Richard Rorty:

“In democratic countries you get things done by compromising your principles in order to form alliances with groups about whom you have grave doubts.”
​

The main purpose of a public debate over issues is not necessarily to change peoples’ minds about science or values, but to establish greater public trust in the legitimacy of science. Trust and legitimacy in expertise is necessary reconcile the challenges of reconciling expertise held by only a few, with democratic governance where everyone gets a vote.

By participating in a debate, Hotez would send the following message:

I disagree with your views and I can explain why in clear and accessible terms. I am not fearful of engaging, because I know my stuff. Nor do I view you to be contemptible and not worth engaging. We are fellow citizens and can model constructive disagreement. I respect you as a participant in American democracy, but I am certain that your views on science and policy are harmful to the nation.
​

By not engaging, Hotez instead sends this message:

You are a crank and not worth my engagement, except from afar. I will challenge your views only from the safe ground of politically friendly media. If you challenge me in response to my criticisms of you I will hide behind the cloth of “science.” My authority and status, and that of all science, should be more than enough to command your deference. Listen to my friends, who agree with me.
​

As we consider this episode it is essential to understand that Hotez is not doing science — he is participating in democracy. Ultimately, for experts “science communication” is not about sharing facts, but about making peace with democracy. Engagement may not change hearts and minds, but it may win them.

Postscript

I have no illusions about how challenging “science communication” is in practice. I know because I’ve been doing it for decades. Like a dog chasing a car, experts engaging in public should consider what might happen when they succeed in their quest. Hotez has caught the car. Now what?

You can see me here debating a self-professed climate skeptic just last week.

And you can read here about my debate challenge more than a decade ago with a highly visible and popular “crank” who sought to delegitimize peer-reviewed and consensus science.​

 

It's fascinating how you're always subscribed to the most right wing qnon substacks but pretend to be a moderate who will vote for Cornel West. I've said this before but you're the most disingenuous hack on these forums

 

My impression of such a debate...

Spoiler

comic relief

Spoiler

 

In this thread the OP lays out in details the many disinformation claims rfk cited in his podcast with rogan. Their so insane they're impossible to fact check in real time without researching them.

This is the issue with debating anti vaccine nutjobs. They lie with no disregard

 

I don't disagree with Rogan on eating right and taking care of your body, but if there's a "gotcha" moment in there somewhere I'm not sure where it is.

During that entire exchange/cross examination Rogan just basically said "alright" when vaccines were discussed.

 

I must have missed it . . . please say it again

 

https://althouse.blogspot.com/2023/06/mr-kennedy-is-one-person-who-has.html


2 hours ago
"Mr. Kennedy is the one person who has the qualities that can bring about the unity that most Americans are hungering for. He speaks a language of conciliation and compassion."

excerpt:

Said Dennis Kucinich, RFK Jr.'s campaign manager, quoted in "Why Robert Kennedy Jr.’s 2024 Bid Is a Headache for Biden/The unexpected polling strength of an anti-vaccine activist with a celebrated Democratic lineage points to the president’s weaknesses, which his team is aiming to shore up" (NYT).

Notice the descriptor: "anti-vaccine activist." A lot depends on the strength of that label. If people accept it as a warning — steer clear of this nut — then Biden easily prevails. But if that insult is questioned — what is it they don't want us to look into? — then Biden is caught flatfooted.
​

more at the link

​