Do Conservatives Actually Like RFK Jr., or Do They Just Think He'll Hurt Biden?
Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars last year's midterms meddling in Republican primaries. Republicans may now be borrowing a page from their playbook.

After announcing he would challenge President Joe Biden for the 2024 Democratic presidential nomination, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. saw a burst of popularity, polling as high as 21 percent. More notable than a Kennedy polling well among Democrats, however, might be that RFK Jr. has received substantial support from figures on the right. This raises the question of whether that support is sincere.
"Dismissing Robert F. Kennedy Jr. might be a mistake," Michael Brendan Dougherty wrote at National Review, arguing that Kennedy could "revive left-leaning skepticism of government and corporate power" and "denounce crony capitalism, censorship, and the CIA to boot." Tucker Carlson said of Kennedy on his Fox News show, "it's nice to have a truth teller around."
Former George W. Bush speechwriter Matthew Scully went further this week, describing Kennedy in National Review as a fearless iconoclast. "The source of Kennedy's troubles is a chronic inability to tolerate the intellectual dishonesty he finds in his antagonists," Scully wrote. "He would fully recover, returning to the life of liberal accolades he once knew, if only he didn't have so much integrity."
As Reason's Matt Welch has written, Kennedy has a long and shameful history of authoritarian pronouncements, including stating that his political opponents should be arrested and dissenting corporations "given the death penalty." Kennedy also praised Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez as the "kind of leader my father and President Kennedy were looking for."
And that's to say nothing of what became Kennedy's signature issue for nearly two decades: a full-scale opposition to vaccines that only intensified during the COVID-19 pandemic. Over the years, he has repeatedly compared vaccination to Nazi experiments, including using the term "holocaust."
Scully huffs that tarring Kennedy as a conspiracy theorist or an anti-vaxxer is "lazy and slanderous, telling us nothing about the merits of his arguments or about what has or has not actually been 'debunked.'" However, Kennedy's long-held insistence that there is a causal link between childhood vaccinations and autism spectrum disorder has been debunked. Kennedy's prediction that Bill Gates would design a COVID-19 vaccine with a microchip, ushering in a cashless society, has also proved incorrect. He has further claimed, without evidence, that 5G wireless signals "could have almost unimaginably devastating impacts on our health [and] environment"; and that they will enable insidious forces to "harvest our data and control our behavior."
During the pandemic, many conservatives turned against vaccines, both the companies that make them and the people who mandate we take them. But there is another issue that puts Kennedy and the right at odds.
Last year, National Review—in whose pages Dougherty and Scully gushed over Kennedy's refreshing seriousness—published a staff editorial claiming, "The U.S. should have zero hesitation to make use of its energy resources," summing it up with, "Drill, baby, drill!" And in July 2022, Carlson said on his Fox show, "Fossil fuels are the only thing that make the United States a rich country and not a poor country."
Kennedy, meanwhile, served on New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's commission on hydraulic fracturing, better known as "fracking"; the commission successfully lobbied Cuomo to ban the practice. In 2016, Kennedy secretly lobbied New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to impose a "corporate death penalty" by terminating ExxonMobil's authority to operate within the state. Kennedy's campaign website promises that his platform will include "curbing mining, logging, oil drilling, and suburban sprawl."
So, why would conservatives support a leftist with whom they agree on exactly one issue?
Last year, groups aligned with Democrats spent tens of millions of dollars boosting illiberal Republican primary candidates to sabotage moderate Republicans who would've had a better chance of winning a general election. Those fringe Republicans won their respective primaries but lost to Democrats in the November general elections. The practice was controversial even within the party: Thirty-five former Democratic elected officials condemned the tactic during the primary season, calling it "destructive" and "risky and unethical."
Perhaps Republicans are now boosting Kennedy—an eco-warrior who wants to jail his opponents and shut down companies that disagree with him—not out of a sincere desire to see him prevail but to weaken Joe Biden. Or maybe jailing opponents and shutting down dissident companies are now tenets of American conservatism.
Kennedy's actual viability in a Democratic primary is anyone's guess, but he is already polling better against Biden than any of President Donald Trump's intraparty challengers did in 2020.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Another egregiously far-left totalitarian-serving article from Reason.
This time they equate the following two very different things:
1. Funding and voting for a "sabotage" candidate in opposing party primaries.
2. Genuinely preferring one opposing party primary candidate over another on merit.
The difference, for those who might actually be stupid enough to believe that Reason is writing in good faith: is that Democrats don't actually prefer the Republican primary candidates that they support, while Republicans actually prefer Kennedy over Joe Biden's handlers.
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,300 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,300 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link—————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
I'd rather have DeSantis than Trump. I'd rather have Trump than RFK. I'd rather have RFK (or, to be honest, damned near anyone) than Biden.
This doesn't mean I "like" RFK. It means I'd prefer oral sodomy over anal sodomy.
Easily start receiving more than $600 every single day from home in your part time. i made $18781 from this job in my spare time afte my college. easy to do job and its regular income are awesome. no skills needed to do this job all you need to know is how to copy and paste stuff online. join this today by follow details on this page.
.
.
Apply Now Here———————————————->>> http://Www.Coins71.Com
Exactly.
An article questioning whether I "actually like" a particular candidate more than an imbecilic incumbent misses the point entirely. Biden is a disaster for our country, and the Democrat party seems determined to keep him in power. I want the Democrats cast aside. I want sane leadership, or saner leadership. I don't "like" Trump, which is good because I will never meet him, but he is competent and he does not embrace policies that are patently destructive of the US.
I think the more salient difference is:
1) Funding commercials and attack ads that pretend to be conservative attacks on the stronger candidate.
2) Writing in a conservative rag that no liberal primary voter will every read about how RFK is good on certain Conservative issues.
Lancaster is Reason's Intern. He cannot be expected to make coherent analogies.
Finally, my paycheck is $ 8,500 A working 10 hours per week online. My brother’s friend had an average of 12K for several months, he work about 22 hours a week. I can not believe how easy it is, once I try to do so. This is what I do....
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> https://www.apprichs.com
You can expand that to all Reason writers and editors.
Another whining, bootlicking, girl-bullying mystical bigot who can't afford a subscription to National Socialist Review. Sad.
There's really only one issue - Government of the People, by the People, and for the People, or NOT.
Kennedy, Gabbard, and Trump take the Yes.
The Establishment takes the NOT.
I'll take Kennedy over any of the Establishment vermin.
Nothing hurts Biden like Biden.
Nothing.
Kinda hoping a debate happens, somebody throws out a "dog-faced pony soldier", somebody throws a fist and RFK winds up actually hurting Biden.
Best! Presidential! Debate! Evah!
They’re both old. I see it going something like this…….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsve9wB_sEA
A truly epic battle.
Do Conservatives Actually Like RFK Jr.,
Speaking as a Libertarian, I say Like Father, Like Son, albeit for different reasons, so for me, No.
or Do They Just Think He’ll Hurt Biden?
In terms of coherence, he makes Biden look worse, but in terms of sinister proposals, it’s a wash (shower for RFKJr. and sponge bath for Biden.)
RFK Jr. has a lot of shitty ideas, but he's also one of the few people inside the cathedral calling the pig a 'pig' and not pretending it isn't there.
agreed….Do Conservatives Actually Like RFK Jr., or Do They Just Think He’ll Hurt Biden? who cares ? just what are you getting at with the question?
Maybe conservatives generally prefer and just want candidates that aren’t gaslighters… ones that actually believe the things they spout. At least then voters can be sure what they're voting for and that should [in a rational universe] ensure the democrats stay far, far away from the levers of power.
The dem voters and activists appear to want to be lied to. i think that they want the fairy tales so that they can then claim to be blameless afterwards when things go sideways. “But they said their policies would fix things….”
At a certain point in every governing experiment, the people look at the entire royal court and conclude that the Jester is their best bet.
RFK Kr. Would be a bad president. But he would likely be far better than the senile criminal traitor Biden. And yes, his primary value is absolutely to hurt Biden.
Which candidate do you low-life rednecks support?
The one who wants to give the death penalty to creeps who post links to CP.
Which candidate do you pederastic authoritarians support?
AOC? Bernie? another shot of Joe?
It’s not that difficult to understand that those of us who value liberty and free markets, for example, are getting desperate to find anyone who will stop the tyranny of the left.
Not a redneck you dumb cunt. Nor am I a pedophile like you. My education is far superior to yours, and I’m obviously much more intelligent.
There’s no point to your existence, other than to damage the rectums of prepubescent boys. Kill yourself.
1. Ron Paul
Those who are not libertarian:
1. Desantis
2. Trump
I like others who have no chance, unfortunately- Haley, for example.
The CIA and fbi would give him what is now called the kennedy
+1
That was funny.
Do conservatives like .... If the earth were flat, Reason would have fallen off the far left side long ago. What does liking someone have to do with anything when the choices (one obvious and the other being, are you kidding?) are framed as RFK vs. Biden?
For starters, they think Trump supporters actually like Trump, but they deny that Biden supporters like Biden.
For seconds, the idea of "lesser of two evils" is absent when Trump is one of those evils.
I haven't seen much bigotry from RFK Jr., so it can't be genuine fondness . . . must just be opportunism.
Of course, you can't see past your own bigotries there, hicklib Artie.
Half-educated, disaffected, roundly bigoted, on-the-spectrum, inconsequential right-wingers awaiting replacement are among my favorite culture war casualties . . . and the target audience of reason.com.
"U R A biggot!!"
*Immediately proceeds to be a bigot*
Standard progressive.
Why so irascible, Reverend? Find a bunch of your husband's moonshine jars while cleaning the double-wide? Or is it the diarrhea from last night's pruno?
The Great Dane decided to fuck the couch instead of him.
https://twitter.com/nationalpost/status/1658867582269546496?t=aXrDaeZQE1n3LfHXnqz4Pg&s=19
One third of Canadians fine with prescribing assisted suicide for homelessness
[Link]
I don’t know whether that’s sad or fucking hilarious. NYC is putting up immigrants in elementary schools and SF, LA, Seattle… all have homeless sleeping all over public parks and conservatives even hinting at “maybe we shouldn’t incentivize this activity” or “let’s not lionize Jordan Neely” are just callous racists who want to kill poor brown people. But up in the Great White North, there’s *one* homeless guy sleeping on a bench somewhere in Banff, 3 hikers, and two other Canadians muttering to each other “Getting crowded, eh? Fuckin’ disgusting.” “I knoo right? Time to purge urselves of the undesirables.”
"One third of Canadians fine with prescribing assisted suicide for homelessness"
We call them Québécois, and they're vicious in a way that only the perpetually placated are.
Seems reasonable.
TBH, doesn't "winter" tend to do that for you in Canada?
As a paleo-libertarian or conservatarian or whatever you deign to call me, I'll throw in my two cents. Do I "like" Kennedy? Sure. The same way I like Tulsi Gabbard, Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Tim Pool, or Jimmy Dore. It doesn't mean I agree with them. Or that I'd vote for them. But, it means more than I just think they'd hurt Biden or the Democrats. They're honorable adversaries. As much as I think they're wildly wrong about a great many things, they've given me reason to think they aren't fundamentally dishonest and corrupt. I can respect that. Because it's a great deal more than can be said of some establishment libertarians.
A very valid comment (hint this isn't sarcasm). Yeah, I can respect someone even if I don't agree with them. That used to be a norm. I can respect John Adams without liking his presidency (I respect the hell out of him for defending the commander of the guard detail that committed the Boston Massacre because of why he defended them despite his personal feelings). I can respect the Luftwaffe pilot who escorted a wounded B-17 out of German airspace and called in fake attack reports and launched fake attacks to keep other Luftwaffe planes from picking it off, without agreeing with what the side he was fighting for. I can respect Thomas Jackson and Erwin Rommel for their tactical genius without agreeing with their cause. I can respect Andrew Jackson's defense of New Orleans without endorsing his presidency or views on race. I can respect George Carlin for his whit and observational skills without endorsing his religious (yes, I view atheism as a religion just the same as theism). Whatever happened to this concept?
++
Yeah, liking is the wrong thing to be asking about. I have no idea if I like RFKjr or not. I like that he is challenging covid stuff. I'm happy to acknowledge narrow agreement on certain subjects.
I can also like someone who I disagree with about lots of things. And I can loathe Donald Trump as a person, and disagree with him about many things to the extent that I wouldn't vote for him and still think we'd be better off with him as president than Biden.
Exactly - to everyone commenting above.
It gives hope that there exist people on the other side that you can still get along with but disagree with. People of principle.
The ones you mention seem to be good examples of that, greenwald, kennedy, taibbi etc.
I always like being surprised by people I have reflexively disliked for 'non conscious' or stereotypical reasons and being forced to change my opinion of them. It gives me hope for myself - that I dont always have to be a creature of reflexive judgements. I dont like only being assaulted by the monolithic evil or mendacity of one side.
Bill Maher comes to mind for me, someone I instinctively disliked, but has become surprisingly tolerable lately. I even kinda enjoy his monologue. Still has nothing on Dennis Miller and "I don't want to get on a rant..." bit he did in his monologues. Even when I didn't agree with him, those were priceless.
Good list.
Even if they can be imbeciles on particular policy issues, fundamentally, all of them seem to believe in government of, by, and for the people.
Which makes them worthy of support in our 95%+ Government of, by, and for Power politics.
Prediction: they made up the "white supremacist" angle
https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1658637451752030208?t=iArV-6r3U5HM_X8jRbDH9Q&s=19
Dear @elonmusk: I’m genuinely curious where you get your information from. A RollingStone reporter reviewed the FBI bulletin on the mass shooter in Allen, TX. The FBI analyses revealed hundreds of neo-Nazi and white supremacist postings by the shooter.
[Link]
"RollingStone reporter"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/oxymoron
The funniest thing is, even the Rolling Stone article isn't devoid of "This shit doesn't add up and it's obvious." theorizing:
https://twitter.com/Oilfield_Rando/status/1658931360772358151?t=1Qt39IzVoUJ8FBbWrQkTiQ&s=19
Honestly, brilliant move by the American Stasi to recruit squads of AWFLs. No other demographic is more ruthless, dangerous, and totally loyal to the any-means-necessary Woke regime.
Bad times ahead.
[Link]
FBI harrassing the families of progressive anti-abortion protesters? I'm sure ENB will be right on that.
No other demographic is more ruthless, dangerous, and totally loyal to the any-means-necessary Woke regime.
It’s not ruthless or dangerous it’s the totally loyal numbers with nothing better to do. I’ve dealt with the FBI exactly twice in my life and that demonstration was a farce of unprofessionalism that would’ve gotten them laughed off the porch of anyone except a fellow AWF.
You don’t know that this isn’t my kid's residence, but you’ve got something to tell them that you can’t tell me, their parent, *if* I can put you in touch with them? Fuck you. Get off my porch. Get a warrant. And I advise you don’t let Ms. “I can’t work a spiral bound notebook./Jot my number at the top of the page.” even touch it before you give it to me. Holy Shit.
From the clarity of Australia, I cant see Kennedy losing (and not just because I love JFK). Firstly, a Kennedy is not an outsider. Secondly, the topics he raises are mainstream even in Australia, so to even suggest he is a nutcase talking fringe issues in America is absurd. Thirdly, the media is running scared. That means he is in with a real chance. Fourthly, Biden and Trump are his competition. Fifthly, he is a Kennedy and middle America loves a Kennedy presidency. Thus why the media is smearing him. Sixthly, he is an incredibly articulate speaker for an American in the 21st century. Let's face it, American politics at this moment in time is not a shining example of oratory abilities.
A good orator does not a good president make.
But could be very electable.
This. "Good president" and "electable" are basically orthogonal.
Re the “clarity of Australia”, I can tell you that you are misinformed on every point you make.
PS: “Middle America” never liked a Kennedy, voted for Nixon in 1960, and didn’t support Ted Kennedy against Jimmy Carter.
40% of people being anti-vax is still "the fringe" to Reason editors.
When someone is against all vaccines, not just experimental vaccines released without the many years of testing that is normally required, that person _is_ fringe.
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1658931091737124864?t=Yb_4z0LQXCgB71mlXvk0xA&s=19
BREAKING: Suspect Zion Teasley in stabbing of Phoenix jogger told police he ‘wanted to look like her,’ uses ‘they/them’ pronouns on LinkedIn, was 'confused about his sexuality'
Lauren Heike, 29, was found stabbed 15 times
Teasley was linked to the crime through DNA on Heike’s shoe along with other forensic evidence including cell phone location data. After records turned up his name, detectives went to his former workplace, a sportswear store just a short distance from the trail, ex-coworkers there recognized him wearing clothes he was suspected of stealing from the store. They also said that was he fired for being aggressive toward female employees.
[Link]
"The real problem is the patriarchy forcing women to wear clothes." - Reason
The problem here is a spelling error. It's women who go nuts because some other woman is showing a bit more than they would. So the real problem is the _matriarchy_ forcing women to wear clothes.
Tucker Carlson said of Kennedy on his Fox News show, "it's nice to have a truth teller around."
This is what sets RFK Jr apart from his party members. I may not agree with his policies, but he seems to be generally honest. In contrast with the rest of the national democrats.
See Jean-Pierre
My question: do the Biden supporting fugazi libertarians of Reason REALLY like Sleepy Joe, or do they just think that their beloved democratic party is in such an utterly dismal state right now that they simply have no better alternative to turn to?
“My question: do the Biden supporting fugazi libertarians of Reason REALLY like Sleepy Joe,”
Biden got to where he is because either it was his turn or he was thought better than the alternative. Not because anybody liked him. His only plausible rivals were Trump or Bernie Sanders, an anti-capitalist independent.
I have a feeling that the grand finale of 2024 will feature neither Biden nor Trump. Kennedy may be there. And he’s got enough charisma to get the Biden voters who voted Trump in 2016, and the Trump voters who voted for Obama in 2012. In other words, he doesn’t need the support of conservatives.
There's been only two (or is it one?) Reason writers who ever said they were voting for Biden in 2020. One of them, I can't remember her name but she was an over-the-top TDS sufferer, got fired. I also see no hints of closet Biden support in the current stable of writers.
Go back and check the article. It was over 50%.
"Go back and check the article. It was over 50%."
That would make it reflective of the nation as a whole. Trump never managed to get 50% in his two elections.
Yeah, 2020 wasn't a good look for them. In the past the accusations that Reason writers went for democrats was nonsense. In 2020 it was more valid.
That's because if you aren't thoroughly TDS-addled, water-carrying shill, you're as mentally and technologically enfeebled as Biden:
https://reason.com/2020/10/12/how-will-reason-staffers-vote-in-2020/
Dalmia was the one who was let go. The rest are all still writing for Reason and maybe only Riggs and Weissmuller pre-date the Trump era at Reason.
*This is an oft-repeated classic line because it perfectly demonstrates that Boehm is only a libertarian when it doesn't matter, and maybe not even then and is continually echoed throughout Reason's writing. Libertarianism is a mask they wear to costume parties with their leftist friends.
"This is an oft-repeated classic line because it perfectly demonstrates that Boehm is only a libertarian when it doesn’t matter, "
Elections don't matter. The game is rigged. What matters if whether he's a Libertarian in real life, dealing with real people in real situations. What's disturbing is that so many, taken in by the spectacle, bothered to vote at all.
Sure, his first term was an unmitigated disaster on multiple fronts, and his declining mental faculties will undoubtedly deteriorate further, but his opponent, Candidate X, is on the wrong side of the culture war, so we will reluctantly and strategically vote for President Biden for a second term...
Whenever Reason writers realize (alliteration) that they have gotten a bit too carried away with their "Orange Man Bad" tirades, they pay penance by finding something bad to say about some Democrat somewhere. The Democrats are desperately struggling to unstick themselves from the asphalt bairn also known as Slow Joe that they saddled themselves with (mixed metaphor) in time to rescue their seriously endangered 2024 Presidential election chances by throwing their standard bearer under the bus, but so far have not found an even remotely plausible replacement. Don't let them off the hook, guys. The GOP is also having a difficult time divorcing themselves from Orange Man, who just keeps digging the hole they're in deeper and deeper. I think I'm going to need to pop some more popcorn!
"The Democrats are desperately struggling to unstick themselves from the asphalt bairn also known as Slow Joe that they saddled themselves with (mixed metaphor) in time to rescue their seriously endangered 2024 Presidential election chances"
Biden has been good for the Democrats. He beat Trump in 2020 and the party did much better than expected in 2022.He's managed to keep his left flank at bay despite backtracking on student loans and fossil fuel drilling. He's also managed to keep his right flank happy by backtracking on student loans and fossil fuel drilling. The party is a lot more unified than the opposition.
I think he was chosen back in 2020 as the best they had to win the election, but nobody was contemplating his run in 2024. It was assumed that he's bow out gracefully and someone younger would fill his shoes. I don't think he'll be there in November, for what's it's worth. Same for Trump.
I think he was chosen back in 2020 as the best they had to win the election, but nobody was contemplating his run in 2024.
I disagree. He was not chosen because he was "the best they had to win the election" he was chosen because he was seen as a useful tool for the neocons to manipulate. He was chosen because he is clearly in steep, STEEP cognitive decline, and can be handed documents to be signed by deep state apparatchiks, without even knowing what's in them.
If you remember back to 2020, Joe Biden wasn't even leading the pack of Democrats in the primaries and they did everything they could to sideline plausible Democratic candidates to hustle Biden to the front. If Joe Biden had been sailing through the primaries as the frontrunner from day one, I think the "best option to beat Trump" theory would hold more water.
Postscript: It's why you don't see me (not that my comments really matter that much, except to maybe one or two other commenters here) focus on Biden for direct criticism. I don't stew in my livingroom about how much I hate Biden, or how this Biden or that Biden policy is going to ruin the country.
Biden is not running anything. It's "the men in grey suits" who are running things, and everyone in Washington knows it.
Yes, Biden is a "weak man" and therefore untrustworthy, but purveyors of court intrigues love weak men at the helm, that way they can run their schemes without interference because they have a pliant figurehead at the helm.
"Biden is not running anything. "
The same people run the show whether the president is Trump or Biden. You must have got the news for example that Rex Tillerson Secretary of State colluded with other cabinet members to distract Trump with fluff like annexing Greenland while they took care of serious business.
Presidents change but that doesn't mean our companies change their CEOs or universities change their professors. The deep state remains. Some shuffling of highly visible seats in courts etc but not much else.
" he was chosen because he was seen as a useful tool for the neocons to manipulate."
By that standard, they could have chosen just about anyone. You really don't think Biden is unique in that regard, do you?
"they did everything they could to sideline plausible Democratic candidates to hustle Biden to the front."
What plausible rivals did he have? Women? They got burned with Hilary and I don't think they would go with a woman unless it was a sure thing. And there were no sure things among the women rivals. The primaries proved that. Bernie Sanders? An anti-capitalist leftist and not even a Democrat.
Biden had wits enough to debate Trump to a standstill, that was more than enough. Whether he has the wits to debate RFK this time around is another question. If he doesn't debate, it might prove his undoing. Same if he does.
By that standard, they could have chosen just about anyone. You really don’t think Biden is unique in that regard, do you?
Yes... he is absolutely unique. And I thought I was clear why.
Do you really think that every Democratic candidate can be manipulated the way Biden can?
What plausible rivals did he have? Women? They got burned with Hilary and I don’t think they would go with a woman unless it was a sure thing. And there were no sure things among the women rivals.
It's a shaved pair of dice. They wanted Hillary because she was 100% on their side, but just because the dice is shaved doesn't mean they win every roll. And I'm not sure why you're focused on "women". I'm not even looking at this in terms of "women" vs "men". I'm looking at it in terms of who can advance Goliath's agenda? The person with a mind of their own who's not going to sign everything that slides in front of you, or the person who can be told what to do, when to do it and how to do it? That was Joe Biden.
" I’m looking at it in terms of who can advance Goliath’s agenda?"
I disagree with this. The agenda advances under its own momentum. A juggernaut, if you'll pardon my Sanskrit. Presidential power is incidental. Sometimes they can be truly important in changing direction and taking the lead, but this is exceptional.
"And I’m not sure why you’re focused on “women”.
I'm only focused on women because the field seemed heavy with them, if memory serves, and none were inspiring. There were men of course, that gay mayor with the weird name, and Sanders. Again, pass and pass again.
I agree with most of the points both of you are making, but lean towards the "Biden is unusually susceptible to manipulation" theory. Either way my point that he may have been useful for defeating Trump but now he's an increasingly severe liability for the DNC seems to be unchallenged. Tulsi Gabbard, for example, was an almost perfect Democratic candidate to break the White House glass ceiling in 2020 but now all of the potential younger generation of Democrats seem to have faded into the shrubbery and I can't say that I blame them.
Are the Democrats ready to give up the far-left nihilism and head for the center? Maybe even try a candidate with a modicum of integrity for a change?
I'm not holding my breath, but I wish Kennedy well.
-jcr
My guess is, it's a combination of both. Welcome to politics.
Fantasy headlines in 2019:
Do Democrats really like Joe Biden, or do they think he'll hurt Trump?
Do Democrats really believe masks work, or do they see them as symbols of #MAGAResistance?
We can play this game all day.
Oh, and by the way, "Hurting Joe Biden" is "hurting the neocon deepstate" so... ok.
As a conservative/populist, I don't like most of Kennedy's policy ideas, but they are far and away more moderate and more acceptable than those of the current administration or most of the 24 Democratic candidates for president in 2020.
But Kennedy says he wants to shut down the Deep State, as his father and uncle were killed for trying to do -- and if he means it, and does it, we will overlook all the rest and support him. The 3-letter agencies have made a joke of our Republic, and we want it back.
Consider that there are "conservatives" who don't like Trump and have no confidence that he or any Republican could get elected president in 2024. Does it not seem possible that they would cast about for any Democrat who they might consider would make a better president than Biden? Especially if some few points they agree with Kennedy on might be of great importance to them.
Consider that there are “conservatives” who don’t like Trump and have no confidence that he or any Republican could get elected president in 2024.
My only thoughts on this is that most of those "conservatives" (paying respect to your scare quotes) probably wouldn't like BFK jr either. I'm sort of thinking of the "conservatives" who voted for Hillary in 2016. *cough* P.J. O'Rourke *cough*
The best thing about RFK Jr is that he exposes the suburban proggies for the pussies that they are. A lot like what Trump did to the establishment club republicans. He calls them on their own bullshit which is a beautiful thing. He has no chance but it will be fun to see him maybe get close.
Probably a bit of both. The democrat side of the uni-party meddled in the republican side of the uni-party nomination process. This sets a precedent and karma is bound to occur and bite them in the butt.
RFK Jr. is correct on some key issues that republicans would agree with. With the sequel of "Idiot Geezers for Resident" likely to afflict us again in 2024, many voters are grasping for alternatives.
Fact is that RFK Jr. is less bad that the two idiot geezers that the uni-party is likely to nominate.
Do Conservatives Actually Like RFK Jr., or Do They Just Think He'll Hurt Biden?
NO. The vast majority of conservatives DO NOT like RFK Jr, OR pretend to support him.
Taking YOUR statements about what some people connected to the Republican party have said about RFK Jr at face value, you cited ZERO support for him. The statements you refer to are more historical comments, or observations of his likely impact than any kind of support.
I would think it is about 50/50. They like his honesty, but not a lot of his policies. While he supports free speech and is honest about the vaccine campaigns, he is still for liberal statism.
RFK jr. is not the first spoiler, Bush one would have been President if not for Ross Perot. Then there are others like Nader, that tried to play the spoiler role, but had no real impact on the election.
Nothing new to see here.
I don't know but I'd bet most of it is the knowledge that it is actuarilly likely that we will have a President Kamala. What fool wants that.
Mebbe Kennedy could hurl himself down a flight of stairs and get the Gerald Ford caucus to switch Kleptocracy factions...
As progressive leftists they cannot be anything else. There isn't a topic where they are not pro-government, pro-Marxist and pro-DNC (but I repeat myself).