I'm not sure the abortion issue is running against Kennedy. The majority are for a middle ground where abortion is legal with limits. 15 weeks might be a little soon for most Democrats, but its not far off from the consensus ideas. The lack of popularity of current Covid boosters speaks to a certain open mindedness about vaccines that wasn't there 5 years ago. Kennedy's ideas are much more far ranging than Silver gives him credit for and when the public starts to pay attention they will get the light of day. Whether those ideas gain enough currency to effect an election is still an open question to me.
A fifteen-week limit on abortion would put give the US similar abortion restrictions to most European countries. A fifteen-week-old fetus is staring to develop hardened bones and the ability to hear sound.
It's actually more liberal than most European countries, which end at the first trimester or 14 weeks. I don't agree either with Silver's take on this; I would love to see the TV ads the Democrats are going to run defending abortion on demand after 15 weeks. They won't be able to exploit the rape issue, which they've so far done ruthlessly and effectively. The issue won't help them but would expose their radicalism.
You won't see ads like that. They don't talk about the party position of abortion up to birth. It is a loser. If they talk about after 15 weeks it will open them to questions about all the way to birth. I'm not saying that democrat voters all agree with that but abortion up to birth is the democrat party position.
I haven't kept up. What booster number are we at (4?) The Noahpinion substack published a graph showing the initial vaccine substantially reduced deth rate over non vaxxed. But the same graph shows no difference between initially vaxxed and boosters people (the chart did not say how many were received)
So you would only like to see one side of the story? There are plenty of positive RFK stories out there to read. This one is a possible explanation to what an RFK third party run could look like and why. The research was done and Americans have decided if they think he's right for wrong. This kind of story is why the word "Free" is in The Free Press.
Hey William, don't get me wrong, we are big Free Press fans over here at DWYT. But, this is about the 4th or 5th piece The FP has done on RFK, all with several digs, often unfair, and a negative bent. ("like Trump, he has sometimes endorsed conspiracy theories." and "Kennedy has expressed a number of views, like on the link between vaccines and autism, that are outside of the scientific consensus.") Very mainstream-media-ish and not very free-press-ish. It's weird too because the rest of the Free Press articles are generally not at all like this. I personally have a hunch at Bari doesn't agree with RFKs vax views, but I trust that she's one who will to continue to seek truth.
I know a lot of people (myself included) who are looking to vote 3rd party if the race is Trump vs. Biden again. This could be the best chance for a 3rd party candidate since Perot.
Mr. Silver's calculations here don't seem to tap the vein, as it were. The abortion issue is a middle-ground, or a nuclear option in most voters' minds. Moderating is probably good and works in Kennedy's favor. It's really funny to read Silver say that Kennedy's vaccine skepticism is a negative. His skepticism has borne good fruit, I'd say-and that shows in that most people in the U.S. aren't getting the next vax, and Europe has recommended against it for anyone under 65 or who is immune-compromised in certain situations. But most importantly, I think the odds favor the simple truth that Biden will not be the Democratic nominee. That's speculation, sure. But it's looking more and more to be the case.
This is an interesting perspective. One small criticism -- I may be wrong (I don't have all the poll data available that Nate does), but my impression is that this is a bit of a mischaracterization:
> particularly from the suburban, college-educated base that Biden and other Democrats have increasingly come to rely upon.
That's not a stable group to rely upon in 2024. It might have been in 2016. But that's a group that's increasingly split along gender lines and a group that's always been the quickest to politically realign. The suburban educated group is more of the "swing" votes that could propel Biden into office, give RFK his boost, or realign behind Trump if their gas and grocery bills get high enough or crimes pills into their neighborhoods. They're obviously the group Biden/dems are pandering to the hardest right now, because the dems can (mostly) count on black and Hispanic votes. But it's hardly a "base", rather it's the group that needs to be won over.
Biden's "base" seems to be essentially tribalist minority voters, often single-issue or identity-politics-only voters, usually from the inner cities. The "black bloc" seems to be breaking a bit in the polls; black voters are slowly abandoning Biden (91% of black voters supported Biden in 2020, polls point to it being 80-85% now, but still a pretty large margin). Hispanic voters also seem to be slightly tearing on various issues. But I'd still characterize these groups as a much more predictable "always vote blue" than highly educated voters.
Kennedy is definitely a wild card. I moved across to vote for Trump 2 times. Kennedy stands for everything I backed originally as a Democrat. But there's the pull of voting for Trump to make the statement that the people still have a say in their government, no matter how hard the establishment tries to ignore that. The current Democrat behavior is abhorrent and it needs to be eradicated by any means possible. Trump seems to be that means.
I would argue RFK Jr is also that means (there's a reason the Dems hate him), and would also make a statement. And between him and Trump, I think RFK Jr would affect much more change because he's much more familiar with what happens behind the scenes, having fought against government corruption in the alphabet agencies for decades.
Thought about that too. But the fear is he would still be surrounded by a Dem admin and after seeing who they really are, I’m not sure I’m willing to take that chance.
Understandable. However, since he's more of a centrist (and muckraker), I'd bet money he would surround himself with like-minded officials of all political stripes. He's not the type to toe the party line.
Talk of third party voting spoiling the election for whatever side holds the country back from breaking the 2 party strangle hold on our politics. Remember, 2 choices is only one more choice than you get in a dictatorship. If we ever want to have a true variety of choices, we need to play the long game and be willing to take a risk on the short-term election outcome.
I've been saying this for years. Too many people have been indoctrinated into thinking there are only 2 choices. And I continually argue that if most people voted 3rd party, we could finally break that (imagined) stranglehold.
Someone should write an article about how it could hurt both Trump and Biden because he could win. I you listen to interviews with RFK Jr., Trump, and Biden, He is the only one that seems to be relatively intelligent and reasonable, and honest. People still have over a year to grudgingly accept this reality. And, most importantly, he has the best campaign logo. Just seeing the name Kennedy has a psychological effect.
It doesn't hurt Biden because Democrats are fanatics now who vote party line more so than the GOP. However, it doesn't really hurt Trump either since those voters who voted for him in 2020 are likely to vote for him again for the same reasons: to stop the fanatics. The RFK voters are a subset of the Democrats -- call them the Bret Weinstein, Heather Heying, vaccine-skeptical people -- who would never have voted for Trump anyway.
People like Matt Taibbi who didn't vote in 2020 because he couldn't vote for either might turn out for RFK, Jr. If you voted for Trump chances are you'll vote for him again. I might have voted for RFK but he refuses to take a firm stand against "Gender Affirming Care" so I cannot vote for him. I will only vote for the candidate who can make the promise to end it for young people.
You never know. A lot can happen in a year. I would also argue there are more former Trump supporters who will vote RFK this time around. My basis for that is the countless comments I see under articles, YouTube videos and podcasts stating some version of, "I voted for Trump twice, but RFK Jr has my vote in 2024." It really surprised me at first.
Kennedy should have just as much of a chance as any candidate, and given what we have gone through over the past few election cycles I believe people are pretty fed up with this two party system. When the party doesn’t even want to allow for a debate between the current democratic candidates, of which there are several, and the president which puts our democratic values in jeopardy. The polls are showing that almost 3/4 of the population DO NOT want this rematch between Trump and Biden. Time for some new ideas because the old ways aren’t cutting it anymore, and we are on the precipice of disaster in this country if we continue down the same path.
This piece reads too much like one from the legacy/mainstream media (never mind how much it cites those outlets). "Endorses conspiracy theories" (easy to believe if you don't read the research he cites); "has views outside the scientific consensus" ("consensus" only because all dissenting views are censored); "doesn’t think it’s realistic to reduce gun violence" (he actually said it's not realistic to believe gun control will reduce gun violence because prescription meds are potentially the bigger culprit); "claimed that Covid vaccines are ethnically targeted” (CONTEXT, Nate - he said the virus disproportionately afflicted some ethnicities more than others); "said the 2004 election was stolen from John Kerry" (voting machine tampering was a huge story in that election, for which a lot of other people were crying foul, as well). When you rely on legacy media for your sources, it's no wonder you come away with distorted views.
I've listened to RFK, Jr. quite a bit and like a lot of what he says. But I'm about 99% likely to vote for the GOP nominee for two reasons: (1) on some issues like affirmative action and climate change, I strongly disagree with Bobby; and (2) no third-party candidate has a decent chance of winning in a country that has two strong, dominant parties. I'm hoping Trump isn't the GOP nominee but I won't hesitate to vote for him if he is.
This heading says all you need to know about this article. The author makes a great effort in this "both sides of the issue" piece, but in the end the reader is no wiser
for reading it. In other words, a "nothing burger"!
Never Trump Republicans voted for Biden last time, while Democrats uncomfortable with Biden hold their nose and vote for him anyway, they would never vote for Trump. Both groups might go for RFK if given the option, which would be a net loss for Biden.
I'm not sure the abortion issue is running against Kennedy. The majority are for a middle ground where abortion is legal with limits. 15 weeks might be a little soon for most Democrats, but its not far off from the consensus ideas. The lack of popularity of current Covid boosters speaks to a certain open mindedness about vaccines that wasn't there 5 years ago. Kennedy's ideas are much more far ranging than Silver gives him credit for and when the public starts to pay attention they will get the light of day. Whether those ideas gain enough currency to effect an election is still an open question to me.
A fifteen-week limit on abortion would put give the US similar abortion restrictions to most European countries. A fifteen-week-old fetus is staring to develop hardened bones and the ability to hear sound.
It's actually more liberal than most European countries, which end at the first trimester or 14 weeks. I don't agree either with Silver's take on this; I would love to see the TV ads the Democrats are going to run defending abortion on demand after 15 weeks. They won't be able to exploit the rape issue, which they've so far done ruthlessly and effectively. The issue won't help them but would expose their radicalism.
You won't see ads like that. They don't talk about the party position of abortion up to birth. It is a loser. If they talk about after 15 weeks it will open them to questions about all the way to birth. I'm not saying that democrat voters all agree with that but abortion up to birth is the democrat party position.
They'll talk about rare heart-rending edge cases, and use euphemisms to describe the much more common and less defensible abortions.
I haven't kept up. What booster number are we at (4?) The Noahpinion substack published a graph showing the initial vaccine substantially reduced deth rate over non vaxxed. But the same graph shows no difference between initially vaxxed and boosters people (the chart did not say how many were received)
You just can't run a positive RFK article can you Bari. Is it the vaccine issue. Do the research. He's right.
So you would only like to see one side of the story? There are plenty of positive RFK stories out there to read. This one is a possible explanation to what an RFK third party run could look like and why. The research was done and Americans have decided if they think he's right for wrong. This kind of story is why the word "Free" is in The Free Press.
Hey William, don't get me wrong, we are big Free Press fans over here at DWYT. But, this is about the 4th or 5th piece The FP has done on RFK, all with several digs, often unfair, and a negative bent. ("like Trump, he has sometimes endorsed conspiracy theories." and "Kennedy has expressed a number of views, like on the link between vaccines and autism, that are outside of the scientific consensus.") Very mainstream-media-ish and not very free-press-ish. It's weird too because the rest of the Free Press articles are generally not at all like this. I personally have a hunch at Bari doesn't agree with RFKs vax views, but I trust that she's one who will to continue to seek truth.
Bari released this (softball, in my opinion) interview with RFK Jr. https://www.thefp.com/p/rfk-jr-is-striking-a-nerve-he-explains-e06
He certainly got his chance to express his positions on Bari's site.
I know a lot of people (myself included) who are looking to vote 3rd party if the race is Trump vs. Biden again. This could be the best chance for a 3rd party candidate since Perot.
Were you former Biden or Trump voter? I was Trump and am definitely leaning toward RFK Jr.
I'm an independent, and he's getting my vote no matter which party he runs in.
Mr. Silver's calculations here don't seem to tap the vein, as it were. The abortion issue is a middle-ground, or a nuclear option in most voters' minds. Moderating is probably good and works in Kennedy's favor. It's really funny to read Silver say that Kennedy's vaccine skepticism is a negative. His skepticism has borne good fruit, I'd say-and that shows in that most people in the U.S. aren't getting the next vax, and Europe has recommended against it for anyone under 65 or who is immune-compromised in certain situations. But most importantly, I think the odds favor the simple truth that Biden will not be the Democratic nominee. That's speculation, sure. But it's looking more and more to be the case.
I agree. Don't know how they will get him to change his mind, but I think he will.
He has no mind to change. He will be told.
Either way.
This is an interesting perspective. One small criticism -- I may be wrong (I don't have all the poll data available that Nate does), but my impression is that this is a bit of a mischaracterization:
> particularly from the suburban, college-educated base that Biden and other Democrats have increasingly come to rely upon.
That's not a stable group to rely upon in 2024. It might have been in 2016. But that's a group that's increasingly split along gender lines and a group that's always been the quickest to politically realign. The suburban educated group is more of the "swing" votes that could propel Biden into office, give RFK his boost, or realign behind Trump if their gas and grocery bills get high enough or crimes pills into their neighborhoods. They're obviously the group Biden/dems are pandering to the hardest right now, because the dems can (mostly) count on black and Hispanic votes. But it's hardly a "base", rather it's the group that needs to be won over.
Biden's "base" seems to be essentially tribalist minority voters, often single-issue or identity-politics-only voters, usually from the inner cities. The "black bloc" seems to be breaking a bit in the polls; black voters are slowly abandoning Biden (91% of black voters supported Biden in 2020, polls point to it being 80-85% now, but still a pretty large margin). Hispanic voters also seem to be slightly tearing on various issues. But I'd still characterize these groups as a much more predictable "always vote blue" than highly educated voters.
Kennedy is definitely a wild card. I moved across to vote for Trump 2 times. Kennedy stands for everything I backed originally as a Democrat. But there's the pull of voting for Trump to make the statement that the people still have a say in their government, no matter how hard the establishment tries to ignore that. The current Democrat behavior is abhorrent and it needs to be eradicated by any means possible. Trump seems to be that means.
I would argue RFK Jr is also that means (there's a reason the Dems hate him), and would also make a statement. And between him and Trump, I think RFK Jr would affect much more change because he's much more familiar with what happens behind the scenes, having fought against government corruption in the alphabet agencies for decades.
Thought about that too. But the fear is he would still be surrounded by a Dem admin and after seeing who they really are, I’m not sure I’m willing to take that chance.
Understandable. However, since he's more of a centrist (and muckraker), I'd bet money he would surround himself with like-minded officials of all political stripes. He's not the type to toe the party line.
AGREE.
Talk of third party voting spoiling the election for whatever side holds the country back from breaking the 2 party strangle hold on our politics. Remember, 2 choices is only one more choice than you get in a dictatorship. If we ever want to have a true variety of choices, we need to play the long game and be willing to take a risk on the short-term election outcome.
I've been saying this for years. Too many people have been indoctrinated into thinking there are only 2 choices. And I continually argue that if most people voted 3rd party, we could finally break that (imagined) stranglehold.
Someone should write an article about how it could hurt both Trump and Biden because he could win. I you listen to interviews with RFK Jr., Trump, and Biden, He is the only one that seems to be relatively intelligent and reasonable, and honest. People still have over a year to grudgingly accept this reality. And, most importantly, he has the best campaign logo. Just seeing the name Kennedy has a psychological effect.
It doesn't hurt Biden because Democrats are fanatics now who vote party line more so than the GOP. However, it doesn't really hurt Trump either since those voters who voted for him in 2020 are likely to vote for him again for the same reasons: to stop the fanatics. The RFK voters are a subset of the Democrats -- call them the Bret Weinstein, Heather Heying, vaccine-skeptical people -- who would never have voted for Trump anyway.
People like Matt Taibbi who didn't vote in 2020 because he couldn't vote for either might turn out for RFK, Jr. If you voted for Trump chances are you'll vote for him again. I might have voted for RFK but he refuses to take a firm stand against "Gender Affirming Care" so I cannot vote for him. I will only vote for the candidate who can make the promise to end it for young people.
You never know. A lot can happen in a year. I would also argue there are more former Trump supporters who will vote RFK this time around. My basis for that is the countless comments I see under articles, YouTube videos and podcasts stating some version of, "I voted for Trump twice, but RFK Jr has my vote in 2024." It really surprised me at first.
He will pull those who are angry about the vaccine and there are many of them.
Kennedy should have just as much of a chance as any candidate, and given what we have gone through over the past few election cycles I believe people are pretty fed up with this two party system. When the party doesn’t even want to allow for a debate between the current democratic candidates, of which there are several, and the president which puts our democratic values in jeopardy. The polls are showing that almost 3/4 of the population DO NOT want this rematch between Trump and Biden. Time for some new ideas because the old ways aren’t cutting it anymore, and we are on the precipice of disaster in this country if we continue down the same path.
Watching Nate Silver is reminiscent of early Tulsi Gabbard.
One is certain that in the near future the light bulb will switch on.
This piece reads too much like one from the legacy/mainstream media (never mind how much it cites those outlets). "Endorses conspiracy theories" (easy to believe if you don't read the research he cites); "has views outside the scientific consensus" ("consensus" only because all dissenting views are censored); "doesn’t think it’s realistic to reduce gun violence" (he actually said it's not realistic to believe gun control will reduce gun violence because prescription meds are potentially the bigger culprit); "claimed that Covid vaccines are ethnically targeted” (CONTEXT, Nate - he said the virus disproportionately afflicted some ethnicities more than others); "said the 2004 election was stolen from John Kerry" (voting machine tampering was a huge story in that election, for which a lot of other people were crying foul, as well). When you rely on legacy media for your sources, it's no wonder you come away with distorted views.
I've listened to RFK, Jr. quite a bit and like a lot of what he says. But I'm about 99% likely to vote for the GOP nominee for two reasons: (1) on some issues like affirmative action and climate change, I strongly disagree with Bobby; and (2) no third-party candidate has a decent chance of winning in a country that has two strong, dominant parties. I'm hoping Trump isn't the GOP nominee but I won't hesitate to vote for him if he is.
"Still, Kennedy’s Effects Are Hard to Predict"
This heading says all you need to know about this article. The author makes a great effort in this "both sides of the issue" piece, but in the end the reader is no wiser
for reading it. In other words, a "nothing burger"!
No, not nothing. I am now equipped with language for discussions with people calling rfk a democratic spoiler. Already this article is helping rfk lol
Call me stuffy, but I won;t vote for anyone that wears shoes without socks. Yecchh!
Stop being a one issue voter! (ha ha)
Never Trump Republicans voted for Biden last time, while Democrats uncomfortable with Biden hold their nose and vote for him anyway, they would never vote for Trump. Both groups might go for RFK if given the option, which would be a net loss for Biden.