https://twitter.com/fraude_101/status/1664953643777523712?s=46&t=RKQIqRrKzVps835SSEmebA
8 Likes
Whoooooo boy
6 Likes
3 Likes
Shocker
nvm. i misunderstood
What are the Unstuck cliffs on Robert Kennedy Jr. as a presidential candidate?
Starting to see Jack and a few other tech bros surprisingly stan for him, so Iām sure he canāt be popular around these parts?
Lol anti-vaxxer. And by anti-vaxxer, not just COVID, but someone who believes vaccines cause autism. Also AIDS denialism. In theory supports a lot of things to the left of Biden, butā¦no, justā¦no. I canāt take him seriously.
2 Likes
This made me think of a hypothetical. An antivaxxer president that also supported universal healthcare (ignoring the unlikeliness of this combo) would probably be a net positive on national health compared to a regular Democrat.
In theory this is possible, in reality an anti-vaxxer that supports universal healthcare is going to institute a national program that bans science based treatments but the government will pay to have someone evaluate your chakras.
2 Likes
Weāre never winning the Senate back until like 2028 if ever so who cares
Good thing the GOP will never eliminate the filibuster
1 Like
So #MarianneWilliamson2024 ?
1 Like
What about a racist who also supported universal health care?
Also an unlikely combo but probably better than most democrats, assuming āuniversal health careā means āuniversalā and not āfor white peopleā. But thatās a less interesting hypothetical, I was more interested in how the negative health impact of promoting antivax compared to the positive health impact of universal healthcare, with my assumption being that the latter is greater.
Promoting antivax with the biggest bully pulpit is much more harmful for public health than the difference between Obamacare and UHC. It would likely lead to removal of requirements for mandatory vaccines to attend school which in turn would lead to public health crises the universal system wouldnāt be able to bear.
This is apart from the even more problematic issue with embracing irrationalism.
I feel like thereās a huge amount of uncertainty around this.
No doubt some people are going to lose benefits, but the CBO projects a net increase in SNAP spending:
Republicans, in response, are just covering their ears and saying āno it wonātā:
āThe estimates are wrong. Theyāre just wrong,ā Rep. Garret Graves, R-La., said in a news conference Wednesday alongside his fellow GOP negotiator Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina.
In addition to the CBOās analysis, a Wharton analysis comes to a similar conclusion:
rfkjr lunacy doesnāt bother me as a likely risk, but iām actually pretty rattled that cheryl hines is involved in this.