US Politics

Ha! So true...

In all seriousness, I reckon it's just a loyalty test for the Republican senators if they vote them in + a demonstration of rewards for longer-term loyalty. Then could then bin some the first tranche of nominees pretty quickly, when they aren't of use anymore.

If that is a possibility I think it's more likely to be a cynical move on his political supporters now they are of limited use.

E.g. Kennedy

• Bannon helps to amplify him to draw dem support.
  
• Over time it appears that he's actually drawing Trump support.
  
• They get him to endorse Trump for the post of health secretary.
  
• they nominate Kennedy as agreed, what are the possible outcomes? A) he goes through. Fine. Whatever. They've followed through on the deal and then will chuck him out when he fucks up. B) he gets rejected. Whatever. They've followed through on the deal "but hey my hands are tied, don't worry I'll find you something, the best something, something better than something".
  

Do you think he is suitable for the role? Or any cabinet role?

Letting some get rejected strengthens Trumps hand when he really wants to push a candidate through. Inching the window of normal over a bit to get who he actually wants in.

Name 1 republican senator that is not going to confirm one of his picks? Some of them may grumble, but they'll all vote exactly the way he wants. It's going to be this for at least 2 years.

Lisa Murkowski maybe.

I think she'll fall into line, but let's see

Who knows but there is a chance. The nominations are so wild, it gives me the feels that Trump is playing it or is daring someone to step out of line.

It the senate leader calls a recess he can push them all through without senate conformation. It could be preferable for him to have candidates who can't get confirmed as he could strong arm the senate leader to call a recess. This will 1, normalise the process, passing more power to the potus, 2 set up enemies for him to play off in the future.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/nov/15/pharma-shares-trump-rfk-jr-health-vaccine-drugmakers-moderna-astrazeneca-gsk?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

This is of course something his supporters love cos "big pharma bad" and that might be the strategic reason behind it.

Or in a messed up but legal way shorting stock for trump mates.

He's also an hiv causes aids denier, "nice" (sigh...)

I would love to be proved wrong, but Trump's stranglehold on the republican party is complete. It was pretty much done when the senate failed to impeach him, and again when the supreme court upheld presidential immunity, but winning the presidency plus the house and senate means its complete. It's going to be an imperial presidency with no real checks and balances. Let's just hope it's only for 4 years.

Yeah poppers causes aids apparently

Do you think he is suitable for the role? Or any cabinet role?

'Suitable' is an interesting word.

Given how shit US healthcare is, I'm not convinced that they have ever had any one in the role who has been suitable.

If by 'suitable' do you mean 'approved of by the mainstream, genocide supporting, war-loving media and the people who uncritically consume it', then the answer is probably no.

If you do want to know what I think, I most likely wouldn't choose any of Trump's cabinet picks. Basically I think they are pretty much all cunts [and any hopes that people projected on to Trump / believed him when he said that he would turn away from the neo-cons has been shown to be false - and I'm not surprised by that as it is what I expected].

I don't consider Kennedy to be the worst, though. I have more of a problem with eg Rubio wanting to be in every war or Huckabee being a rampant zionist than I do with Kennedy's position on vaccination - whatever it might be, as I'm not entirely sure exactly what it is - but I expect we will be getting a lot more info on it soon.

I was pleasantly surprised when I saw he was nominated - given my extremely low expectations. Also it might liven things up a bit, and he might get the CIA papers released on his uncle's one-way trip to Dallas. The bear cub in Central Park was weird though!

Suitable as in competent to do the job without causing significant public health issues that would not have happened otherwise.

Trump suing the NYT, CBS and others for $10 billion for bias against him.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/15/trump-sues-media-outlets-bias

This might be helpful, though I'm really not convinced you're not trolling with some of these comments.

https://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/fact-checking-presidential-candidate-robert-f-kennedy-jr-on-vaccines-autism-and-covid-19/

Please, it's other people who have to do the reading, not him.

“Kennedy's position on vaccination - whatever it might be, as I'm not entirely sure exactly what it is - but I expect we will be getting a lot more info on it soon.”

Dead children from measles for example, I’m sure there will be more fallout from his appointment.
Too much info?…

he might get the CIA papers released on his uncle's one-way trip to Dallas.

Dear lord I hope you're not serious

That is what he negotiated in return for his support, no?

Too much info?…

Too little info. We need to understand from Kennedy exactly what his position is on vaccines and a bunch of other things.

Whatever it is though, I'm still more concerned about WW3 kicking off, Palestinian genocide and apparent lack of a credible alternative economic strategy.

Suitable as in competent to do the job without causing significant public health issues that would not have happened otherwise.

I think it's a bit of a stretch. Given he's a lawyer with, as far as I know, no experience in running anything, I was surprised he was offered and that he accepted a cabinet position.

But I'm still way more concerned about other appointments. Slightly less so after having listened to a podcast this afternoon that reckoned Rubio was a bit more thoughtful on China than we're reading in the press.

We need to understand from Kennedy exactly what his position is on vaccines and a bunch of other things.

Whatever it is though, I'm still more concerned about WW3 kicking off, Palestinian genocide and apparent lack of a credible alternative economic strategy.

How about when he suggested that Covid was 'ethnically targeted' to spare Chinese and Ashkenazi Jews? Or when he continued to promote the totally debunked effectiveness of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, over a safe and effective vaccine? Just the sort of guy you'd want in charge during the next global pandemic, eh?

Thoroughly unserious.

I don't disagree with you, but what someone says when they have executive responsibility is a lot more important than what they said before when they were not actually responsible for anything.
I expect he will be a bit more careful about what he says now he is in this role. If he isn't, he won't be very effective, or he won't be in it for long.

I think it's clear what his position on vaccines is, and, in general what his attitude to evidence based decisions is. He's more of a feels guy.

But I'm still way more concerned about other appointments. Slightly less so after having listened to a podcast this afternoon that reckoned Rubio was a bit more thoughtful on China than we're reading in the press.

I've noticed that you are a pivoter. You'll be asked a question and you'll attempt to pivot away in a {vague answer} but {vaguely related statement} format.