Talk:Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 August 2024

Remove Occupation "Anti-Vaccine Activist". It is incorrect. RFK jr stated I'm many interviews that he is not "Anti-Vaccine". He states that he wants to make sure Vaccines are tested and safe to use, which is not the case right now. He believes Vaccines can help and do help, but can cause harm if not careful. Gstevensphoto (talk) 17:11, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: Please read the FAQ. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Are all these requests coming from the same person socking? 2A02:C7E:2EC1:8D00:D72:A47C:240:6E3A (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Maybe. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ – Muboshgu (talk) 15:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Einstein, in response to the book "100 authors against Einstein" famously said, "why 100? If I was wrong, only one would be needed" The quantity of opinions means nothing. Right is right. Do you dispute that vaccines can cause harm if not properly tested? 65.191.153.96 (talk) 01:47, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

On being a 'spoiler' candidate

The article suggests Kennedy is a spoiler candidate intended to injure Democrats because he's financed by Republicans. It assumes their intent is to take votes from Biden (should be updated to Harris.)

However, this discounts Republicans, including many 'Never Trumpers,' who are earnest in their support of Kennedy. Logically, Kennedy's policies are closer to Trump's and are more likely to sway Trump voters. 108.4.153.106 (talk) 17:21, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Reliable sources trump your personal opinion. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:51, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

This article is unnecessarily politically biased

It puts the overbroad, subjective and and inflammatory term "conspiracy theorist" in the first sentence as one of his main titles, and focuses disproportionately on vaccine issues, which are a blip on his life and career. Almost all the prominent information was taken from recent news articles and not from any depth of research. Also, his career section starts with conviction for heroine, which is an odd place to start. This article appears designed to smear the subject's image, or in any case relies on sensationalist tabloid type news articles over historical sources. Caoruktnmsmo (talk) 16:58, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

The article reflects the coverage found in reliable sources. Zaathras (talk) 00:05, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

His conspiracy theories about vaccines are not "political". It's just the usual antiscience crackpottery. And it is not a "blip", it was his actual job for several decades. So, not only do the reliable sources back up what the article says, the reliable sources are even correct. --Hob Gadling (talk) 07:34, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@Caoruktnmsmo I agree that starting the section Career with a subsection on Conviction for Heroin Possession is odd. The paragraph on the conviction should be a separate section before Career. Seananony (talk) 23:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

@Caoruktnmsmo I also agree with what you say about heroine conviction being in the career section. This should be changed. MensaGlobetrotter (talk) 01:52, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Potentially of interest

RFK Jr. campaign ‘looking at’ joining forces with Trump, running mate Shanahan says.

Zaathras (talk) 00:34, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

RFK Jr. plans to drop out of presidential race by end of week: Sources – Muboshgu (talk) 19:24, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

https://x.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1826351609385025708?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet 68.169.251.102 (talk) 22:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Now we know when we will need to update the article. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:16, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 August 2024

Remove “conspiracy theorist”- many of the “conspiracies” have come true, therefore making them real, not theories. 47.213.153.187 (talk) 01:47, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir (talk) 01:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

2024 Presidential campaign section needs expansion

This article currently has more information about the subject's hobbies than about his campaign to be president, which is what he is best known for at this point and the focus of pretty much all recent media coverage from reliable sources. I know there is a separate article about his presidential campaign, but this seems to be a big WP:PROPORTION problem. Perhaps, for a start, the section could be expanded to summarise the main points of the Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 2024 presidential campaign article? In particular, the article says nothing about his unusually high levels of support (given that he is a third-party candidate) during parts of his campaign. TWM03 (talk) 19:07, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I disagree, what he is best known for at this point and the focus of pretty much all recent media coverage from reliable sources sounds like WP:RECENTISM to me, especially as he is reportedly ending his campaign tomorrow. The unusually high levels of support have faded and likely speak more to the unpopularity of Trump and Biden than any popularity of RFK Jr. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:18, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I do think the section can be improved by adding why he left the Democratic primary and active language in place of Kennedy was considered regarding the Libertarian nomination. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm pleased we have some agreement that the section needs to be improved.

Your point about recentism has some merit, and I would concede that his presidential campaign is just one of a number of things he is known for. I don't think that greater emphasis should necessarily be placed on this than his career as an environmental lawyer or his anti-vaccine advocacy. However, as it is at the moment the article makes his campaign seem like a trivial detail. The section about Kennedy's campaign has less information than there is about the fact that he likes falconry and whitewater kayaking, and less information than the section about Kanye West's presidential campaign in his article.

Whether Kennedy's high levels of support were due to the unpopularity of the other candidates is a matter of opinion, and I don't think it needs to be discussed at length in this article, but perhaps we could include some information about his polling numbers? It explains why there was so much media interest in his campaign if nothing else. TWM03 (talk) 20:24, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Ballot placement post-Trump endorsement

A general note of caution to editors - subject withdrew from some ballots but declared on Aug 23, 2024 his intention to remain on certain states' ballots; therefore his candidacy should remain in the present tense until after the November election RyeCityRoller (talk) 21:41, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

No, his candidacy is ended. Remaining on certain ballots doesn't mean it's an active campaign. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:57, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

If the the determining factor is active or not, then I would agree with you, as highly unusual as Kennedy's decision to remain on select ballots is in presidential elections (I don't recall a similar case in modern American presidential politics) Thanks for weighing in. RyeCityRoller (talk) 00:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

In his speech on August 23,2024, RFK Jr SPECIFICALLY stated that he was not ending his campaign; that he's suspending it.

https://www.kennedy24.com/

Why have the only links that I've noticed so far lead only to known biased media outlets and not the unedited/unclipped videos directly from the campaign website? In his 08/23/2024 speech, he addresses in detail and entirety and his own words almost every one of the "conspiracy" theories discussed in these talks.

I opened this article, the first thing to show up on a search of RFK's official site, and am appalled at how heavy the obvious bias against this man is and it bleeds through every section of this article. And VERY sadly, it may be the only thing that a lot of people read and end up "knowing" about him with its prominence in search results.

While showing some examples of opposition to his views through articles critical of them may be helpful to contrast his opinions, using only those articles does nothing to show his discussions in their FULL CONTEXT. Too often the media and other influencers on all sides pick and clip the most inflammatory portion(s) of a statement (without the full statement presented) to back their own arguments. This is misleading by omission. I'd recommend citing more direct links to full speeches and interviews to be dually referenced with the cited articles. NuetralFC (talk) 03:30, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Reorganizing

Much of what's under the Career section would fit better under Environmental Policy. Since Kennedy is an environmentalist, it's difficult to distinguish much of his career from his environmental stances. I've already moved some. I'm wondering now if the Environmental Policy section needs subsections and should Hydro be moved there, for example. Cape Wind subsection would be good to move as well. Seananony (talk) 01:03, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Kennedy is not an anti-vaxxer

The "numerous sources" all say he is an anti-vaxxer but he is not. The only thing he has ever promoted is to treat vaccines with the same rigor in testing as we do other medicines. He's vaccinated, his kids are vaccinated, except for Covid. How come someone is an anti-vaxxer if they don't want to take one vaccine? Ridiculous. 65.191.153.96 (talk) 01:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:MANDY applies. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@65.191.153.96 I would further suggest that labeling him as an anti-vaccine activist right in the article description does not match the following quote on the article:

""People who advocate for safer vaccines should not be marginalized or denounced as anti-vaccine. I am pro-vaccine. I had all six of my children vaccinated. I believe that vaccines have saved the lives of hundreds of millions of humans over the past century and that broad vaccine coverage is critical to public health. But I want our vaccines to be as safe as possible."

Further, the article describes many other areas of activism. So narrowing the article description to focus on just the vaccine activism doesn't match the rest of the article either.

Can somebody please change the article description to just say "activist" instead of anti-vaccine activist? Thanks MensaGlobetrotter (talk) 02:17, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

No. Read WP:MANDY. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Muboshgu Ok, you make a fair argument on that point. However, you didn't address the other point: he has engaged in many areas of activism, so why only specify the vaccine activism in the article description? He has been engaged in indigenous rights activism and environmental activism for longer than vaccine activism. I have no love for anti-vaxxers and the harm they do, but this article description is too narrow. MensaGlobetrotter (talk) 02:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Wait, you're referring to the short description? That I agree with. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)