this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
715 points (99.6% liked)

politics

19634 readers
3012 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. accused Bernie Sanders of taking millions from Big Pharma during a heated exchange, but Sanders refuted the claim, stating his donations came from workers, not corporate PACs.

Kennedy repeatedly insisted Sanders was the top recipient of pharmaceutical money in 2020, but financial data shows no corporate PAC contributions to Sanders.

Meanwhile, Kennedy has profited from anti-vaccine activism, earning millions from lawsuits and speaking fees.

The debate ended without Kennedy answering whether he would guarantee health care for all as HHS secretary.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] justOnePersistentKbinPlease@fedia.io 175 points 1 day ago (73 children)

I feel sorry that the Democratic party opted to cheat us out of President Sanders.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world -4 points 1 day ago (48 children)
[–] megalow 11 points 1 day ago (8 children)

The DNC actively worked against his campaign in both primaries. There was ample info in the WikiLeaks drop in 2016.

And in 2020, there was the conspicuous action of every other candidate suddenly dropping out and endorsing Biden. We didn't get the same inside view as the previous primary, but it's pretty plain to see that there machinations by the DNC again to push for this.

And we pretty much had a similar move this last election, not allowing for any sort of primary.

I don't think it can be a serious position to deny that wealthy, powerful interests control the DNC, and therefore actively work against candidates who threaten their wealth and power. It's not a hidden secret (donors, PACs, politicians getting rich, etc). And of course the same is true with the GOP too.

[–] megalow 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why this worries me most is that I think it's a losing strategy by the DNC. AOC is clearly a preferred candidate for a future election, but if she runs, I fully expect the DNC to do everything they can to sabotage her campaign in favor of a milquetoast politician who won't upset their donors. And the GOP would win again (presuming we have elections anymore).

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Also presuming the DNC decides to bother with primaries.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (45 replies)
load more comments (69 replies)