I saw the one with him at 14% and Marianne at 5%. I don't know that I trust these polls yet. I don't see him getting 21% in any primary, but 1/5 people believing or supporting things he says sounds about right to me.

Well lets look at historical trends and look at the combined total of Democratic Primary opponents (AND VOTES FOR UNCOMMITTED) to an incumbent Dem Prez: 1936: 7.1% 1940: 28.07% 1944: 20.8% 1948: 36.1% 1964: 12.3% 1968: 94.9% (LBJ Withdrew after NH) 1980: 48.9% 1996: 11% 2012: 11.1% A lot of the hardcore Marianne Supporters truly seem to think that her bid will be a repeat of 1968 or 1980 harping on Biden's unpopularity, but that is mostly for people outside of the Democratic Party and not Democrats themselves. Yes a lot of them did not WANT him to run, but now that he is most Dems are just going along with it. Whereas LBJ and Carter were seen as detriments through and through, even by their own party. It's not unprecedented that they could possibly get higher, but realistically it is going to be in the low double digits if at all. 15% is the peak, RFK only doing it out of Name Rec and Marianne only getting the most hardcore of the "Bernie or Bust" types

How many of those challengers were conspiracy theorists?

'64 had Wallace get 10% (IDK if he counts, cause I am mostly basing this on the fact that his base in 1968 included Holocaust Deniers) '96 Had Larouche get 5%.

Most of the American people agree with this assessment, however. The public comments sections at OurCampaigns.com is actually one of the very few public venues where this would be a minority position. That the CIA-killed-JFK, is regarded as something of a truism outside the social circles of legislative aides and the like.

A 2004 poll showed that a majority of people believe that a man gathered 15,540,000 animals on a giant boat and lived to be 950 years old.... Just because a lot of people say the same braindead thing, does not make it true

Most of the American people agree with this assessment, however. The public comments sections at OurCampaigns.com is actually one of the very few public venues where this would be a minority position. That the CIA-killed-JFK, is regarded as something of a truism outside the social circles of legislative aides and the like. Lol, I don't think many users here are legislative aides and the like anymore. I also think you need to broaden your own social circle a bit.

Okay realizing that no one here wants to hear the majority position on the JFK assassination ... 1) The holes in JFK's coat and shirt were in the location of the third thoracic vertebra, which correspond to the back wound identified on his death certificate. The doctors probed this wound and described it as being only one inch in depth and angled downward. It is *lower* than the throat wound and in no way can accommodate an upward trajectory through JFK's body required by the single bullet theory. This back wound was not in JFK's neck - take a look at the 1963 autopsy sheets. 2) At the time the shots were fired, the electricity in the Texas School Book Depository was down, which meant that its elevator was not operable. Victoria Adams walked down the building's single set of stairs from the fourth floor to the first floor immediately after the shots were fired, and she did *not* see Oswald running down the stairs. When Marion Baker met Oswald in the lunch room on the second floor soon thereafter, he had just purchased a drink from a machine and was not out of breath after supposedly running down four flights of stairs. No one has ever replicated Oswald's supposed race down the stairs, purchased a drink, and then not been out of breath in the allotted time. 3) A policeman named W.R. Westbrook found a wallet at the Tippit murder scene that contained an identification card for A.J. Hidell. This wallet was mentioned by James Hosty, an FBI agent in Dallas, on page 62 of his 1996 book, and a TV crew captured Westbrook looking at it (you can watch it on YouTube). Since Oswald had his wallet on him in the Texas Theatre, the wallet at the Tippit scene had to be planted. A witness that day who had helped Tippit before the police arrived stated he was certain that the wallet was not there at the time of the shooting. 4) In early November 1963, the Secret Service foiled an assassination attempt on JFK in Chicago, mostly due to the work of SS agent Abraham Bolden. The man being set up as the patsy there was Thomas A. Vallee, who worked in a tall building overlooking the proposed motorcade route. At the time Vallee was arrested, foiling the plot, his car had a New York state license plate. When law enforcement ran the plates, the car was registered to a man named Lee Harvey Oswald with a fake New York address. Another assassination attempt in Tampa had similar parameters to Chicago and Dallas, and white supremicist Joseph Milteer was recorded on tape discussing this plot before it happened. Milteer was also in the Dallas crowd, standing along Houston Street on 11/22/1963. The three plots had multiple similarities. It's okay if you like Bugliosi or Posner, but you should take bits of information like this seriously rather than laughing them off without verification as irrelevant.

1) Watching the Zapruder film you can see that Kennedy is seated in a certain way, that is a mix of both Kennedy's Back brace as well as the hydraulic lift in his Lincoln Continental that lifts him 10.5 Inches, which positions his body in the most upright position. A photo taken just before the shot enters Kennedy also shows that the jacket he was wearing was bunched up significantly around the neck, presumably as he sat down in the car. 2) Were any of the people in question a 3 year or more Marine Corps member? Plus there is a chance most people were not truly paying attention, considering the President was just shot. And from the testimony Adams gave, it seems that she was just running from floor to floor, not really having time to stop. And considering she was 2 floors below Oswald, it makes sense that their paths did not cross. 3) Perhaps Oswald had 2 ID's, it is not uncommon for people to commit crimes to have multiple different forms of identification as a way to throw off the scent. A.J. Hidell was an alias that Oswald had used previously for his Left-Wing Activities, possibly worrying of potential government surveillance, its not really unlikely to have that form of identification especially if you 4) This entire story you have stated is dubious at best, both major purveyors of the story are not really trustworthy at all. We have Richard V. Burnes, an assistant to Jim Garrison, who's biggest claim to fame in regards to the Kennedy assassination was a case that failed. We have Mark Lane, who would become defend many members of the Far-Right and later a huge ally to the Peoples Temple. And Bolden himself was spreading this story while serving a prison sentence for accepting a bribe, while claiming that the bribery charge was in fact a the CIA trying to SILENCE HIM! A lot of the "Holes" JFK Conspiracy nuts claim are not filled by the official story, are very much not holes at all. And it's usually the JFK Conspiracies' that have more holes in their stories. How can a conspiracy of this scale be hidden without any form of verifiable leak? What purpose does killing JFK serve?

Oh, we're really still doing this? Yeah, we deserve RFK and Trump.

Just because a lot of people say the same braindead thing, does not make it true Oh sure, I know that. Which is one reason I'm not overly entranced with the idea of democracy. Yet Biden supporters, and their allies in the dominant press outlets, seem to uphold "democracy" with a fervor that often seems almost religious in character. And yet the whole idea is based on rule- by-the-opinion-of-the-masses. So it's kinda weird to see you denigrate the very basis of the system you supposedly regard as near-sacred.* *If I've mischaracterized your views here, please feel free to denounce democracy, and I will subsequently apologize.

Someone ask RFK Jr. if he thinks his nephew is alive.

Which is one reason I'm not overly entranced with the idea of democracy. Sure, people love autocracies. As long as they agree with their ideologies. Would you be okay with losing democracy if Democrats were the ones in charge?

The CIA is the reason my 3rd and 4th wives left me!

American intelligence agencies will overthrow anyone they don’t like anywhere across the world, lie about intel to get us into foreign wars and we are going to stand here and pretend like they didn’t have a hand in assassinating a President who was very much their opposition?

Which is one reason I'm not overly entranced with the idea of democracy. You only say that because your local ethnostate referendum failed lol American intelligence agencies will overthrow anyone they don’t like anywhere across the world, lie about intel to get us into foreign wars and we are going to stand here and pretend like they didn’t have a hand in assassinating a President who was very much their opposition? Kennedy had very much been in line with the American Intelligence Agencies during his administration, as this was during the height of the Cold War so every Prez was a warhawk in regards to the "growing Communist threat". I see a lot of Kennedy people claim he was trying to diminish the role of US Intelligence Agencies but never actually find example of him doing so, in fact when you look at him he is just another Cold War Liberal Hawk. It only looks as if it's lesser because he is sandwiched by a War genreal, the Vietnam Warmonger himself, and Nixon

EPU is correct about JFK's connection with the CIA. You may recall that in the late 1960s, LBJ once referred to JFK's foreign policy as "Murder, Inc." JFK approved of the assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem, the president of South Vietnam (supposedly an ally of the US). JFK also approved of a proposed coup d'etat in Haiti, and his brother RFK personally led the CIA operation during the JFK administration to kill Fidel Castro. In the 1960 presidential election, JFK was the first politician to publicly call for a US-backed invasion of Cuba (that became the Bay of Pigs). I don't know if JFK really wanted to scale back US involvement in Vietnam as proposed by a large group of people who investigate his assassination.

RFK Jr.'s playbook, it seems to me, is about the same as Trump's, and equally as simple. Be ceaselessly incendiary, make a scene, sit back, and see what happens. I bet he'd be very pleased with himself to see how much ink has been spilled on his BS already.