Philippa Kaur

While incumbent Joe Biden is the favoured Democratic pick for the 2024 US presidential nomination, another more controversial candidate is gaining popular support in the polls. Robert F. Kennedy Jr, a self-described vaccine sceptic, announced his candidacy to run for president as a Democrat in April.

Our new study on the rhetorical techniques used to spread vaccine disinformation partly explains Kennedy’s appeal to voters. We examined the strategies of RFK Jr and American osteopath Joseph Mercola, two prominent members of the “disinformation dozen”.

These 12 anti-vaccine advocates, according to research conducted by the Center for Countering Digital Hate, were responsible for nearly two-thirds of anti-vaccine content posted to Facebook and Twitter during the pandemic.

We analysed their social media profiles, books, documentaries, websites and newsletters from 2021-22, and identified the techniques that comprise what we call the “truther playbook”. These take the form of four enticing promises which figures like Kennedy and Mercola use to give their claims legitimacy and build a loyal following.

These techniques – promising identity and belonging, revealing “true” knowledge, providing meaning and purpose, as well as promising leadership and guidance – feature prominently in Kennedy’s 2024 presidential campaign.

1. Identity and belonging

COVID truthers offer their followers access to an exclusive in-group identity. They adhere to a dualistic belief system that divides the world into good and bad actors, light and dark forces. For COVID truthers, it is not simply that their opponents have acted through ignorance or error – they frame them as corrupt and evil.

Kennedy’s and Mercola’s social media posts, newsletters and publications frequently frame prominent public figures such as Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates as evil elites, or “dark forces” allegedly conspiring against ordinary people.

COVID truthers present themselves in opposition to these corrupt corporations and government institutions. They offer a promising invitation to their followers: join me, and be part of the movement fighting “the system”.

Kennedy, for example, refers to himself as a resolute “defender” of children and the public. His anti-vaccine activism is framed as a noble pursuit aligned with the public good. Similarly, his presidential pledge of honest government is pitched as being “for the people”.

2. True knowledge and enlightenment

The spread of disinformation about COVID vaccines has occurred in a society characterised by low institutional trust. Figures such as Kennedy and Mercola capitalise on this, appealing to those disillusioned with the government’s official narrative. They present themselves as having access to privileged knowledge and understanding.

They do this by revealing alternative “facts” that contradict the official narrative, and that they claim have been concealed from the public. Some researchers refer to such information as “stigmatised knowledge”, meaning claims that are not accepted by mainstream institutions.

COVID truthers, as the name suggests, promise to expose, release and reveal the truth, which they claim has been censored by powerful, corrupt organisations.

Kennedy’s presidential bid exists in opposition to what he has described as “an incredibly sophisticated system of information control”. He refers to himself as a “truth teller”, and promises to establish an honest government that will earn back the trust of the public.

The truther playbook promises followers ‘true’ knowledge and enlightenment.
metamorworks/Shutterstock

3. Meaning and purpose

COVID truthers provide their followers with meaning, offering a reason to believe in a greater purpose. This can take the form of New Age spirituality, suggesting that humanity is undergoing a “shift in consciousness”, or a more secular commitment to truth, freedom and justice.

Kennedy frequently deploys the language of social justice in his posts and newsletters, as a rallying call to unite his followers. Most of his early anti-vaccine messaging focused on protecting pregnant women and children from harmful ingredients in vaccines.

During the pandemic, Kennedy shifted to the topic of medical racism – situating the opposition to vaccine mandates in a broader civil rights agenda. He compared racial segregation to non-vaccination, or what he refers to as “the new apartheid”.

In a direct call to action, Kennedy’s newsletters invited followers to “unite to create a better world”, and reminded them of the importance of “seeking justice and spreading the truth”. He made explicit analogies to the civil rights movement, telling supporters: “We won a revolution before, we can win it again.”

Similar messaging appears in his presidential campaign, which calls on supporters to “join the movement”, “spread the word”, and “restore our rights”.

4. Leadership and guidance

COVID truthers proffer order and security in a world that feels disorderly and insecure. They speak to the institutional distrust many people feel towards “the establishment”.

Kennedy’s campaign contrasts the power of corrupt government institutions, corporate cronyism and nefarious media elites with the powerlessness that the disenfranchised public feels. As a consequence, he positions himself as an incorruptible leader with the capacity to “clean up government”, restore civil liberties, and speak truth to power.

Why this matters

The success of the truther playbook in spreading anti-vaccine discourse during the pandemic demonstrates the popular appeal of belief and emotion in the current political climate. Filings with charity regulators show that revenue for Kennedy’s organisation more than doubled in 2020, to US$6.8 million.

In our current post-truth era, where opinions often triumph over facts, influencers and celebrities can achieve authority. By framing their opponents as corrupt and evil, and claiming to expose this corruption, COVID truthers can successfully encourage others to join their movement.

And, as Kennedy’s campaign is now demonstrating, these rhetorical techniques can be used to promote populist politics just as much as anti-vaccine content. More

The United States debt limit is a legislative limit on the overall debt the US government can incur. As the US keeps running budget deficits, the debt keeps increasing. Congress could deal with this permanently by either repealing the debt limit, or increasing it to a very large number.

But instead, Congress has only increased the debt limit enough to give grace for a year or two before it needs to be increased again. The last time the debt limit was increased was December 2021.

The US hit the debt limit on January 19 this year. The Treasury has been taking extraordinary measures to delay a default, but these measures could fail as early as June 1. While the US has never defaulted, there were debt limit crises in 2011 and 2013.

The main reason for the 2011 and 2013 crises was divided government – Democrat Barack Obama was president and Republicans controlled the House of Representatives. This situation is the same now, with Democrat Joe Biden as president and Republicans controlling the House. Republicans have attempted to use the debt limit to demand spending cuts.

Read more:
A brief history of debt ceiling crises and the political chaos they’ve unleashed

Republicans only hold a 222-213 House majority, and it took 15 rounds of voting for Republican Kevin McCarthy to be elected House speaker in early January. But right-wing Republicans won concessions from McCarthy, and the speaker decides what comes to the floor for a vote.

To keep the right onside, McCarthy will probably deny a vote on any debt ceiling increase that excludes major spending cuts, and such cuts would be unacceptable to Democrats.

Democrats had overall control of the presidency, House and Senate until January 3 when the new House started. But they made no real attempt to increase the debt limit and avert a crisis until after the 2024 presidential election. If there is a default, the failure to increase the limit will come back to haunt Democrats, the US and the world economy.

A weaker economy in the presidential election year of 2024 is likely to hurt Biden, so Republicans have some incentive to not compromise on the spending cuts they are demanding.

On April 26, Republicans passed a bill through the House of Representatives by a 217-215 margin that would raise the debt limit in return for big spending cuts that Democrats strongly oppose. All Democrats that voted were opposed.

This bill has no chance of passing the Democratic-controlled Senate, and would be vetoed by Biden. But it showed that Republicans could pass their agenda. Had the House not passed this bill or something similar, there would be more pressure on Republicans to pass a “clean” debt limit increase – an increase without any spending cuts.

As it is, McCarthy can argue that the House has done its job, and that Democrats need to give ground on spending cuts.

In the last week there have been negotiations over the debt limit between Democratic and Republican leaders, but these negotiations have broken down in the last two days, with both sides blaming the other for changing their positions.

Left-wing Democrats have been urging Biden to use Section 4 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, and effectively declare the debt limit unconstitutional. However, the US Supreme Court currently has a six-to-three right-leaning majority, so it’s unclear whether they would support Biden.

Trump way ahead of DeSantis in Republican primary polls

Republicans and Democrats will both select their presidential candidates for the November 2024 election in a series of nominating contests in each state in early 2024, at which delegates to the national conventions are elected. When we are closer to the voting in the early states, polls of those states will be useful, but for now the national polling is better.

Former President Donald Trump has 53.5% of the vote in the FiveThirtyEight aggregate of national Republican presidential primary polls. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis trails far behind on 20.8% and no other candidate has more than 6%. Since this aggregate started in early March, Trump has steadily increased his lead over DeSantis.

For the Democratic primary, there are polls that list many possible candidates, which indicate that Biden could face a contest if a high-profile candidate were to enter. However, Biden will easily defeat the only two other candidates who have actually entered: Robert F Kennedy Jr and Marianne Williamson.

General election Biden vs Trump polls are close

If Biden and Trump both win their parties’ nominations, which current polling suggests is likely, we will have a November 2024 rematch of the 2020 contest which Biden won. The RealClearPolitics average of national Biden vs Trump general election polls currently has Trump leading Biden 44.2-42.8%.

A key reason why this match-up is close is that Biden’s ratings have slumped since the beginning of his presidency.

In his first six months as president, Biden’s approval rating was over 50% in the FiveThirtyEight aggregate. But since October 2021, his approval rating has consistently been below 45%, while his disapproval has been over 50%. Biden’s ratings haven’t changed much in the last few months and are currently at 52.7% disapprove and 42.4% approve (net -10.4).

The two potential hurdles to Biden’s re-election are the economy and his age. A debt default would make the economy far worse, and Biden will be almost 82 by the November 2024 election, though Trump will be 78. More

A quick check of the Met office forecasts for Ukraine suggests that over the next week or so the weather is going to get steadily warmer. The rising mercury has fuelled speculation that Ukraine’s much discussed spring offensive is just around the corner, the only questions being when and where Ukraine’s military planners intend to make their big push. Kyiv is being understandably tight-lipped about this, surprise and deception – as Sun Tsu noted in the Art of War millenia ago – being key to military success.

Some observers have noted that Ukraine has achieved a bridgehead on the eastern side of the Dnipro River, which could foreshadow a major push southwards towards Crimea. The big question exercising most military experts is whether Ukraine has received sufficient new military equipment from its western allies to achieve the sort of spectacular successes it managed in September and October last year.

But there are signs of war fatigue setting in among some of Kyiv’s friends, while – as we noted in the last Ukraine recap – an increasing number of countries are opting to join China in urging Volodymyr Zelensky to the negotiating table. Just this week the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, held a telephone conversation with the Ukrainian president, the first time the pair has spoken since the war began. Zelensky said afterwards that he had told Xi that: “There can be no peace at the expense of territorial compromises.”

Since Vladimir Putin sent his war machine into Ukraine on February 24 2022, The Conversation has called upon some of the leading experts in international security, geopolitics and military tactics to help our readers understand the big issues. You can also subscribe to our fortnightly recap of expert analysis of the conflict in Ukraine.

But with much of Europe and the west suffering rising inflation and the prospect of continuing unstable energy prices, this may become an increasingly unpopular stance. Stefan Wolff, an expert in international security at the University of Birmingham, tracks Beijing’s growing influence in the diplomatic manoeuvring around Ukraine while noting widening divisions in the west.

Read more:
Western anger over China’s ambiguity on Ukraine cannot hide growing divisions in EU over support for Kyiv

There is, as Chris Morris – an expert in military strategy at the University of Portsmouth notes here – an element of Catch-22 about the situation. Kyiv’s allies want the spring offensive to demonstrate that Ukraine can achieve significant gains on the battlefield if they are to continue to pour billions of dollars’ worth of military equipment into the cause. Kyiv, meanwhile, needs billions of dollars’ of military equipment to achieve that success.

The state of the conflict on April 26 according to the Institute for the Study of War.
Institute for the Study of War

The problem, as Morris notes, is that the recent massive leak of US intelligence files included Pentagon assessments that Ukraine is unlikely to make the same massive gains as it achieved last autumn. A great deal is likely to hang on whether that assessment is accurate or whether, like last year, Ukraine’s tactical nous will surprise everyone once again, most crucially, of course, the Russians.

Read more:
Ukraine war: as Kyiv prepares counteroffensive it needs to convince allies it is up for the fight

Many observers have linked the fighting – particularly over the winter around the battered city of Bakhmut in Ukraine’s east – to the first world war: the trenches, the high casualty numbers, the slow progress across territory. Christiaan Harinck, an expert in the history of war at Utrecht University, says that while much of this is undeniable, it would be foolish to jump to conclusions about what would appear to be the failure of Russia’s winter offensive.

Moscow’s political objectives, Harink warns, might be as much about involving the west in a lengthy and debilitating conflict. As he writes here: “It might be the case that in its current assessment of the situation, a stalemate in eastern Ukraine serves the Kremlin’s purpose.”

Read more:
Ukraine war: why WWI comparisons can lead to underestimates of Russia’s strengths

The Russian front

If many western commentators are comparing the trench warfare in eastern Ukraine to the first world war, Putin and his propaganda machine have been insistent in drawing parallels with the “great patriotic war” in which Russia (with, admittedly, a modicum of help from the US, Britain and other countries) faced down the Nazi threat and achieved victory in Europe.

Russians celebrate Victory Day on May 9 (the UK celebrates the same thing on May 8, due to the time difference) and, particularly since Putin came to power, it’s become a huge thing. One of the centrepieces is the march of the Immortals Regiment in which thousands parade with pictures of loved ones who gave their lives in defence of the homeland.

But not this year. It was recently announced that for security reasons the celebrations would be scaled back (cancelled in cities deemed too close to the Ukraine border) and the march of the Immortals will not take place.

Dina Fainberg, an expert in modern history at City, University of London, tells the story of how Victory day become Russia’s biggest national celebration. As she notes, the decision has been greeted with derision by many in the west. One former US military commander tweeting that: “Nothing says you’re a grand strategist quite like not having enough soldiers and equipment to hold an annual parade.”

Fainburg thinks there could be another reason behind the decision. Imagine if thousands of people turned up to march carrying pictures of loved ones killed in Putin’s “special military operation”.

Read more:
Ukraine war: Russia scales back May 9 Victory Day celebrations amid fear of popular protests

Victory Day become a tradition during Soviet times. Another less palatable feature of that era were the show trials by which Stalin rid himself of possible rivals and other thorns in his side. Preparing to be sentenced to 25 years for “treason”, journalist and activist Vladimir Kara-Murza recently drew a comparison between his treatment and 1930s-style Soviet “justice”.

Russian dIssident Vladimir Kara-Murza has been sentenced to 25 years in prison for ‘treason’ among other charges.
The Moscow City Court via AP

But, as Stephen Hall – an expert in authoritarian regimes at the University of Bath – notes here, Putin has shown he has myriad ways of silencing troublesome voices in modern Russia.

Read more:
‘Stalin-style’ show trials and unexplained deaths of opposition figures show the depth of repression in Putin’s Russia

Further afield (and on sea)

Anyone following the war in Ukraine will have heard of the Wagner Group, a mercenary army allegedly run by one of Putin’s closest allies, Yevgeny Prigozhin. Allegedly, because Prigozhin himself denies any knowledge of the Wagner Group. Whatever the truth of this, there is increasing evidence that Russian mercenaries are involved in several parts of Africa, including Sudan – where savage fighting is rapidly spreading across the whole country and threatens to descend into civil war (although the Wagner Group denies this).

Kristian Gustafson and a team of intelligence experts at Brunel, University of London, have taken a close look at reports of Russian involvement in conflicts across Africa.

Read more:
Sudan: questions about Wagner Group involvement as another African country falls prey to Russian mercenaries

Finally, it remains unclear who was behind the sabotage to the Nord Stream pipeline last year that held up supplies of gas into Europe, fuelling concerns about the vulnerability of vital undersea and maritime infrastructure. Now a documentary report from a consortium of Scandinavian broadcasters has investigated the movements of a Russian research vessel called Admiral Vladimirsky allegedly collecting data on windfarms, gas pipelines, power and internet cables in the North Sea.

Christian Bueger, a professor of international relations at the University of Copenhagen, once accompanied a Royal Navy reconnaissance vessel to the North Sea where part of its mission was to look out for Russian spy ships. He gives us his assessment of just how vulnerable this infrastructure is to hostile interference.

Read more:
Russian ‘spy ship’ in North Sea raises concerns about the vulnerability of key maritime infrastructure

Ukraine Recap is available as a fortnightly email newsletter. Click here to get our recaps directly in your inbox. More