How did you come to the conclusion that the bitcoin was purchased as a collectible rather than as a liquid scarce asset like gold? Also, calling this "mainstream acceptance" might be pushing it a little bit.

More free publicity nonetheless.

Of course, they can used it during their campaign, specially for the young generations of voters. Maybe it can make an appeal to them that a Presidential candidate is also in BTC.

And if this true then being rich and have a lot of money, the family might think of it as a sort of investment or something. For his kids and grand kids, bitcoin could be look upon as a potential generational wealth for this wealthy individual. However, average joe like the majority of us here can also think of BTC that way.

But as what others have said, this id free publicity for RFK Jr, so still a win-win for him.

I like this guy and I think he would be a good president however I just don’t think that he will get enough support. Most likely Trump will be on the lead unless there is some hard evidence about his crimes and he ends up stuck in court for the next decade.

Maybe he should of started campaigning earlier. Because trump started pretty much since he lost the election and hence why he has all this support. Most people never heard of RFK Jr until perhaps 2 months ago.

How many Bitcoiners are US citizens? Several million? Not a big enough number to win the elections, if you ask me.
I remember that in the 2020 US presidential elections, another candidate from the Democratic party was pro-Bitcoin, but he got a ridiculously low amount of support. I even forgot his name. Stating that you are pro-Bitcoin doesn't mean anything. What if a republican candidate also declares, that he supports Bitcoin? I think that Ron DeSantis also made some public statements in favor of Bitcoin/crypto.
Most crypto supporters are right wing libertarians, so I doubt that they will support a left wing liberal/socialist candidate.

I wonder whether he uses a custodial service for distributing the BTC for inheritance planning or whether he is just holding all those BTC himself in separate wallets.

Because if its the latter, then he could actually take out the money slated for inheritance and spend it on himself if he wanted to. So just hearing the claims that he's bought BTC for his kids is not enough, they need to be verified via the blockchain for absolute certainty.

I remember there was also the candidate for the POTUS last election that has mentioned Bitcoin. So basically it was really a free exposure for Bitcoin. IIRC, that was Yang but we knew what was the result of that last election.

Anyway, a politician will always be a politician. They'll say, they like this and bought that here and there so that they can attract and get the thoughts of those people that are in that sector like those BTC folks that are qualified to vote next year.

He buys bitcoins for his kids but he discloses having no investment in crypto in the cointelegraph article listed.
He bought bitcoin for his son with the assumption that bitcoin is an investment for the future. That's good because he is aware of the advantages of bitcoin as an investment asset.

In one of my responses regarding the topic of a neighbor asking why Robert Kennedy Jr. bought 2 bitcoins for each of his seven children, because he probably likes even numbers. On the other hand, I don't really like the words of politicians. But, despite his status as a presidential candidate and political symbol, I am personally happy that he continues to campaign for bitcoin.

I'm with you here on being skeptic but if there's an image for proof, I think we can give RFK Jr. some slack, but that doesn't mean he is a different kind of politician even if proven. And if I'm being honest, I am tired that we're okay as a community to just have the paltry exposure from second-rate candidates promoting bitcoin, I want the winning ones or even the one nominated by their party to talk about bitcoin, that's more exposure than this I am pretty sure.

I think he's being wise enough not to miss two major opportunities of life that if his ambition as a presidential candidate have no chances of becoming a reality, he can take advantage of being a bitcoin pro to left an inheritance for his children and also see that his financial career is well secured, maybe in doing so, this might bring more recognition on his over future attempts on career ambition in politics, but for now, he's giving more attention on bitcoin and helps the public see the need for a decentralized network with bitcoin.

Considering the amount of money this guy has, 14 BTC for his children is truly nothing, and an explanation about children is good to avoid accusations of lying to others. I think it doesn't have much to do with Bitcoin and is just politics: the Republican contestant DeSantis is a vocal supporter of Bitcoin, so it makes sense for a Democrat to try to get support of some of the same audience, showing some engagement with Bitcoin. So if you're an American citizen, it's important to consider that it might be simply an attempt to win some votes, and that's relevant both for DeSantis and for RFK.
But I do agree that a Democrat and a Republican trying to be pro-Bitcoin is advertising Bitcoin, as well as showing that it's truly becoming one of the major societal matters, the kind of stuff that major politicians can build their election campaigns around or at least feel important to voice their opinion on.