Column: Could RFK Jr. really throw the election to Trump?

Hello, and happy Tuesday. There are 69 days until the election and today we’re starting with a game. A bear, a brain worm and a whale’s head: What do they all have in common?

If you guessed dead things that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has carried around, then: Ding! Ding! You’re a winner.

You’ve probably heard the latest bizarro RFK Jr. animal story by now, this one courtesy of an old interview with his daughter Kathleen “Kick” Kennedy, in Town & Country magazine. Once, when Kick was 6, her dad found a dead whale on the beach, chainsawed its head off and bungee-corded it to the minivan for the drive home. Along the way, juices from rotting flesh poured into the car windows, prompting the Kennedy kids to cover their own heads with plastic bags.

Oh, family memories. This might just be another “What-the-heck RFK Jr.?” story if it wasn’t for the fact that Bobby Kennedy’s son (one of 11 kids) sort of, not really dropped his own run for president in order to endorse Donald Trump. Yes, that noise you hear is RFK Sr. screaming from the great beyond.

Stick to mutilating animals, Bobby. Leave democracy alone.

“If my dad were alive today, the real Robert Kennedy would have detested almost everything that Trump represents,” Kerry Kennedy, Kennedy Jr.’s sister, told reporters. “And I completely disavow and separate, dissociate myself from Robert Kennedy Jr. and his flagrant efforts to trample my father’s memory.”

But should we the people also be screaming? Could RFK Jr. really throw the election to Trump?

Let’s break it down.

Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during a campaign event Nov. 14, 2023.

(Meg Kinnard / Associated Press)

What have you done, Bobby Jr.?

RFK Jr. didn’t entirely drop out of the presidential race. Instead, he has suspended campaigning for himself and endorsed Trump — and will now continue stumping to encourage his former supporters to vote for the man he once called a “sociopath.” Game knows game.

Kennedy told Dr. Phil (don’t ask — Dr. Phil has swung hard right) that he plans on removing his name in 10 swing states, where he might pull needed votes away from Trump. Does this mean that he, alone among men, could decide this presidential election?, Dr. Phil asked.

“That is possible,” answered Kennedy. Kennedy claims that his polling showed that 57% of those who said they were voting for him would vote for Trump if Kennedy wasn’t in the race. So in a few key places, removing his name could theoretically be the defining factor.

But he’ll keep his name on the ballot in states that are nearly certain to go either Harris or Trump, regardless. Because, ego? Paperwork? Or, as Kennedy puts it, “It allows people to vote for me without any consequences.”

Oh, that great Kennedy tradition of meaningless votes.

Can he do that?

Here’s where I started asking myself, is that legal? Can you put yourself on the ballot only to pull yourself off in places where you don’t want people to vote for you? Where you have spent months building just enough support that your base gives you the power to maybe negotiate a payoff for dropping out?

Kennedy didn’t outright say what if any role Trump had offered him, but he (and his now-former running mate, Nicole Shanahan) insinuated that Kennedy would be a part of a second Trump term in exchange for the bow out. Kennedy called it a “unity government.”

“If President Trump is elected and honors his word, the vast burden of chronic disease that now demoralizes and bankrupts the country will disappear,” Kennedy said during his announcement of the suspension.

I asked Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of UC Berkeley’s law school, what he thought. He assures me Kennedy is on solid ground — he can, if it’s offered, trade his votes for a job, and stay on the ballot wherever he wants.

“The simple answer is yes, it is permissible,” Chemerinsky said of the quid pro quo. “Of course, such promises are not enforceable. And if it is an appointment that requires Senate confirmation, taking office would depend on that.”

Chemerinsky gives this famous example of the 1952 presidential race with a similar dynamic: Dwight Eisenhower made a deal with Earl Warren (a three-term California governor raised in Bakersfield) to nominate Warren to the Supreme Court in exchange for Warren not challenging Eisenhower for the Republican presidential nomination.

The first vacancy after Eisenhower was elected was for chief justice. Eisenhower balked at this, but ultimately did it, Chemerinsky points out.

Justice Kennedy? Unlikely, but who knows with this bunch. More probably chief minister of the Wizengamot.

But seriously, can he do that?

Beyond the self-dealing, the question becomes is Kennedy an actual threat to the Harris campaign? The answer is unclear, but tilts towards yes.

Kennedy at one point had double-digit polling numbers in some states, making him a definite player in the election. However, those numbers have slipped precipitously in recent weeks, especially after Vice President Kamala Harris replaced President Biden on the Democratic ticket.

The majority of those who once backed Kennedy but changed their minds moved to Harris (39%) instead of Trump (20%). That’s according to an analysis from Pew Research. It also found that a lot of Kennedy-backers weren’t really paying attention to the election, and weren’t that motivated to vote. But they did say they leaned more Republican. So who knows how serious they were in the first place?

But it is possible in swing states that Kennedy could deliver some votes for Trump. And all it is going to take in those places is a few votes one way or the other.

One thing is for certain, JD Vance and Shanahan are now no longer shiny objects for their ticket-mates.

It’s hard to imagine that Shanahan was much more than a cash machine for Kennedy, but he didn’t even bother to take her along to the Trump announcement. She was left announcing on social media how great it was to back Trump, and reciting the sad lie that Harris is a communist — actually saying Harris would create a “Great Famine” like the one “my family endured in China.”

So glad she is back to being irrelevant. But things are tougher for Vance. His bromance with Trump was already rocky, now there’s a Kennedy to compete with?

Vance tried to make the best of it in an NBC interview this week, arguing that those who revered the Kennedy dynasty really prefer Trump. Which makes me think he has confused Camelot and “Spamalot.”

“We’re thrilled to have the Kennedy Democrats where they belong,” Vance said. “The Kennedy Democrats are actually more at home in the Republican Party of Donald Trump.”

As the doughnut shop worker said to Vance last week: OK.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: Trump and Harris embody a stark partisan divide on fighting poverty
The pull of power: RFK Jr. says Trump endorsement not out of revenge
The L.A. Times Special: Charli XCX ‘happy to help’ after Kamala Harris tweet influences presidential push

Stay Golden,
Anita Chabria

P.S. Did I lose you on the doughnut shop?

Here’s the cringey video of Vance trying to act normal while ordering during a campaign photo op. And here it is set to the credit song from the HBO show “Veep.”

Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.