By Nick Catoggio
Thursday, June 20, 2024
“The most dreaded election in modern political history.”
That’s how Axios described
this year’s presidential contest, citing the freakishly huge percentage of
voters who view both candidates unfavorably. Over the last 10 presidential
cycles, so-called “double-haters” have typically accounted for between 5 and 13
percent of the electorate. (The number was higher
during the 2016 election, as you might expect.) This year, they account for
no less than 25 percent.
To a historic degree, Americans despise the choice that
the two major parties have offered them. Never in my adult life, not even in
1992, has the political climate been more favorable for a heterodox independent
with a famous name to enter the race and make a splash. And as it happens, a
heterodox independent with a famous name is running for
president this year.
So why is he losing support rather than gaining it?
We’ve been conditioned to expect
the unexpected in presidential politics but Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s
early decline feels surprising anyway. A new Fox
News poll published on Wednesday found him slipping from 15 percent against
Joe Biden and Donald Trump last November to 12 percent in March to 10 percent
today. He’s gone from plus-3 in net favorability over the last three months to
minus-11, with 51 percent now viewing him negatively.
That’s no outlier, either. After many months of Americans
holding a generally favorable opinion of him, Kennedy slid into negative
territory in mid-May in the FiveThirtyEight
polling average and has continued to fall. His net favorability now
stands at minus-8.7 points.
His decline is also showing in head-to-head polling with
Biden and Trump. Over the first two months of this year, he reliably averaged
13 percent or better in the RealClearPolitics
average. Then, in March, he shed a few points, and shed a few more in June.
Today he sits at 7.9 percent in the five-way race. Some surveys have him as low as 3
or 4 percent.
Americans have stared into the abyss of having to choose
between two plainly unfit geriatrics and decided that one or the other of them
would still be preferable to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Realistically, RFK’s only hopes for a rebound are to
qualify for next week’s presidential debate and to pile up a mountain of
fundraising money as quickly as he can. He needs to introduce himself to voters
who haven’t heard of him yet and to improve his image with voters who
have—urgently. The obvious way to do that is to perform well at the debate
before an enormous television audience and to flood American media with
advertising.
But as of Thursday morning, both of those hopes have been
extinguished. Kennedy
will not qualify for the debate, having failed to meet either the polling
requirement or the ballot-access threshold. And for the second straight month,
his grassroots fundraising has been anemic: He brought in just
$2.6 million in May, a month in which Trump raised $53
million in a single day.
“Independent presidential candidate disappoints” is a
dog-bites-man story in American politics but less so in a year in which the
electorate is desperate for an alternative on the ballot. Why has RFK 2024
failed to launch?
There are obvious “structural” answers to that, I think,
and a few specific to Kennedy that aren’t as obvious.
***
Every buzzworthy third-party candidate eventually suffers
from the fact that he’s a human being, not a political abstraction onto which
disgruntled voters can project their preferences.
Running against “the system” is a shrewd way to draw
interest from antiestablishmentarians on both sides, but “the system” means
different things to populists of different stripes. For Bernie Sanders voters,
it means capitalism and staunch U.S. support for Israel; for Trumpers, it means
the “deep state” and entrenched liberal orthodoxy among American institutions.
The less either side knew of RFK early on, the easier it
was to assume he was running against “the system” as they specifically conceive
of it. As he was forced to flesh out his positions on the trail, those
assumptions inevitably gave way to disillusionment.
Imagine how a Kennedy-curious progressive must have felt
upon learning that he believes Israel’s offensive against Hamas is a “moral
war.” Or what a Kennedy-curious conservative must have thought upon
discovering that he supports “full-term abortions.” (Or did until
very recently, anyway.) Familiarity breeds contempt, it’s said, and that’s
never more true than for third-party candidates. RFK’s polling probably had
nowhere to go but down.
He had another problem in this campaign that independent
insurgents don’t normally face. The “anti-establishment” lane is already
occupied by one of the major-party candidates.
When Ross Perot made a go of it in 1992, he had the
advantage of facing two milquetoast centrists in George H.W. Bush and Bill
Clinton. For populists who wanted to shake up “the system,” Perot was the only
game in town. Not so for Kennedy, who’s been forced to try to out-populist a
figure in Trump who was himself elected to the presidency in 2016 as a radical
antidote to “the system.”
And unlike most “outsiders” who head to Washington and
promptly go native, Trump is loonier today than he was eight years ago. If it’s
true that populist voters care less about ideology than about supporting “the
craziest son of a b-tch in the race,” RFK faces an all but insurmountable
challenge in trying to top the Republican nominee for president.
Kennedy’s fundamental strategic problem as a candidate,
in fact, is that he persists in trying to gain traction on both sides despite
the obvious difficulty of getting to Trump’s right. That’s led him into some
awkward and almost certainly counterproductive panders, such as when he told a
right-wing podcast last month that he “viscerally”
opposes removing Confederate monuments. Is that going to convince any
reactionaries to prefer him to Trump? Nope.
Is it going to improve his standing with the progressives
he’s courting on the other side? Big nope. It’s the sort of
play that might have been interesting if the race were between two major-party
nominees who agree that America shouldn’t pay public tribute to a slave
regime’s military wing. That is not the race we have, alas.
There’s one more reason Kennedy might be in decline.
Paradoxically, an election with a huge number of “double-haters” may be less hospitable
to third-party candidates than the average election is.
Longtime readers know my
reasoning about that. The ideal political climate for an independent isn’t
a race in which Americans have strong negative feelings about the major-party
candidates, it’s a race in which they don’t have strong feelings either way. In
a low-stakes election, a disgruntled voter might plausibly risk his vote on a
longshot challenger because he doesn’t care which major-party candidate
ultimately prevails.
Again, that is not the race we have.
The 2024 election is the highest of high-stakes campaigns
because of the threat Trump poses to the constitutional order and the threat
Biden poses to … ushering in a Kamala Harris presidency, I guess. (That, and
four more years of unchecked immigration.) By November, many Americans unhappy
with their choice will nonetheless develop a reasonably firm opinion of which
candidate presents the more diabolical threat to America. And they’ll hear over
and over again that the race will be tight, with each vote potentially
decisive.
Faced with that kind of psychological pressure, few will
end up throwing their votes away on a no-hoper like Kennedy. In fact, it may be
that the single biggest catalyst in RFK’s decline over the last three months
was the end of the presidential primaries and Americans being forced to reckon
with the reality that they actually are going to have to choose between
Trump and the other guy again. There’s no room for protest votes in an election
where disaster is on the ballot.
It might not be a coincidence that Kennedy’s June
swoon in polling appears to have begun just a few days after Trump was
convicted of 34 felonies in Manhattan. That’s exactly the sort of thing that
might sharpen the minds of disaffected voters who otherwise would have taken a
hard look at RFK. Do we want to have a convicted felon in the White House? Do
we want to let Democratic “lawfare” decide our elections?
Antiestablishmentarians on both sides are now thinking hard about it.
In the end, then, the dynamics of the race probably are
such that Kennedy never stood a chance.
But that doesn’t mean he was doomed to decline as quickly
as he has. Some of this is on him.
***
His insistence on competing for votes on both sides has
exposed him to twice the amount of hostile fire he otherwise would have taken
from the parties. Go figure that he ended up badly wounded before summer has
officially begun.
For months, fearing that he might end up winning more
support from their side than the other, Democratic and Republican party organs
have pummeled him. On the left, most of that dirty work has fallen to the
Democratic National Committee and a “war room” led by longtime
operative Lis Smith. The wider Kennedy
family has also joined the effort, posing for photos
with Biden to disabuse Camelot nostalgists of any sense that they owe their
support to RFK.
But on the right, Trump
himself has taken the lead in attacking Kennedy, leveraging his vast
influence among the base to undermine the source
of his opponent’s core appeal to right-wing cranks:
Again and again since April, Trump has personally derided
RFK as a secret
vaccine enthusiast and a not-so-secret leftist.
A pro-Trump super PAC launched
a website dedicated to the subject titled “Radical F—ing Kennedy.” Maybe most
importantly, after Kennedy withdrew from the Democratic primary and remade
himself as an independent, his fan club in right-wing media predictably soured
on him. Propagandists like Charlie Kirk were happy
to promote him when he was poised to play spoiler against Biden; once he
posed a risk to Trump too, the tone changed sharply.
That alone may explain the bulk of RFK’s declining
popularity. Remember, from the beginning of his presidential candidacy, he was
vastly more popular on
the right than on the left because of his hostility to the president
and to vaccination. As he’s gradually become anathema to MAGA cultists who fear
he might spoil Trump’s chances, his numbers have moved accordingly.
A second self-made problem for Kennedy is his choice of a
running mate. In a way, picking Nicole
Shanahan made too much sense and too little.
Shanahan is a lawyer and philanthropist whose claim to
fame is having received a very
large settlement in her divorce from Google founder Sergey Brin. As near as
anyone can tell, that’s the only reason Kennedy put her on the ticket: She’s
made of money and he needs a wealthy patron to bankroll his campaign given how
disappointing his grassroots fundraising has been.
By her own admission, Shanahan had spoken to Kennedy only
“a
few times” before laying out $4 million to help fund a Super Bowl ad for
his super PAC. In late May, after she became his running mate, the Washington
Post reported on their arrangement and discovered that RFK didn’t seem to
know what she was up to on the campaign trail and that Shanahan didn’t seem to
know his position on abortion.
She sure can write a check, though. In April, she accounted for
$8 million of the $10.7 million he raised.
Choosing her was as rational a decision as Robert F.
Kennedy Jr. is capable of making. But voters who are looking for “the craziest
son of a b-tch in the race” don’t want “rational.” They want gonzo idealism,
and a Silicon Valley plutocrat is the opposite of that. Shanahan’s selection
was greeted on social media with grumbling
about “globalism” from fans who expected RFK to choose someone who would
maximize his anti-establishment cred. Instead they got a shockingly mercenary
choice. As one Kennedy fan put
it, “How do you sell financial support as … inspiring to the general
public?”
You can’t have a rich cipher helping to lead a “great
cause” candidacy. RFK didn’t grasp that, and it’s been all downhill ever since.
There’s one more problem he’s had to cope with. Kennedy
is, shall we say, eccentric, and Americans tend not to like personal
eccentricity in major leaders.
The closest thing to an eccentric among national
political figures is Trump, of course, but “eccentric” is the wrong word to
describe him. (Well, maybe sometimes.)
His cultural tastes—fast food, action movies, UFC—are thoroughly mainstream.
And while he’s plainly unwell, his behavior rarely comes off as “odd” more so
than boorish and selfish. He acts the way most people would if they convinced
themselves that morality is for Boy Scouts and suckers. That’s not “eccentric,”
exactly. It’s rotten.
Many men seem to view him as an alpha-male role model, in
fact. God help us.
Kennedy is eccentric. The pet
emu, the interest in Aaron
Rodgers as a running mate, his diagnosis
with literal “brain worms”: All of that might be spinnable in isolation,
but the weight of it grows as it accumulates. And it’s all filtered through a
reputation for political kookery courtesy of a years-long crusade against
vaccination that has amassed a
body count and an insatiable
appetite for conspiracy theories.
Even his
voice is eccentric.
For the most disaffected populists, that’s all part of
his charm. But for normie voters who dislike Biden and Trump and who looked at
Kennedy early on as a potentially serious independent alternative, it’s
destined to be off-putting. It’s hard not to notice, in fact, that RFK’s
favorable rating at FiveThirtyEight
began ticking downward not long after the widely publicized “brain worms” story
appeared in the New
York Times.
Better to stick with a guy who’s senile or sociopathic,
normies may have concluded, than roll the dice on one who had “a worm that got
into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died.”
***
All of that said, I don’t think he’ll drop out.
Why should he? America will never again pay him as much
attention as it’s paying him right now. He has a sugar mama in Shanahan, who
seems poised to pick up his tab all the way to Election Day. And the pressure
he’s applying to the two major-party candidates on his pet issues could
successfully force
them toward his position, to our universal detriment:
The fact that Biden and Trump are as old as they are is
another incentive for Kennedy to hang in there. If one candidate or the other
suffers a crisis before November, a chunk of his populist support could peel
off to RFK in despair and resignation about the race’s outcome. There’s still a
scenario in which the Democratic and/or Republican candidate stumbles enough to
push Kennedy back into double digits.
But none of us would bet on it at this point, would we? His likely trajectory is further south as partisans on each side turn more frantic and apocalyptic about the consequences of losing to the other. We’ll be lucky to live again someday in a country happy and stable enough to make a third-party candidate truly competitive, where the stakes of national elections are low. It’ll be a while.
No comments:
Post a Comment