IN THE SUMMER of 2000, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a scion of the Democratic Party dynasty, took time out of his schedule as an environmental attorney to write an op-ed for the New York Times. In the piece, Kennedy hailed consumer advocate Ralph Nader as his “friend and hero,” but he lambasted him for mounting a third-party run for president. Nader could “siphon votes” from Vice President Al Gore, who was running against Texas Gov. George W. Bush, Kennedy warned, saying it was “irresponsible” for Nader to argue that there was “little distinction” between the Democratic and Republican nominees. A vote for Nader, Kennedy asserted, “is a vote for Mr. Bush” and for what he considered a disaster: the Republicans’ anti-environment agenda.
That was then.
Twenty-four years later, now an anti-vaxxer and conspiracy theorist, Kennedy has broken with the Democratic Party and is running for president as an independent. He insists that unlike Nader, he’s no spoiler, and he dismisses the notion that his presence in the race will help either former President Donald Trump or President Joe Biden. Political analysts are uncertain which candidate will benefit more from Kennedy’s campaign. The Kennedy brand could hold appeal for some Democrats, but his paranoia-drenched attacks on the public health community could also be catnip for Trump voters. “I think Americans should have a choice,” Kennedy told NBC News, “that they shouldn’t be forced to choose the least of two evils.”
Democratic and Republican political pros have good cause to be jittery about how third-party or
