The consensus that emerged among pollsters and pundits across the political spectrum after RFK Jr.’s shock endorsement of Donald Trump was that it would have little effect on the outcome. But does that consensus reflect the same groupthink that missed the Trump surprise in 2016?
The editorial board of The Wall Street Journal warned that while Kennedy’s backing could possibly help Trump marginally in battleground states, “the price could be high if it includes putting Mr. Kennedy in a second Trump Administration,” concluding that “Mr. Trump’s best response is to thank RFK Jr. for his support, make no promises about the future, and by all means avoid joint campaign appearances” to avoid the taint of association with his fringe positions.
ABC News’ 538 polling site assured readers that “our analysis of the polling data suggests Kennedy’s endorsement of Trump will have a minimal impact on the race. Kennedy, who has consistently polled around 5 percent since Vice President Kamala Harris became the presumptive nominee, was drawing roughly equally from both Trump and Harris … [T]he effect of his departure on overall support for either candidate will be small.”
The New York Times’ analysis of the move asserts that the endorsement “is unlikely to change the nature of the race … in part because it is hard to know how many of Mr. Kennedy’s supporters will vote in November. They are less likely than others to have voted in 2020, and are also less likely to say they will vote come
