|  | | | | How RFK, Jr. Could Impact a Second Trump Presidency |
| Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has formally thrown his support to Donald Trump and delivered what could be an election-changing endorsement. The 2024 Presidential election is a tight race that will potentially come down to a small sliver of undecided voters in a handful of states.
From an investment standpoint, RFK’s alliance with Trump matters not only because it improves Trump’s odds of victory, but it also signals potential changes in how Trump would govern. Trump continues to break with establishment Republican orthodoxy on a wide range of economic issues from trade to industrial policy.
With RFK now likely to play an important role within a potential second Trump administration, we would expect a less hands-off approach and more active involvement in many sectors of the economy, from healthcare to agriculture to technology. This could be good or bad, depending on the company. Investors need to be tuned into these possible policy shifts and understand what drives them. |
|  | RFK Endorses Trump: Impact on Election and Markets |
| RFK’s campaign was controversial from the start, given the near-royal status of the Kennedy name within the Democratic Party. His attempt to primary an incumbent President was an affront to party leadership. RFK was stymied by extensive legal efforts to keep him off the ballot and perhaps equally extensive media efforts to portray him as unhinged.
Many of RFK’s own family members, who fall within the mainstream of current Democratic Party thinking, participated in the attacks against him. They have tried desperately to separate the Kennedy name from his political activities.
Now that he is asking his supporters to get behind Trump, the stakes are even higher. RFK’s own sister described the Trump endorsement as an “inexplicable effort to desecrate and trample and set fire to my father’s memory.”
Who really represents the Kennedy legacy?
Superficially, it may indeed seem like a family betrayal that the nephew of one of the most famous Democrats in history would line up behind Donald Trump.
Trump is not only a Republican, but he is brash, at times insensitive and a master of lowbrow humor. JFK was eloquent and high-minded.
John F. Kennedy had a deep admiration for the poetry of Robert Frost, who was also a personal friend. Trump, on the other hand, has a close personal relationship with Kid Rock.
While their personalities are not exactly identical, as politicians, there happen to be some very significant overlaps. In fact, Trump and JFK seem to align philosophically on many of the most important subjects that face any President—including taxes, foreign policy, industrial policy and Constitutional interpretation.
RFK, Jr.’s uncle was elected as the 35th President of the United States in 1960 at the age of 43. His father, Robert F. Kennedy, became the young President’s Attorney General and closest advisor.
JFK was assassinated just about three years after getting elected amidst circumstances that remain subject to all kinds of speculation. RFK was assassinated by Sirhan Sirhan, a pro-Palestinian activist, about five years later, on the first anniversary of the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. RFK’s oldest son Bobby was 14 years old at the time.
After endorsing Trump last week, RFK, Jr. offered his own explanation as to why the MAGA movement represents a continuation of the values and beliefs for which his uncle and his father sacrificed their lives. |
| | "Make America Great Again" recalls a nation brimming with vitality, with a can-do spirit, with hope and a belief in itself. It was an America that was beginning to confront its darker shadows, could acknowledge the injustice in its past and present, yet at the same time could celebrate its successes. It was a nation of broad prosperity, the world's most vibrant middle class, and a idealistic belief (though not consistently applied) in freedom, justice, and democracy. It was a nation that led the world in innovation, productivity, and technology. - Robert F. Kennedy tweet (8/25/2024) |
| | The question of who truly represents the ideals of JFK and RFK—RFK, Jr. or his mainstream Democrat family members—is more than an interesting historical debate. The subject sheds light on the enormous political shifts that have taken place in both the Democratic and Republican parties in recent years.
Notwithstanding obvious differences, as individuals, there are in fact some interesting parallels between JFK and DJT. Like Trump, the real John F. Kennedy was a charming, talented and passionate man—but also complicated and imperfect, to put it gently.
JFK was of course a World War II veteran, while Trump never served. But both of them came from prominent East Coast families. With distinctive charisma and flair, both men shined in the age of television. Like Kennedy, when Trump was in his forties, he was celebrated nationally as a debonair symbol of American success and prosperity. |
|  | | Democrats are keen to cling to the Kennedy legacy, which still generates immense affection among patriotic Americans. The emotional connection transcends partisan affiliation. That tragic moment on November 22, 1963—when a young President and father had his life taken from him in a Dallas motorcade—remains seared in our national consciousness. Even those born after the event grasp its significance within American culture.
The Kennedy mystique remains central to the Democratic Party brand—optimistic and forward-looking, lofty yet compassionate. Bill Clinton was inspired by an interaction with JFK as a young man. Barack Obama is spending his (very active) retirement years in Martha’s Vineyard. Every male Democrat politician seems to emulate JFK in some way.
Preserving the connection to JFK is essential for modern day Democrats, who are persistently fighting an uphill battle to claim the political center. Kamala Harris, for example, is being aggressively repackaged as a moderate despite having had one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate.
So much of our memory of JFK is based on style rather than substance: the popped collars, disarming wit, and uplifting rhetoric in a Boston accent. But when it comes to policy, what did JFK actually believe, and which party now more accurately reflects his point of view?
JFK was only President for three years, but through his campaign against Richard Nixon and the few years he served as President, we get a fairly clear picture of where he stood on a wide range of issues.
Tax cuts and growth
Democrats today speak urgently of the need to raise taxes on the wealthy, corporate profits, and capital gains (realized or unrealized). They generally seek to expand the size and scope of government.
Yet JFK was perhaps the most ardent advocate for tax cuts of the post-war era—and even disagreed with his Republican rival Richard Nixon on this topic. Top marginal personal income tax rates were 91% when JFK submitted his January 1963 tax cutting proposal.
In a December 1962 speech to the Economic Club of New York, JFK explained his plans to move forward with sweeping personal and corporate income tax rate reductions. Kennedy saw American industry and the private sector in general as the source of America’s strength. |
| | But the most direct and significant kind of federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand -- to cut the fetters which hold back private spending…. If government is to retain the confidence of the people, it must not spend more than can be justified on grounds of national need or spent with maximum efficiency…. The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system -- and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in 1963. - John F. Kennedy (12/14/1962) |
| | Technological leadership
Kennedy was interested in unlocking the potential of the private sector via reduced taxation because he understood how important a vibrant economy was to uphold America’s global leadership position. Along the same lines, he was focused on industrial policies that would strengthen America’s technological edge.
JFK was famous for sponsoring the space program and the lunar landing. This involved an enormous commitment of resources and investment, which was motivated in large part by competition with the Soviets.
Trump himself has been quite steadfast in his commitment to promoting American dominance in space. Having established the U.S. Space Force in 2019, just this week, Trump announced he wants to create the Space National Guard “as the primary combat reserve of the U.S. Space Force.”
Trump’s approach to fostering American leadership in artificial intelligence (AI) also reflects a Kennedy-esque sense of competitive urgency. With China top of mind, Trump wants to position the U.S. to achieve dominance in the technologies of the future.
In 2019, then President Trump signed the Executive Order on Maintaining American Leadership in AI. Trump continues to speak frequently on the importance of this initiative, which has created a certain level of enthusiasm for Trump within the U.S. tech and venture capital community. |
| | Continued American leadership in Artificial Intelligence is of paramount importance to maintaining the economic and national security of the United States. - Donald J. Trump |
| | Foreign policy pragmatism
JFK pursued a foreign policy that has been described by experts as “technocratic realism.” While he sought a militarily strong United States and was an ardent anti-communist, he was also cautious about the risk of military escalation and the intensification of conflict.
A veteran of World War II, Kennedy didn’t want war. In his inaugural address, he famously stated, “Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate.” |
|  | | There are significant parallels between the U.S. rivalry with the Soviet Union in the 1960s and the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine with Russia (and by extension China). Trump seeks a de-escalation of the conflict and a peaceful resolution, whereas Democrats continue with the narrative that Putin is a reincarnation of Hitler and must be defeated entirely. Joe Biden stated this directly in his most recent State of the Union address.
Just as Trump has expressed concerns about the risk of the conflict in Ukraine leading to World War III, Kennedy was keenly focused on avoiding catastrophic miscalculations that could lead to nuclear conflict, a doctrine known as “flexible response.” Evidence has surfaced that RFK himself played a key role in back channel dialogue with the Soviets.
Kennedy’s overall strategy for managing his Soviet adversaries resembles Trump’s posture towards America’s chief rivalry today, the Russia/China partnership. The shared elements are promoting economic strength, establishing deterrence, maintaining technological supremacy, avoiding conflict escalation, and engaging in diplomacy.
Like Trump, Kennedy was often criticized for being “soft” on Russia, but he maneuvered through a number of tense confrontations with the Soviets, most notably the Cuban Missile Crisis. Interestingly, the situation was resolved by a mutual agreement between the U.S. and the Soviets to keep out of one another’s backyards. Kennedy secretly agreed to remove ballistic missiles from Turkey after the Soviets removed theirs from Cuba.
JFK was a realist about great power competition. This is a stark contrast with the Biden administration’s apparent refusal to acknowledge the threat posed by NATO expansionism in Ukraine and the antagonistic nature of America’s extensive military involvement there.
The success of JFK’s foreign policy is the subject of much historical debate. But it would be his successor, Democrat Lyndon Johnson, who set in motion the policies that led to the Vietnam War and all the political, cultural, economic consequences that came with it. Whereas Kennedy stood for fiscal restraint, it was also LBJ who led the massive expansion of the welfare state that would characterize Democrats going forward. |
| Commitment to equality
JFK helped lay the groundwork for the 1960s Civil Rights legislation. Like Trump, he believed in rights-based human equality, as framed within the U.S. Constitution, and opposed racial discrimination. |
| | It ought to be possible, in short, for every American to enjoy the privileges of being American without regard to his race or his color…. We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution. The heart of the question is — whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities. - John F. Kennedy (6/11/1963) |
| | Today’s Democrats, especially Kamala Harris, explicitly reject the principle of racial equality that defines the traditional liberal perspective which JFK advanced. Instead, they seek to promote the concept of “equity,” which is derived from Critical Race Theory, an academic hybrid of postmodernism and neo-Marxism. JFK’s statements on equal rights are entirely incompatible with contemporary ideas about engineering “equal outcomes” among arbitrarily defined identity groups. |
|  | Harris calls for “equal outcomes” |
| Free speech
JFK’s commitment to the Constitutional principle of equal rights was matched by his fondness for freedom of speech. Kennedy understood that government could not and should not be in the business of regulating ideas. |
| | We seek a free flow of information across national boundaries and oceans, across iron curtains and stone walls. We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. - John F. Kennedy (2/26/1962) |
| | JFK’s ardent support for the First Amendment stands in stark contrast with complaints about “misinformation” coming from leading Democrats. The American left has rapidly lost interest in protecting free speech.
We suspect JFK would be unimpressed by Kamala Harris’s running mate Tim Walz’s position on the matter. JFK would no doubt understand that, under the Constitution, the government has no right to censor speech that it chooses to classify as “misinformation” or “hate speech.” |
|  | Walz calls for speech restrictions |
| Partisan shifts
As we have contended here before, the Republican Party under Donald Trump’s influence has been ideologically transformed. The Democratic Party has also evolved over the decades—from the generally pro-business post-war liberalism of JFK, which perhaps had its last gasp under Bill Clinton, to a party that today finds inspiration in higher taxes, deeper regulation, larger government, military conflict, identity-based preferences and speech restrictions.
JFK and RFK were assassinated some 60 years ago. Their descendants are entitled to believe whatever they wish to believe. But it does not require extensive historical investigation to verify RFK, Jr.’s claims about his family legacy.
Whether or not RFK, Jr.’s following is large enough to tilt the election in Trump’s favor is hard to judge. But to the extent traditional liberals can find their way past the smears against RFK, Jr. propagated by resentful family members and Democrat allies in the media, his decision to side with Trump could be impactful.
RFK, Jr.’s defection illuminates just how much the Democratic Party has drifted in a new direction and away from the founding principles of American government which inspired the Kennedy family in the 1960s.
Sector impacts
As we write, the election outcome essentially remains a toss-up within betting markets. PredictIt favors Harris, while crypto-based Polymarket gives a slight advantage to Trump.
The RFK, Jr. support base tends to align with younger, tech-oriented, pro-crypto voters that also gravitate towards more politically independent figures like Elon Musk. JD Vance himself has real connections to this segment of the emerging Trump coalition via his close connections with venture capitalist Peter Thiel, Vivek Ramaswamy and others.
A second Trump administration could see an even more robust commitment to the tech sector broadly, as well as aerospace and other industrial subsectors that feed into desired advancements in our technological infrastructure.
Notwithstanding their recent complicity in Biden administration censorship activity, as Mark Zuckerberg recently acknowledged, social media platforms may actually benefit from less pressure to stifle political and cultural dialogue. While some may view Big Tech suppression of speech as having been ideologically motivated, these companies are ultimately profit-driven and were arguably reacting somewhat rationally to heavy-handed government coercion.
On the other hand, while Big Tech may see a more permissive environment around political speech, it needs to worry about emerging Republican support for aggressive antitrust enforcement and regulation around its interactions with children.
Traditional media, which is already fighting technological headwinds, could see additional market share erosion if the climate around speech regulation and AI restrictions changes under another Trump Presidency.
The pharmaceutical and agricultural industries may also find themselves in a challenging spot, especially if Trump agrees to give RFK, Jr. a high degree of influence in these areas, which are especially important to him. Trump seems to have little interest in protecting profit streams that are correlated with the (very expensive) health problems of the American public.
While Trump is correctly perceived as generally pro-business, he surprised many during his first term with his willingness to threaten certain business interests through his implementation of tariffs and other policies.
In contrast with Bush-era Republicanism, Trump appears comfortable making some enemies within the private sector if it is necessary to achieve larger political or economic goals. His newfound alliance with RFK, Jr. only heightens the risk of inflicting certain casualties along the way.
Within our Model Portfolios, we are not relying on a Trump victory but continue to think carefully about how our individual positions line up relative to the evolving MAGA agenda. |
| |  | | | FOR SUBSCRIBER USE ONLY. DO NOT FORWARD OR SHARE. |
| | | | |  | |
|
|
|
|
|
