Editor's Note: The following series on RFK's impact on the presidential race first published on Divided We Fall and features perspectives from Ipsos Senior VP Chris Jackson and Dr. David Richards. It has been republished with permission Divided We Fall. Photo by Gage Skidmore on Flickr.

Author's note: The first four entries of this series were written before RFK Jr. announced the end of his campaign, while the final was written after his announcement. 

Third Parties Are Negligible This Election Season 

By Chris Jackson – Senior Vice President, Ipsos Public Polling

In the days since President Joe Biden announced his withdrawal from the 2024 presidential campaign and Vice President Kamala Harris ascended as the nominee, the understanding of the potential impact of third-party candidates—particularly Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—has been muddled. 

Before Biden stepped out of the race, there was a widely held conventional wisdom that while third-party candidates, like Kennedy, had virtually no chance of winning the election, they could influence a close race between Biden and Trump. After all, the last two presidential elections came down to a few thousand votes across a handful of states, margins more than covered by the third-party vote in those elections. 

However, with Harris on the ticket and a bump in Trump’s standing after the attempted assassination and the Republican National Convention, it looks less likely that third parties will be a determining factor in 2024.

Third-Party Success Is Tied to “Protest Votes”

While there is a small core of committed Libertarians, Greens, and other ideologies, historically, third parties in America are best classified as a means of expressing discontent with the current candidates, as opposed to specific ideologies or policies.

The occasions when a third-party candidate received significant numbers of votes (John Anderson in 1980; Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996; Ralph Nader in 2000; Gary Johnson and Jill Stein in 2016) are characterized by periods where the major-party candidates were relatively unpopular. This was certainly the case at the start of the 2024 campaign season, featuring the two oldest and least-liked presidential candidates in modern American history. Thus, the matchup of Biden against Trump was ripe for a strong performance by Kennedy and other third-party figures given third-party performance is best understood as a protest against the prevailing two-party system. For the past two decades, a majority of Americans have reported they believe the system is broken. When that sentiment combines with unpopular figures, it is a recipe for protests and protest votes.

The New Democratic Ticket Pushes RFK Jr. Aside 

However, Kamala Harris’ replacement of Biden on the Democratic ticket and some positive shifts in views of former President Donald Trump have undermined this logic, at least for now. Since securing the Democratic nomination, Harris’ favorability ratings have climbed into the mid-40 percent range. Similarly, after the RNC, Trump’s favorability numbers have climbed above 40 percent, an overall high since January 6th. This increasing favorability has reduced the number of “double haters” that dislike both candidates and serves as the most likely reservoir for a third-party vote. Kennedy’s performance in polls has declined correspondingly. 

It’s possible campaign effects may push sentiments toward these two figures back into negative territory; indeed, we should expect it in modern American politics. But in the absence of widespread disaffection, we should not anticipate a major, election-deciding third-party vote.

RFK Jr. Will Lose—But He Can Still Make or Break Swing States

By Dr. David Richards – Chair of Political Science, University of Lynchburg

I don’t disagree with Mr. Jackson’s points. The idea that Kennedy could win is out of the question, and it is doubtful he will come anywhere near the votes that Perot or Anderson did in their unsuccessful third-party runs. As of this writing, Kennedy is not even polling at his May 2024 peak of over 16 percent. He is now settled into just over 5 percent and has held steady since dropping right after Biden announced his withdrawal from the race. The drop from his high in May indicates how Kennedy did have an impact on this race, at least indirectly if not directly. 

How RFK Jr. Has Influenced Major-Party Dynamics 

When the race was still between Biden and Trump, as Mr. Jackson notes above, the “double-hater” polling was high. Kennedy offered a suitable alternative to the other two candidates. He is younger and less well-known, so he seemed like a reasonable option. His numbers held even as more coverage of his actual political positions became known. People were willing to put up with his unusual policy slate if it meant moving on from Biden and Trump. This was not lost on either candidate. Trump often swung out at Kennedy, while also trying to co-opt him. And inside the Democratic Party, some voiced worries about Kennedy stealing the precious few percentage points they would need to win swing states. 

I am not saying Biden withdrew because of Kennedy. But certainly, as part of the larger obstacles to Biden winning in November, RFK Jr.’s candidacy had a role to play. 

Support for RFK Jr. Could Tip the Balance in Swing States 

The other question that remains is whether Kennedy will now have an impact on the general election. I would argue he still could. Right now, his 6 percent in the polls is far higher than the third-place Libertarian party in 2020, which earned 1.2 percent of the vote. Libertarians did better in 2016, with over 3 percent, but still under Kennedy’s current numbers. Even if he slips down to 2 or 3 percent, it might be enough to swing states like Wisconsin or Pennsylvania—both states where Biden won with just a little over the 1 percent margin. 

Lastly, with the introduction of Harris, who seems to be appealing to the Democratic base in ways Biden did not, Kennedy now seems to draw more from the Republican base than the Democrats. In June, according to Marquette polling, Kennedy drew about 6 percent of Democrats and Republican voters. By the end of July, the number of Democrats supporting Kennedy dropped to 4 percent but rose to 8 percent for Republicans. 

It is still too early to see what all this means exactly. Kennedy’s dropping poll numbers could make where he draws his votes from less important, but in an electorate so closely divided, just a few percentage points might make Kennedy a king-maker, even if he will not be the king.

Third-Party Voting Behavior Minimizes RFK Jr.’s Impact 

By Chris Jackson – Senior Vice President, Ipsos Public Polling

It is good to see that Dr. Richards and I agree on many points. We agree the chance of Kennedy becoming president is near zero. And we agree that currently, Kennedy appears to have the largest impact on Donald Trump’s potential base. However, I still do not think his candidacy, if he is still running in November, will be the deciding factor in the 2024 election.

Yes, Kennedy’s relatively strong showing in the first half of the year might have contributed to spooking Democrats into pushing Biden out of the race. However, Biden’s performance in the June debate was more influential. All reports suggested that most establishment Democrats were going along with the Biden campaign talking points that he would be able to recover many of his soft supporters once the campaign kicked into gear. Only after Biden appeared unable to change the trajectory of the campaign did the party elite turn on him.

Third-Party Votes Don’t Pan Out

The historical dynamic for independent votes continues to suggest Kennedy will be a minimal player. First, third-party candidates almost always underperform their poll standing in American elections. People who are disgruntled with the political system use the poll to voice their unhappiness, but many end up not voting when their preferred candidate seems unlikely to win. This suggests that even with Kennedy currently polling around 5 percent, he’s likely to see 1 or 2 percent of the actual vote come November. This could certainly be a deciding amount, but only if those voters could be swayed by the main candidates.

This is where understanding the dynamics of American voting behavior becomes more important. The popular perception is that there is a group of swing voters who change their minds on who they support and that this group decides elections. Statistical analysis suggests a more accurate view is that most Americans already have pretty firm preferences on who they will support—the real question is whether they will show up to vote. It is somewhat of a survey construction fallacy that independent voters are pushed to say if they would support one of the main candidates, but their certainty to vote drops way down after that push. So, it is likely that Kennedy supporters would just not vote rather than support Trump or Harris.

RFK Jr., while he seemed to be a potential kingmaker at the start of the year, now appears to be a footnote in the 2024 election.

RFK Jr. May Swing States, But His Chances Are Grim

By Dr. David Richards – Chair of Political Science, University of Lynchburg

Mr. Jackson and I are not far apart regarding Kennedy because we are both looking at the facts rather than opinions. This is why we can agree on Kennedy’s ill-fated run. 

I still believe that if the swing states remain close, within 2 to 3 percent, then Kennedy’s 3 to 5 percent of the vote will be a deciding factor. This is especially true if Kennedy drops out and endorses Trump. If he can give Trump an extra percentage point in a state like Pennsylvania, it may give Trump the state. However, if the race begins to drift one way or the other, as we saw with Trump’s rise before Biden withdrew, or Harris’ recent rise in the polls, then Kennedy’s voters will not have much of an effect. As Mr. Jackson points out, it is doubly true if his supporters simply stay home, rather than vote for someone they didn’t like in the first place. 

RFK Jr.’s Failure to Capture Attention on the Issues 

I agree about the overall impact of Kennedy’s campaign. Unlike other third-party candidates we remember, Kennedy was never able to push one of his issues into the mainstream conversation. Ross Perot, for example, was able to make the deficit a central issue in the 1992 campaign. Kennedy got plenty of press coverage, but never for the issues he supported. 

The lesson from Kennedy’s run is that the two-party system is still firmly entrenched in the United States. Absent a major issue a party could coalesce around, there does not seem to be room for a third party. Kennedy has run short of money, with most mega-donors more interested in backing candidates with a reasonable chance of winning. He has also struggled to get on the ballots in all 50 states, something the two major parties do with ease, thanks to their massive organizations. The odds were stacked against him, and Kennedy, like so many others who ran under a third-party banner, was not able to overcome those odds.

RFK Jr. Faced Defeat from Day One 

By Chris Jackson – Senior Vice President, Ipsos Public Polling

RFK Jr.’s campaign ended because the reason for its existence ceased to be, and he did not put in the work to build a more sustainable effort.

America’s democratic system is built to make it difficult for anyone outside the main political parties to seek office, particularly for the presidency. You may dislike the parties, but they are made of thousands of elected officials, tens of thousands of staff, and millions of supporters. It’s a common mistake of third-party actors to assume a singular individual can match that. Indeed, it is a mark of astounding hubris to think an individual can independently vault into the presidency. It discounts the real work and labor of those thousands of people who fundamentally care about the democratic system.

People forget that the last time a “new” party was born, it started by winning local and congressional seats before Abraham Lincoln captured the presidency and the party earned its name. There has been no serious effort to build an equivalent organization harnessing the shared beliefs of a large cross-section of society, only glorified vanity projects by individuals.

Modern third-party candidates feed off the resentment toward the Democratic and Republican systems. Many of these grievances are real and valid, but just as many are fueled by a media environment focusing on conflict and a public that is more than willing to be entertained. Once Biden dropped out and Harris accepted the nomination, half of that equation disappeared. With generally sympathetic coverage and Harris’ strong personal favorability ratings—at least for now—the animosity toward both sides has diminished. RFK Jr.’s reason to be a candidate diminished with it.

How Third Party-Flaws Sealed RFK Jr.’s Fate 

By Dr. David Richards – Chair of Political Science, University of Lynchburg

RFK Jr. was always a long shot, but several problems doomed his run. The main factor was money. While he raised millions from supporters, that is a drop in the bucket compared to the billions that will be spent in this election cycle. Once he ran out, it was over. He needed money not only to campaign but also to try to get on all 50 states’ ballots.

The two-party system we have was also stacked against him. In many states, rules about getting on the ballot often make it difficult for third-party candidates to qualify. Both major parties have large operations in every state, while RFK Jr. was starting from scratch. 

But I think the main reason Kennedy was unable to last this campaign season was that he never had a defining issue to grab the general public’s attention. He had plenty of policy proposals and took unique stands on issues, but nothing seemed to catch on. The last successful third-party candidate, Ross Perot (who still only got a maximum of 18 percent of the vote in 1992), focused on the national debt, and he got the two major-party candidates to talk about the issue. RFK Jr. never was able to do that.

About The Authors

Dr. David Richards is the Chair of Political Science and International Relations at the University of Lynchburg. He received his Ph.D. in American and Comparative Government from the School of Public Affairs at American University. His research focus includes U.S.-Cuban relations and American elections.

Chris Jackson is a Senior Vice President and lead for the Ipsos Public Polling practice in the United States. His research specialties include public opinion trends, election polling, strategic communications research and reputation research. He works with a wide variety of public and private sector clients including Ipsos media partners Thomson Reuters, the Washington Post, and ABC News. He is also a spokesperson for Ipsos Public Affairs in the U.S.