Prime minister’s approval drops to three-year low; party trails by 12-points in vote intention
September 7, 2023 – While the Bank of Canada holds steady – for now – on the borrowing rate, there appears to be little end in sight to a 15-month slump in Liberal political fortunes. The popularity of both the governing party and its leader, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, have been on a consistent slide, and the latest results of a public opinion survey from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute do nothing to reassure a shrinking Liberal base.
Trudeau’s perceived handling of the ongoing cost-of-living crisis has sent a significant segment of past LPC voters to both the New Democrats and opposition Conservatives and sent his personal approval down to levels unseen since early 2020.
This bleeding of support benefits the Conservative Party directly, with CPC vote intent now at 39 per cent, a 12-point advantage over the Liberals.
More critically, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is now seen as best prime minister by twice as many as those who say the same of the actual prime minister (32 versus 17 per cent) and is additionally viewed by a plurality (41 per cent) as best to manage the economy.
As many Canadians consider whether the grass is greener on the blue side of the fence, given the option, most would prefer a different arrangement in parliament than the Liberal minority, with NDP support, that Canada currently has. Two-in-five (38%) say a Conservative majority would be the best government for Canada going forward, slightly more than the proportion who prefer the ongoing NDP-Liberal supply-and-confidence set-up (35%). Equal numbers prefer a Liberal majority (13%) as a Conservative minority (15%).
Conversely, though a Conservative majority is the most preferred choice, it is also the most feared one. When presented with the same options and asked to evaluate which one would be worst for the country, more than two-in-five (43%) say a Conservative majority. A similar number (38%) believe a Liberal majority would be the worst possible government Canada could have over the next four years.
More Key Findings:
Fewer than half (45%) of 2021 Liberal voters currently say that Trudeau is the best option of the federal leaders to be prime minister. Comparatively, 77 per cent of past Conservative voters say Poilievre would be best.
The Liberal Party currently does not lead in vote intent in any region of the country canvassed in this survey. The LPC holds an advantage over the CPC in only one – Quebec – where it sits second behind the Bloc Québécois.
Conservative and Liberal vote intention has inverted in the 905 belt of Greater Toronto. Comparing data from last September, the Liberal Party has dropped 17 points in vote intention from 47 to 30 per cent, while the CPC has jumped 10 points from 36 to 46 per cent.
Those Canadians who are suffering most financially – a group that say they’re worse off this year than they were last year, and they expect this to continue to worsen into next year – are most likely to say the CPC is best on economic issues (56%). Just nine per cent of them trust the Liberals on this file, while 22 per cent say there’s no good option to help them.
About ARI
The Angus Reid Institute (ARI) was founded in October 2014 by pollster and sociologist, Dr. Angus Reid. ARI is a national, not-for-profit, non-partisan public opinion research foundation established to advance education by commissioning, conducting and disseminating to the public accessible and impartial statistical data, research and policy analysis on economics, political science, philanthropy, public administration, domestic and international affairs and other socio-economic issues of importance to Canada and its world.
Note: Because its small population precludes drawing discrete samples over multiple waves, data on Prince Edward Island is not released.
INDEX
Part One: Top issues
Part Two: Federal party leaders
Trudeau approval drops to three-year low
Poilievre sees modest gain in personal appeal
Singh, Blanchet both more favourably viewed
Who would make the best prime minister?
On economic issues, Poilievre preferred
Part Three: What kind of government do Canadians want?
Canadians divided between current minority and CPC majority as best result
CPC majority most feared result, followed by Liberal majority
Part Four: Vote intent
Regional results
Urban centres
Age and gender
Vote retention favours CPC
Part One: Top issues
As summer days dwindle and the cooler winds of autumn descend upon Canada (to the appreciation of many smoke- and fire-ravaged communities), the Bank of Canada took a break from applying heat to money markets. The BoC held its key policy rate at five per cent, as premiers in two of Canada’s largest provinces appealed on behalf of their residents for a halt to interest rate increases. Though inflation continues to simmer, Ontario premier Doug Ford highlighted the effect rising interest rates have had on mortgages and other borrowing costs. B.C. premier David Eby worried another rate hike could worsen inflation rather than help further.
The cost of living and inflation continue to be the given the highest priority by Canadians, unifying people across the political spectrum. Health care and housing affordability are also key priorities. Past Conservative voters emphasize economic issues, with others point to climate change as the issue they care most about:
Part Two: Federal party leaders
Trudeau approval drops to three-year low
As many Canadians suffer as a result of the cost-of-living crisis, so too do Justin Trudeau’s political fortunes. His personal approval has fallen to a three-year low of 33 per cent.
The prime minister and his government were heavily criticized after making assurances that housing affordability was a top priority but offering no new plans to address the issue following a three-day ministers retreat in August. Trudeau’s disapproval rises above three-in-five (63%) this quarter, a nine-point jump since the end of 2022:
Trudeau has seen his approval fall among women over the age of 54, who typically represent a source of stalwart support for the prime minister. Since he was re-elected with a minority government in 2021, Trudeau’s approval among all demographics has dropped, with a notable exception among men aged 18- to 34-years-old. Given the prime minister’s recent lack of personal popularity among this latter group, it is too early to tell whether this represents an anomaly in the trend line, or the beginning of a recovery among this segment:
Poilievre sees modest gain in personal appeal
Meanwhile, there has been a slow but positive trend this year for the leader of the Conservative party, Pierre Poilievre. He has gained favourability to the point where now two-in-five say they view Poilievre positively. Negative views of the leader of the opposition have remained consistent in the year since he won the Conservative leadership election, with approximately half of Canadians voicing this sentiment:
Singh, Blanchet both more favourably viewed
The leaders of the third- and fourth-most popular parties from the 2021 election are viewed more favourably than the prime minister and the leader of the opposition. More than two-in-five have a positive view of NDP leader Jagmeet Singh. In Quebec, half say they view Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet favourably (see detailed tables).
Who would make the best prime minister?
As Trudeau begins his third year as the leader of a minority government, few believe he is the best prime minister available. By a near two-to-one margin, Canadians choose Poilievre (32%) as the best option for prime minister over Trudeau (17%). Nearly as many believe Singh (16%) would be best to lead the country as the current PM. Notably, “none of the above” (26%) is the second-most popular option.
No demographic chooses Trudeau as the best prime minister at a plurality level, though among women older than 54, he (28%) and “no one” (28%) tie as the top pick. Two-in-five men aged 35 and older believe Poilievre is the best possible person of the three main party leaders to hold the country’s top job:
Past supporters of Trudeau’s party seem lukewarm on the man they helped elect to a third term in office. More than two-in-five (45%) say Trudeau is the best choice for PM, but that leaves more than half who are either unsure (10%) or say Singh (12%), Poilievre (7%) or none of the above (26%) are better options. Past NDP voters are more likely to believe their current party leader is the best pick for prime minister (50%), but not by much. Meanwhile, three-quarters (77%) of those who voted Conservative in 2021 say Poilievre represents the best choice to lead the country:
On economic issues, Poilievre preferred
The Bank of Canada took a break this month from its recent cycle of rate hikes, despite inflation still hovering above its intended target of two per cent. Recent economic data showed that Canada’s economy may be responding to previous rate increases. Unemployment is up, and Canada’s economy contracted in the second quarter, the first time it had done so since the onset of the pandemic. The short-term concern may be Canada is heading for a recession.
There is also trouble in Canada’s broader economic story. While Canada’s economy has grown in recent years, much of it has been fueled by rapid population growth. This has meant that Canadians’ standard of living, measured by GDP per capita, has declined at the same time, leaving Canada lagging behind other advanced economies.
Against this backdrop, and after eight years of Liberal government, just one-in-five (21%) believe Trudeau and the Liberals are the best equipped of the major political parties to handle the economy. Twice as many (41%) instead say it is Poilievre and the Conservatives.
Majorities of men older than 34, and pluralities of all other demographics except women aged 18 to 34, would hand the reins of the economy to Poilievre, given the choice:
Those who are most pessimistic about their own financial situation are even more likely to say that Poilievre and the CPC are their preferred leadership on economic issues. More than half (56%) of Canadians who say they are worse off now than they were at this point last year, and expect to see things worsen for them in the coming year, choose Poilievre and the CPC. Just nine per cent among this group trust Trudeau and the Liberal Party to lead them out of their challenges:
Liberals, New Democrats voice less confidence in their leadership on economy
The Liberal and NDP have maintained a minority government through a supply-and-confidence agreement signed six months after the 2021 election in advance of the new government’s first budget. As past supporters of those two parties evaluate the results of this cooperation, they offer perhaps mixed reviews. More than half of those who voted Liberal (54%) say Trudeau and the Liberals are the best choice to handle Canada’s economy, leaving a sizable group who select other options. Half (50%) of past NDP voters believe Singh and the NDP are the best choice.
Past CPC voters are far more certain. More than four-in-five (85%) believe Poilievre and the Conservatives are the best option for economic stewardship:
Part Three: What kind of government do Canadians want?
Canadians divided between current minority and CPC majority as best result
Assuming the supply-and-confidence agreement persists, the Liberal minority government is at its half-life. Looking forward, it seems however most Canadians would prefer an alternate arrangement. Given the choice, two-in-five (38%) say a Conservative majority would provide Canada with its best government over the next four years, more than who say the same of the current situation in parliament (35%). Another 15 per cent would like to see a Conservative minority government, while 13 per cent would prefer a return to a Liberal majority.
Those in Saskatchewan (61%) and Alberta (60%) are more likely than those in other provinces to believe a CPC majority would be the best government to lead the country. A plurality in B.C. (38%), Quebec (40%) and Nova Scotia (39%) support a continuation of the current NDP-Liberal agreement:
There appears to be reluctance from past Liberal voters to hand over full control of Canada’s government to their party for a term. Three-in-ten (30%) who voted Liberal in 2021 believe a Liberal majority would be the best government for Canada over the next four years. More (52%) among that group say the current arrangement, where the Liberals are supported by the NDP, is the better choice.
Comparatively, there is much less hesitancy from those who voted Conservative in 2021. Four-in-five (82%) among past CPC supporters say a Conservative majority would provide the best government to Canada:
CPC majority most feared result, followed by Liberal majority
While Conservative supporters heavily prefer their own party winning a majority government in the next federal election, this proposition causes heavy consternation for others. Indeed, the most feared result for a future election is exacly that – a CPC majority. More than two-in-five (44%) say this, including the largest proportion of respondents in B.C., Manitoba, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada. For others (38%) a Liberal majority is most troublesome. This group is largest in both Alberta and Saskatchewan:
As one might expect, past Conservatives tend to say a Liberal majority would be cause for alarm, and past Liberals and New Democrats say the same of that result for the CPC:
Part Four: Vote intent
These factors result in the continuation of a positive trend for the opposition Conservatives, with the official opposition party gaining two more points this quarter, at the cost of Liberal support. The CPC now hold a 12-point advantage in vote intention. This is by far the largest lead the party has held since the previous election in 2021. It is also the highest the Conservatives have risen in vote intent since March 2018, in the wake of a trip by Trudeau to India, described as a political “disaster”. Trudeau returns to the country for the first time since 2018 in the coming week.
Regional results
The CPC advantage has been built in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba in recent years. Now, it extends to Ontario and British Columbia. A 12-point edge in both of those provinces helps to produce the 12-point national lead. Compared to last year at this time, the Liberals are down six points in Ontario and four in B.C.:
Urban centres
Canada’s urban centres have represented the Liberal Party’s path to victory in recent elections, with few exceptions. The governing party is now splitting votes close to evenly in both Metro Vancouver and the Toronto core, a trend that spells trouble for its electoral fortunes if it persists. The biggest difference by far for the Liberals and Conservatives, however, is a swapping of positions in the Toronto suburbs:
Age and gender
The CPC continues to hold a distinct advantage among male voters. Perhaps the most difficult group to pin down currently, however, are young men, who embraced Poilievre early, but appear to have cooled off compared to last September. The challenge for the Liberal Party now appears to be a loss of support among women of all ages. Trudeau’s party is chosen third among young women, well behind both the NDP and CPC. The Liberals maintain a lead among older women, though that too has diminished – down nine points compared to last September:
Vote retention favours CPC
If an election were held at the time of fielding, 86 per cent of past Conservatives say they would cast the same vote now as they did in 2021, while few would depart. The same can not be said of 2021 Liberal voters. Two-thirds (65%) among this group say that they would support their Liberal candidate again, but 16 per cent say they would switch to the NDP, and approximately one-in-ten (9%) would vote for the opposition Conservatives. Similar movement is noted among past NDP voters:
This retention rate of approximately two-thirds represents a persistent challenge for the Liberals, who have seen a steady erosion of support since the last federal election. Both the Conservatives and NDP have chipped away at the government’s past voters:
Survey Methodology:
The Angus Reid Institute conducted an online survey from Aug. 31 to Sept. 6, 2023 among a representative randomized sample of 3,400 Canadian adults who are members of Angus Reid Forum. For comparison purposes only, a probability sample of this size would carry a margin of error of +/- 1.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. Discrepancies in or between totals are due to rounding. The survey was self-commissioned and paid for by ARI.
For detailed results by age, gender, region, education, and other demographics, click here.
To read the full report, including detailed tables and methodology, click here.
NEW YORK (AP) — In a new video posted early Election Day, Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in the television program “Baywatch” – red one-piece swimsuit and all – and asks viewers to vote.
In the two-and-a-half-minute clip, set to most of “Bodyguard,” a four-minute cut from her 2024 country album “Cowboy Carter,” Beyoncé cosplays as Anderson’s character before concluding with a simple message, written in white text: “Happy Beylloween,” followed by “Vote.”
At a rally for Donald Trump in Pittsburgh on Monday night, the former president spoke dismissively about Beyoncé’s appearance at a Kamala Harris rally in Houston in October, drawing boos for the megastar from his supporters.
“Beyoncé would come in. Everyone’s expecting a couple of songs. There were no songs. There was no happiness,” Trump said.
She did not perform — unlike in 2016, when she performed at a presidential campaign rally for Hillary Clinton in Cleveland – but she endorsed Harris and gave a moving speech, initially joined onstage by her Destiny’s Child bandmate Kelly Rowland.
“I’m not here as a celebrity, I’m not here as a politician. I’m here as a mother,” Beyoncé said.
“A mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we’re not divided,” she said at the rally in Houston, her hometown.
“Imagine our daughters growing up seeing what’s possible with no ceilings, no limitations,” she continued. “We must vote, and we need you.”
Harris used the song in July during her first official public appearance as a presidential candidate at her campaign headquarters in Delaware. That same month, Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, publicly endorsed Harris for president.
Beyoncé gave permission to Harris to use the song, a campaign official who was granted anonymity to discuss private campaign operations confirmed to The Associated Press.
Outside of sports and a “Cold front coming down from Canada,” American news media only report on Canadian events that they believe are, or will be, influential to the US. Therefore, when Justin Trudeau’s announcement, having finally read the room, that Canada will be reducing the number of permanent residents admitted by more than 20 percent and temporary residents like skilled workers and college students will be cut by more than half made news south of the border, I knew the American media felt Trudeau’s about-face on immigration was newsworthy because many Americans would relate to Trudeau realizing Canada was accepting more immigrants than it could manage and are hoping their next POTUS will follow Trudeau’s playbook.
Canada, with lots of space and lacking convenient geographical ways for illegal immigrants to enter the country, though still many do, has a global reputation for being incredibly accepting of immigrants. On the surface, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver appear to be multicultural havens. However, as the saying goes, “Too much of a good thing is never good,” resulting in a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, which you can almost taste in the air. A growing number of Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, are blaming recent immigrants for causing the housing affordability crises, inflation, rise in crime and unemployment/stagnant wages.
Throughout history, populations have engulfed themselves in a tribal frenzy, a psychological state where people identify strongly with their own group, often leading to a ‘us versus them’ mentality. This has led to quick shifts from complacency to panic and finger-pointing at groups outside their tribe, a phenomenon that is not unique to any particular culture or time period.
My take on why the American news media found Trudeau’s blatantly obvious attempt to save his political career, balancing appeasement between the pitchfork crowd, who want a halt to immigration until Canada gets its house in order, and immigrant voters, who traditionally vote Liberal, newsworthy; the American news media, as do I, believe immigration fatigue is why Kamala Harris is going to lose on November 5th.
Because they frequently get the outcome wrong, I don’t take polls seriously. According to polls in 2014, Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals were in a dead heat in Ontario, yet Wynne won with more than twice as many seats. In the 2018 Quebec election, most polls had the Coalition Avenir Québec with a 1-to-5-point lead over the governing Liberals. The result: The Coalition Avenir Québec enjoyed a landslide victory, winning 74 of 125 seats. Then there’s how the 2016 US election polls showing Donald Trump didn’t have a chance of winning against Hillary Clinton were ridiculously way off, highlighting the importance of the election day poll and, applicable in this election as it was in 2016, not to discount ‘shy Trump supporters;’ voters who support Trump but are hesitant to express their views publicly due to social or political pressure.
My distrust in polls aside, polls indicate Harris is leading by a few points. One would think that Trump’s many over-the-top shenanigans, which would be entertaining were he not the POTUS or again seeking the Oval Office, would have him far down in the polls. Trump is toe-to-toe with Harris in the polls because his approach to the economy—middle-class Americans are nostalgic for the relatively strong economic performance during Trump’s first three years in office—and immigration, which Americans are hyper-focused on right now, appeals to many Americans. In his quest to win votes, Trump is doing what anyone seeking political office needs to do: telling the people what they want to hear, strategically using populism—populism that serves your best interests is good populism—to evoke emotional responses. Harris isn’t doing herself any favours, nor moving voters, by going the “But, but… the orange man is bad!” route, while Trump cultivates support from “weird” marginal voting groups.
To Harris’s credit, things could have fallen apart when Biden abruptly stepped aside. Instead, Harris quickly clinched the nomination and had a strong first few weeks, erasing the deficit Biden had given her. The Democratic convention was a success, as was her acceptance speech. Her performance at the September 10th debate with Donald Trump was first-rate.
Harris’ Achilles heel is she’s now making promises she could have made and implemented while VP, making immigration and the economy Harris’ liabilities, especially since she’s been sitting next to Biden, watching the US turn into the circus it has become. These liabilities, basically her only liabilities, negate her stance on abortion, democracy, healthcare, a long-winning issue for Democrats, and Trump’s character. All Harris has offered voters is “feel-good vibes” over substance. In contrast, Trump offers the tangible political tornado (read: steamroll the problems Americans are facing) many Americans seek. With Trump, there’s no doubt that change, admittedly in a messy fashion, will happen. If enough Americans believe the changes he’ll implement will benefit them and their country…
The case against Harris on immigration, at a time when there’s a huge global backlash to immigration, even as the American news media are pointing out, in famously immigrant-friendly Canada, is relatively straightforward: During the first three years of the Biden-Harris administration, illegal Southern border crossings increased significantly.
The words illegal immigration, to put it mildly, irks most Americans. On the legal immigration front, according to Forbes, most billion-dollar startups were founded by immigrants. Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, to name three, have immigrants as CEOs. Immigrants, with tech skills and an entrepreneurial thirst, have kept America leading the world. I like to think that Americans and Canadians understand the best immigration policy is to strategically let enough of these immigrants in who’ll increase GDP and tax base and not rely on social programs. In other words, Americans and Canadians, and arguably citizens of European countries, expect their governments to be more strategic about immigration.
The days of the words on a bronze plaque mounted inside the Statue of Liberty pedestal’s lower level, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” are no longer tolerated. Americans only want immigrants who’ll benefit America.
Does Trump demagogue the immigration issue with xenophobic and racist tropes, many of which are outright lies, such as claiming Haitian immigrants in Ohio are abducting and eating pets? Absolutely. However, such unhinged talk signals to Americans who are worried about the steady influx of illegal immigrants into their country that Trump can handle immigration so that it’s beneficial to the country as opposed to being an issue of economic stress.
In many ways, if polls are to be believed, Harris is paying the price for Biden and her lax policies early in their term. Yes, stimulus spending quickly rebuilt the job market, but at the cost of higher inflation. Loosen border policies at a time when anti-immigrant sentiment was increasing was a gross miscalculation, much like Trudeau’s immigration quota increase, and Biden indulging himself in running for re-election should never have happened.
If Trump wins, Democrats will proclaim that everyone is sexist, racist and misogynous, not to mention a likely White Supremacist, and for good measure, they’ll beat the “voter suppression” button. If Harris wins, Trump supporters will repeat voter fraud—since July, Elon Musk has tweeted on Twitter at least 22 times about voters being “imported” from abroad—being widespread.
Regardless of who wins tomorrow, Americans need to cool down; and give the divisive rhetoric a long overdue break. The right to an opinion belongs to everyone. Someone whose opinion differs from yours is not by default sexist, racist, a fascist or anything else; they simply disagree with you. Americans adopting the respectful mindset to agree to disagree would be the best thing they could do for the United States of America.
PHOENIX (AP) — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent proponent of debunked public health claims whom Donald Trump has promised to put in charge of health initiatives, said Saturday that Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water on his first day in office if elected president.
Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.
Kennedy made the declaration Saturday on the social media platform X alongside a variety of claims about the heath effects of fluoride.
“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S. water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote. Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, “want to Make America Healthy Again,” he added, repeating a phrase Trump often uses and links to Kennedy.
Trump told NBC News on Sunday that he had not spoken to Kennedy about fluoride yet, “but it sounds OK to me. You know it’s possible.”
The former president declined to say whether he would seek a Cabinet role for Kennedy, a job that would require Senate confirmation, but added, “He’s going to have a big role in the administration.”
Asked whether banning certain vaccines would be on the table, Trump said he would talk to Kennedy and others about that. Trump described Kennedy as “a very talented guy and has strong views.”
The sudden and unexpected weekend social media post evoked the chaotic policymaking that defined Trump’s White House tenure, when he would issue policy declarations on Twitter at virtually all hours. It also underscored the concerns many experts have about Kennedy, who has long promoted debunked theories about vaccine safety, having influence over U.S. public health.
In 1950, federal officials endorsed water fluoridation to prevent tooth decay, and continued to promote it even after fluoride toothpaste brands hit the market several years later. Though fluoride can come from a number of sources, drinking water is the main source for Americans, researchers say.
Officials lowered their recommendation for drinking water fluoride levels in 2015 to address a tooth condition called fluorosis, that can cause splotches on teeth and was becoming more common in U.S. kids.
In August, a federal agency determined “with moderate confidence” that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. The National Toxicology Program based its conclusion on studies involving fluoride levels at about twice the recommended limit for drinking water.
A federal judge later cited that study in ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to further regulate fluoride in drinking water. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen cautioned that it’s not certain that the amount of fluoride typically added to water is causing lower IQ in kids, but he concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk that it could be. He ordered the EPA to take steps to lower that risk, but didn’t say what those measures should be.
In his X post Saturday, Kennedy tagged Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the plaintiff in that lawsuit, the environmental advocacy group Food & Water Watch.
Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization has a lawsuit pending against news organizations including The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy is on leave from the group but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.
What role Kennedy might hold if Trump wins on Tuesday remains unclear. Kennedy recently told NewsNation that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and some agencies under the Department of Agriculture.
But for now, the former independent presidential candidate has become one of Trump’s top surrogates. Trump frequently mentions having the support of Kennedy, a scion of a Democratic dynasty and the son of former Attorney General Robert Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy.
Kennedy traveled with Trump Friday and spoke at his rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin.
Trump said Saturday that he told Kennedy: “You can work on food, you can work on anything you want” except oil policy.
“He wants health, he wants women’s health, he wants men’s health, he wants kids, he wants everything,” Trump added.
