Like many people driving an electric car for the first time, Mikey Marohn had questions: Could he drive hundreds of miles to visit his father without stopping? Where would the chargers be? How did you turn it on?
“I’m anxious,” said Mr. Marohn, a 34-year-old carpenter, as he settled behind the wheel of a Chevrolet Bolt near Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming.
But after a test drive with Alicia Cox, executive director of Yellowstone-Teton Clean Cities, a nonprofit group that promotes green transportation, Mr. Marohn had gone from skeptical to curious.
“I would consider it,” he said after Ms. Cox explained that he could save $3,000 a year in fuel costs if he replaced his Chevy Impala with a Bolt. “I’d like to save money and help the planet.”
Green energy and transportation have advanced faster than many experts thought possible a few years ago. But many hurdles remain, including efforts by conservative politicians to prolong the use of coal, oil and gas and campaigns by environmentalists and local residents to block new wind turbines, transmission lines and mines.
Just as important will be persuading people like Mr. Marohn that electric cars, renewable energy and electric heaters and stoves are practical, economical and exciting.
Ms. Cox, who travels Wyoming offering free rides in the Chevy Bolt, is part of a broad, and sometimes quixotic, retail effort to win hearts and minds in the fight against climate change, one person at a time. Biden administration officials are trying to highlight to voters the economic benefits of his energy and industrial policies. Corporations like General Motors, which makes the Bolt, are spending billions of dollars to build electric vehicles they hope to sell everywhere, even in conservative states like Wyoming.
Alicia Cox, executive director of Yellowstone-Teton Clean Cities, travels Wyoming offering free rides in an electric Chevy Bolt.
Continue scrolling
In conversations with activists, policymakers and corporate executives, it becomes clear that a save-the-planet argument doesn’t go very far. Most people won’t buy green technology unless it will clearly save them money and wows them with stunning designs or jaw-dropping performance.
Many, conservatives in particular, chafe at the prospect of the government forcing them to buy electric cars or ditch their natural gas appliances, polls show. That’s perhaps why those pitching the technology often avoid mentioning climate change. They emulate evangelists who don’t lead with Jesus when trying to win over nonbelievers.
A clean energy future will require painstaking and individually tailored persuasion campaigns. About half of Americans say they are not interested in buying electric cars, and a little more than half say they have not seriously considered solar panels, heat pumps or electric water heaters, a recent Pew Research Center survey found.
“I never expect anyone to adopt an E.V. on the first go of it,” Ms. Cox said. “They need someone walking along beside them as they are making the decision.”
“I never expect anyone to adopt an E.V. on the first go of it,” Ms. Cox said.
Selling Green Energy
Jae Landreth operates a solar installation business in Baldwin City, Kan., a rural town southwest of Kansas City. Though he believes in climate change, he said, he “learned the hard way” not to mention it when marketing solar panels to his neighbors.
“That’s not how you sell it,” he said over coffee at his home. “Nobody’s ever going to make a decision unless it benefits them in a money sense.”
Mr. Landreth, an ebullient man who plays percussion in a Phil Collins tribute band, owns a Tesla, an electric off-road vehicle and an electric Ford F-150 Lightning pickup he uses for his business, Solar Planet.
His enthusiasm for electric vehicles is hardly the norm in this patch of corn-and-cattle country. It’s not unusual for drivers of Teslas and Toyota Prius hybrids to get “coal-rolled” by diesel trucks rigged to produce clouds of black exhaust on demand.
One of Mr. Landreth’s customers is Rob Leach, a dairy farmer. Mr. Leach hired Mr. Landreth to install solar panels on his barn when it was rebuilt after a 2019 tornado. The panels power the large fans that were keeping Mr. Leach’s cows cool on a July day when the temperature was in the high 90s.
Jae Landreth’s solar installation business in Baldwin City, Kan., counts Rob Leach, a dairy farmer, among his customers.
Continue scrolling
Cost was crucial, according to Mr. Leach. “I said, ‘I just want to know at the end of the month, am I going to be paying less even with my investment in solar?’ And that has been the case.”
Mr. Leach has since encouraged other farmers to install solar panels. “I’ve had several friends of mine that were, you know, not necessarily trying to save the planet,” he said. “They just wanted to save money.”
The Inflation Reduction Act passed by Democrats last year allocated hundreds of billions of dollars in incentives for wind and solar manufacturing, electric vehicles and other clean energy.
Although no Republicans voted for the bill, much of the money has gone to G.O.P.-led states in the South where many automakers, battery manufacturers and solar companies are building factories in part to take advantage of the law’s tax breaks.
Getting credit for the new jobs is a political imperative for President Biden, who will be seeking re-election next year. That helps explains why his energy secretary, Jennifer Granholm, spent part of July traversing the Southeast in a caravan of electric vehicles.
Ms. Granholm stopped at universities and elementary schools, a hardware store and a Baptist church. She made the case that federal investment in clean energy is creating thousands of jobs, saving consumers money and even protecting the nation against President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who has used fossil fuel exports to exert pressure.
Not on Ms. Granholm’s list of reasons to go green: climate change.
Sipping black coffee at a Starbucks outside Memphis. Ms. Granholm said she liked to focus on how Biden administration policies were turning the region into a vibrant manufacturing hub. “It’s important to lean on the message that makes sense for people where they are.”
Mr. Landreth said he had “learned the hard way” not to mention climate change when marketing solar panels to his neighbors.
Jobs and Savings
In North and South Carolina, Georgia and Tennessee — states on Ms. Granholm’s itinerary — solid majorities accept that global warming is real, according to detailed polling by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. But there is widespread skepticism that humans are responsible.
“The climate has always been changing,” said Sue Burns, 59, at a gathering of Pontiac car enthusiasts in Murfreesboro, Tenn. “The left is out of control” in insisting that burning fossil fuels is causing a planetary crisis, Ms. Burns said.
Yet Ms. Burns drives a Prius — a far cry from a Pontiac muscle car — that runs on an internal combustion engine and an electric motor. She said she had bought the car to save money on gas.
Among residents benefiting from the economic boost, attitudes may be softening. Outside Dalton, Ga., Qcells, a maker of solar panels, is planning to expand a manufacturing plant. The factory is in the congressional district represented by Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican who has called fossil fuels “amazing” and climate change a “scam.”
William Turner, 49, one of Ms. Greene’s constituents, said he didn’t “really buy into that stuff” about global warming. But he added, “I don’t have anything against solar, especially if it’s creating jobs.”
Experts say most people won’t buy green technology unless it will clearly save them money or dazzle them.
The true test of public opinion will come when the promised factories are up and running, said Jason Walsh, the executive director of the BlueGreen Alliance, a partnership of unions and environmental groups.
“Political messaging and press announcements” will not convince anyone, Mr. Walsh said. “But a paycheck might.”
In Democratic strongholds, Ms. Granholm’s clean energy message went down more smoothly. Yet even there, many people said they needed to think with their pocketbooks, not their principles.
“I care about climate change,” said Tia Williams, 29, eating lunch with a friend at the Georgia Institute of Technology before an appearance by Ms. Granholm. But she said she wasn’t planning to buy an electric car because they were too expensive.
“I know the corporations love them, but I don’t see much use for them myself,” Ms. Williams said of federal incentives designed to make electric vehicles more affordable.
Slightly less than half of Democrats say they support phasing out fossil fuels, according to Pew. And just 12 percent of Republicans support doing so. That’s perhaps why Mr. Biden tends to emphasize the economic upside of his policies.
How Electrifying Everything Became a Key Climate Solution
To tackle climate change, we’ll need to plug in millions of cars, trucks, home heaters, stoves and factories.
In July, Mr. Biden went to South Carolina, where he taunted Republicans who had voted against climate change and infrastructure bills yet were reaping their benefits. Mr. Biden toured Flex, which makes fast chargers for electric cars and is in the district represented by Joe Wilson, a Republican who said the Inflation Reduction Act was “to the detriment of American families.”
“Didn’t get much help from the other team, but that didn’t stop us from getting it done,” Mr. Biden told the crowd, speaking of the legislation.
Gov. Roy Cooper of North Carolina, a Democrat, said in an interview that Republicans were trying to block or roll back efforts to promote electric trucks and buses, energy efficiency and offshore wind development. But Mr. Cooper predicted that economics would prevail.
“Even if some of them deny the science of climate change, they can’t deny good-paying jobs,” he said.
Not ‘Mission: Impossible’
In Wyoming, where coal, oil, natural gas and souped-up pickups are cherished, Patrick Lawson is fighting a lonely campaign.
A member of the Northern Arapaho Tribe, he tries to get local businesses to install charging stations. He takes out his Tesla Model Y and Ford F-150 Lightning as an Uber driver at night, less to make money than to drum up interest in electric vehicles.
Once a year he participates in the Rocky Mountain Rebels Car Show in Riverton, which adjoins his reservation. “I just want to change the perception that electric cars are not as good as big, noisy muscle cars,” Mr. Lawson said.
It’s a tough sell. During a Friday night “cruise parade” that opened the show, Mr. Lawson’s mother, Susan Lawson, drove a red Tesla Model X, its distinctive wing doors open. As she waited in a lumber store parking lot for the parade to start, a middle-age woman approached.
“Wow, it’s a Tesla, beautiful car,” said the woman, who identified herself only as Cheryl, “a patriot and small business owner.”
But then her tone shifted. “I don’t believe in electric cars,” she said. “The government could turn them off. The government controls our electricity.”
Patrick Lawson lobbies local businesses to install charging stations, talks to skeptics and demonstrates his Tesla at the car show’s obstacle course.
Continue scrolling
A few bystanders on the parade route commented favorably about the Tesla’s looks. But there were brickbats, too. “They’re on their way to Jackson,” someone said, referring to the liberal resort town. “Good luck getting over the pass in that thing,” shouted another.
After the Lawsons parked in front of the local Elks lodge, a man pretending to hold a machine gun fired a spray of imaginary bullets at the electric vehicles.
That kind of reaction doesn’t deter Mr. Lawson, 42, who manages the tribe’s internet company along with his small charging business, Wild West EV.
When Mr. Lawson arranged $174,000 to match a federal grant to install charging stations at the city hall and airport, the Riverton City Council declined the money. The one public charging station in town, outside a sandwich shop, is often blocked by trucks, sometimes deliberately parked horizontally to make charging impossible.
During an obstacle race that was part of the car show, another Tesla driver beat all 40 cars. Onlookers were impressed but still skeptical. “It doesn’t fit everybody’s needs,” said Kent Wheeler, a technician at an auto body and paint shop.
Mr. Lawson remains optimistic. “I’m in it for the long haul,” he said. “It’s not ‘Mission: Impossible.’”
Ford Motor, G.M. and dozens of other companies are investing hundreds of billions of dollars to refit factories and build new ones to produce electric vehicles. They don’t want to make cars that only Democrats buy.
One company confronting the marketing problem is Polaris, a Minnesota automaker that builds four-wheel off-road vehicles used by hunters and farmers.
In April, Polaris began selling a $25,000 electric vehicle called the Ranger XP Kinetic. Advertising barely mentions the environment, instead stressing its performance. The strategy seems to have worked. The initial production run sold out two hours after Polaris began taking orders.
Mr. Lawson, a member of the Northern Arapaho Tribe, said, “I just want to change the perception that electric cars are not as good as big, noisy muscle cars.”
“We knew the target customer,” said Josh Hermes, vice president for off-road vehicles at Polaris. “We really focused in on the benefits of the product”
One of the first buyers was Paul Rosenzweig, a Georgia resident who is in the wholesale feed business and is skeptical that climate change is caused by mankind. Rather, Mr. Rosenzweig, who hunts deer, rabbit and squirrels in Louisiana, likes how quiet the Polaris is.
“You see more wildlife with electric than you do with the motor burning,” he said.
When G.M. begins selling a battery-powered version of its Chevy Silverado pickup this year, it will emphasize the truck’s 450-mile range and towing capacity.
The company’s chief executive, Mary T. Barra, said the cars were winning people over. Customers are “figuring out they’re really fun to drive, and it’s really nice to not have to go to the gas station,” she said in an interview.
There are tentative signs that conservative opposition is wavering.
The Republican-controlled Legislature in Alabama, where Mercedes-Benz makes electric cars and Polaris builds the Kinetic, has allocated $1 million a year for a campaign to encourage residents to buy electric vehicles.
“We want to make sure we embrace the jobs and economic opportunities that accompany this new generation of vehicles,” Kenneth Boswell, director of the Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs, said in a statement.
Republican lawmakers in Missouri have sought to block Quinton Lucas, Kansas City’s Democratic mayor, from raising the minimum wage, making buildings more energy-efficient and restricting gun ownership. But they have not tried to block Kansas City from buying electric cars and trucks, Mr. Lucas said.
Building inspectors and supervisors in the Fire Department drive electric cars. At the city-owned airport, electric tractors deliver baggage, and electric buses shuttle passengers. The technology saves the city thousands of dollars per vehicle in maintenance and fuel costs.
“They usually notice everything new that we do and often try to pre-empt it,” Mr. Lucas said of the Legislature. “And so what that tells me is, actually, I don’t see this being a flashpoint.”
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.
