How the Trump-Kennedy partnership can serve as a new political blueprint

On a phone call, shortly after the assassination attempt against him, former President Donald Trump and independent presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr., agreed to meet in order to explore avenues of cooperation, narrowing in on key issues they aligned on towards advancing the cause of national unity. They solidified their bond by agreeing to allow space for disagreement — a strategy reminiscent of Abraham Lincoln’s “Team of Rivals’, where he appointed his political opponents to key positions in his Cabinet during the Civil War.

By bringing together leaders with differing views, Lincoln aimed to unify the nation and strengthen his administration through a diversity of perspectives and talents, ultimately contributing to the Union’s success. Mirroring this strategy, Trump and Kennedy officially joined forces in the spirit of a “Unity Party.” 

Like many Democrats, I was deeply rattled when Trump ascended to the presidency in 2016. Eight years later I find myself substantially more balanced emotionally, despite polls indicating he has a solid chance of winning. A Trump victory, while feared by many liberals, might not spell the doom so many predict, but rather offer unexpected opportunities for growth. 

In a political era marked by polarization, Kennedy’s decision to suspend his independent campaign and endorse Trump, has left millions reeling. “WTF” was the next reaction felt by many across the political spectrum.

Another segment of Americans, equally stunned, followed the initial moment of shock with a sobering pause. This interlude echoed with the faint resonance of hope and considerations of what such an alliance might signify. Could this moment symbolize a first step toward bridging our political divide? 

If an association between national unity and a Trump-Kennedy partnership feels like magical thinking, I understand. But, sincerely, when is the right time to begin restoring our country, and what could it look like?

Would we recognize a first step towards unity if it were right in front of us?

As a lifelong Democrat, I now find myself among the 51 percent of voters registered as independents. Threats to freedom of speech, censorship and infringements on medical freedom are among my chief grievances with my former party. Kennedy’s campaign, with its shrewd, innovative solutions, drew me in.

For Kennedy supporters, his decision to align with Trump wasn’t entirely unexpected. The Democratic National Committee (DNC) actively worked to undermine his candidacy, manipulating primary schedules and imposing restrictive rules and lawsuits that hindered ballot access. This wasn’t just a rejection of Kennedy; it was a rejection of the democratic process itself—ironic for a party that claims to be the guardian of democracy.

Nicole Shanahan, Kennedy’s vice presidential running mate, stated that it was the Democratic Party, not the Republicans, that obstructed a free and fair election for their campaign. Faced with a rigged system, Kennedy made a pragmatic, faith-driven decision to avoid being sidelined like Ross Perot and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Given the colossal challenges Kennedy faced, deciding to work within the system and align with Trump was likely an easier “yes” than many might suspect. At 70, Kennedy knows his time to effect change is limited. His alliance with Trump isn’t about political expediency; it’s about seizing what may be his last, best chance to make a difference.

While it may be tempting for skeptics to foresee catastrophic outcomes from this alliance —or a Trump victory, instead, what if we considered the potential success of this team, should he be reelected? Rather than demonizing and “awfulizing” Trump supporters, what if we genuinely sought to understand what continues to draw them to him?

This question is supported by thought leader and author, Michelle D’Avella, who points out that self-righteousness prevails on both sides of the divide, and that in not seeking to understand why people vote for Trump (or any candidate for that matter), a decision is being made to be divisive and judgmental.

By acknowledging the power that our collective curiosity, perceptions and intentions hold in shaping reality, I propose moving beyond entrenched political biases and alarmist rhetoric, to contribute instead to the realization of a more favorable outcome.

If we foster a climate of positive expectations rather than relentless criticism, we might tap into the well-documented Pygmalion effect, encouraging Trump to focus on constructive leadership. This shift in perception could lead to more collaborative governance and motivate him to prioritize legacy-building achievements, driven by a desire for public approval and recognition for positive actions.

Trump and Kennedy represent the potential for a new archetype in addressing partisan challenges—prioritizing policies where Americans find common ground first. This approach holds the ability to strengthen collective stamina and trust, equipping citizens to confront complex matters more effectively. By shifting focus from partisan non-negotiables to shared concerns, this strategy could help break the cycle of endless dissonance. Their alliance could be likened to the historical partnership of President Abraham Lincoln and his secretary of War, Edwin Stanton—two men who began as rivals but whose collaboration was instrumental in preserving the Union.

The Trump-Kennedy alliance isn’t driven by complete ideological alignment; instead, they’ve united in faith and out of a mutual recognition of the existential threats facing our nation. Three critical issues form the bedrock of the Trump-Kennedy partnership: ending the chronic disease epidemic, bringing an end to America’s “forever wars,” and balancing the federal budget. Kennedy cites these issues, along with censorship and the corporate capture of our government agencies, as serious threats to our nation.

Similar to BRICS — an alliance of developing countries formed to challenge Western dominance and create a multipolar world —  Kennedy and Trump’s example offers Americans an alternative route beyond the constraints of the traditional two-party system. If they fulfill their promises, their collaboration could offer a pathway to healing the divide —especially if Americans, as Kennedy urged, unite out of love for our children rather than hate for each other.

Trump recently shared that he wants “healing childhood disease” to be his legacy—a perspective he may have gained after surviving an assassination attempt. Some of Kennedy’s skeptics may ease their concerns by exploring his detailed interviews, which offer a nuanced view of his character and his revolutionary vision for our country. It’s worth remembering that great leaders are often misunderstood in their time, and media biases frequently serve their interests over the public good.

The 2024 election is more than a contest between candidates; it is a referendum on the future of our nation. Will we seize this moment to forge a new course that prioritizes kindness, freedom, health, security and prosperity for all Americans? Should Trump win, he and Kennedy stand to offer America a new blueprint by modeling unity and renewal across party lines. 

While we may feel individually powerless in shaping the outcome of this election, collectively we hold more influence than we realize. Beyond the vote, our true power lies in how we choose to respond to the outcome, how we engage with our political counterparts and how we contribute to ending the toxicity in our political discourse. 

Medina Dugger is a multidisciplinary artist, writer and curator who spent a decade producing work in Lagos, Nigeria. She has been featured in Vogue, Smithsonian and National Geographic magazines and was awarded First Prize by the Magnum Photography Award in 2017.