Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has become the rare figure who draws as much raw hostility from Democrats as Donald Trump ever has. That fact alone is remarkable.

Democrats once celebrated Kennedy as the scion of a legendary political dynasty. They now treat him as a menace to society. His break from the blue ranks last year, and the populist movement he has built, mirrors Trump’s earlier rebellion against establishment Republicans. That similarity explains why both men are uniquely loathed by Democratic insiders.

The fury stems not just from Kennedy’s decision to leave the Democrat party, but from how he left. He accused party leaders of rigging 2024 presidential primaries against him, echoing the language Trump used in 2016 and 2020 about elections being stacked against outsiders.

Those accusations landed hard with many Americans who already believed Democratic elites, at best, manipulate the rules to protect their favorites and, at worst, utilize election fraud. By later considering a unity ticket with Trump, Kennedy didn’t simply criticize Democratic leadership. He rejected its authority outright.

That is why Kennedy, now history’s most powerful Health and Human Services secretary, stands in a category almost by himself. Like Trump, he represents a brand of populism that does not map neatly onto traditional left-right divisions. His campaign drew in voters alienated by Democratic elitism, people less concerned with ideology than with authenticity and choice.

That unpredictability terrifies blue strategists, who, most charitably put, prefer elections to be controlled exercises in coalition management. Kennedy’s rise signaled that many voters want an alternative to being told what options they’re allowed to have.

Kennedy has also made himself radioactive among Democrats by confronting their most sensitive hypocrisies. He has called out censorship, denouncing collusion between government officials and media companies to silence his views. In doing so, he placed himself alongside Trump in framing free speech as a cause under siege. His lawsuits against corrupt bargains highlight how undemocratic these arrangements truly are, darkening blue resentment toward him.

The deepest offense came when Kennedy openly questioned the “scientific” consensus surrounding vaccines and other health policies. To Democrats, whose coalition increasingly leans on credentialed professionals and “educated” white-collar voters, this skepticism amounted to heresy. Kennedy was no longer simply debating policy. He was challenging the authority of the very institutions that anchor their worldview. For many in the party’s cultural base, that could never be forgiven.

Kennedy’s eventual decision to endorse Trump sealed the estrangement. Having suspended his own campaign, he turned around and gave his blessing to the man Democrats consider the greatest threat to democracy itself. For party loyalists, this was not just apostasy but treason. They saw Kennedy as cementing a defection that mirrored Trump’s own flight from Team Blue over a decade earlier.

Kennedy masterfully positioned himself as another figure who would never again bend the knee to establishment politics.

Even Kennedy’s independent run, after realizing the Democratic “primary” was an establishment-rigged game, was a provocation. By giving Americans an option outside the Biden-Trump rematch, he exposed how deeply uncomfortable Democrats are with real voter choice. His candidacy embodied the very anti-establishment sentiment the party fears most: the belief that people should never be bound to a binary they did not design.

In that sense, he and Trump both became avatars for a demand that politics return to the people.

The parallels continue in rhetoric. Kennedy speaks often about the dangers of corporate-government collusion, a theme that resonates with Trump’s outsider appeal. Democrats understand the risk here: both men have proven adept at drawing diverse voters, particularly those who once made up Barack Obama’s coalition. For a party that increasingly relies on managing its coalition rather than persuading swing constituencies, Kennedy’s appeal is destabilizing.

The Democratic establishment has also taken aggressive measures to blunt his reach. From restricting his ballot access across various states to coordinating social media platforms against him, the party went all-out in its sabotage. Yet each attempt to marginalize him only reinforced his central message: that elites fear open debate and free choice. Democrats loathe Kennedy because he refuses to submit to their methods of control.

There is another dimension to their hatred: Kennedy’s potential role in the Republican future. Some strategists openly worry that he could emerge as a battle-tested candidate for the GOP in 2028, perhaps leading a “Make America Healthy Again” movement that would continue Trump’s populist legacy. Democrats dread that because they have already seen how effectively he communicates with voters they once considered their political property.

Of course, Kennedy himself was one of those voters, making his defection all the more stinging.

By aligning himself with Trump’s broader critiques of establishment corruption, Kennedy also exposes the hollowness of Democratic rhetoric. The party claims to champion democracy, yet it works aggressively to suppress dissent from within its own ranks. Kennedy’s refusal to abide by those boundaries signals a movement Democrats cannot easily neutralize. His rise suggests that populism, whether under Trump’s banner or his own, is not going away.

That populism challenges the Democrats on cultural and philosophical grounds. The party’s coalition has become anchored in urban, highly credentialed voters who take pride in institutional authority. Kennedy’s rejection of that “authority,” especially on public health and science, is thus perceived as betrayal. Where Democrats see him undermining the pillars of “progress,” many Americans see him simply asking the questions they are savaged for raising.

The personal animus runs deep as well. Kennedy embodies a transition from Democratic royalty to Republican ally, a trajectory that highlights the elitist party he abandoned. To Democrats, this makes him as detestable as Trump, perhaps even more so, because he is a defector from deep within their own ranks.

In the end, Kennedy represents something Democrats cannot easily process: optionality. He stands for the idea that citizens do not have to accept the choices handed down by the establishment, whether in primaries, in policy, or in culture. That vision resonates not because of ideology, but because it restores agency to ordinary people.

Like Trump, he is the leader of a movement that transcends the old partisan divides. That makes him unpredictable, uncontrollable, and therefore despised.

Kennedy has become the Democrats’ nightmare not because he is another Trump, but because he is different enough to expand the populist challenge beyond Trump. He critiques their hypocrisies, exposes their undemocratic tendencies, and offers voters a genuine alternative. For a party increasingly defined by control, that is intolerable. Kennedy reminds them of their fragility, and for that, they hate him.

His rebellion is no political sideshow; it is a mirror held up to a party that once claimed to stand for the people but now punishes those who dare to question its power. Kennedy’s journey from Democratic heir to populist insurgent lays bare a truth many Americans feel in their bones: the establishment fears choice because choice means losing control.

That is why Robert F. Kennedy Jr. draws the same fury as Donald Trump, and why his defiance may yet prove more dangerous to Democrats than any policy fight. He is living proof that the age of managed politics is cracking, and that ordinary citizens are not content to be ruled. They demand to be heard.

Dr. Joseph Ford Cotto hosts and produces News Sight, speaking the data-driven truth about economic and political issues that impact you. During the 2024 presidential election, he created the Five-Point Forecast, which correctly predicted Trump's national victory and the outcome in all swing states. The author of numerous nonfiction books, Cotto holds a doctorate in business administration and is a Lean Six Sigma Certified Black Belt. During 2014, HLM King Kigeli V of Rwanda bestowed a hereditary knighthood upon him. It was followed by a barony the next year.

Image: SNL.no // public domain