“Get the message out that Trump is the candidate of toxic chemicals,” Zorn urges in courting RFK Jr. voters.

As Robert F. Kennedy Jr. bows out of the presidential race, Justin Talbot Zorn, a senior adviser at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, has been offering strategic advice to Vice President Kamala Harris and the Democratic Party on how to win over the late candidate’s supporters. As The Hill reports, Harris is currently ahead of President Joe Biden over Donald Trump, but experts like Zorn are warning the 2024 Democratic nominee against complacency.

Zorn highlights Kennedy’s appeal to environmentally conscious voters, pointing to Kennedy’s call for a “realignment” of environmental policy. Kennedy had publicly criticized the Democratic Party for what he described as “divisive” climate policies and promoted an environmental agenda that he believed could “unite the nation.”

“It’s easy enough for Democrats to mock Kennedy’s comments,” Zorn observes. “Instead, they should make a serious offer to his voters.” Zorn’s recommendation to Harris and Democrats is simple: “Tell the truth.” He argues that they should “get the message across that Trump is the candidate of toxic chemicals.”

In an op-ed published Thursday by MSNBC, Zorn wrote:

While Kennedy’s support has fallen to about 5 percent in three-way races nationwide since Vice President Kamala Harris entered the race, there is ample evidence that the third-party candidate is taking more cues from Harris than Trump. While it’s hard to predict whether Kennedy will be able to persuade his supporters to vote for the Republican, even a single percentage point could be decisive in a close election like this one. Look at Florida in 2000. Or any of the “blue wall” states in 2016.

This is a crucial point to make, he says, given that Trump has tried to distance himself from Project 2025, a conservative policy framework aimed at dismantling environmental regulations. Zorn reminds us that “the document’s key environmental plans were written by Trump appointees and are consistent with his own promises to dismantle the ‘administrative state.’”

But Kennedy’s vision for environmental realignment is problematic: It relies on the electoral vehicle of Trump, who as president has appointed profiteers from the plastics industry and big agriculture to key positions responsible for food and water security, given chemical company lobbyists a wish list of concessions, appointed Supreme Court justices who have gutted government authority to regulate toxic substances, and now promises to shrink government watchdogs and remove “forever chemicals” like PFAS from the lists of hazardous substances. And that’s to say nothing of his legacy on climate.

To appeal to Kennedy’s green supporters, Zorn believes Harris and Democrats need to offer a proactive environmental agenda. He suggests Harris take the lead by unveiling “a more comprehensive plan to address PFAS and permanent chemicals in the food system and supply chains,” because those issues resonate with voters concerned about the long-term health of the environment.

By addressing these concerns and positioning itself as the party with a strong environmental vision, Zorn argues that Harris and the Democrats can attract disillusioned Kennedy supporters and secure a broader base heading into the 2024 election.