I'm sure many Democrats - both Congresscritters and generally - regard RFK, Jr. as a really poor pick for HHS Secretary.

On the other hand, when was the last time a Republican President named a pro-choice nominee for that position?

You can't fight every cabinet nominee, and you have to acknowledge that even if you win any particular fight (hi, Matt Gaetz!) the job will always end up going to someone that the Democrats wouldn't choose for that position (hi, Pam Bondi!). Trump is the President, and his Cabinet will 100% be filled with people he chooses.

So....RFK, Jr.? He's got some really nutso opinions on some public health issues. But he's pro-choice. He doesn't personally appear to have any desire to limit women's reproductive options. That seems to be where Trump lands as well.

If he is the HHS secretary, it's kind of unlikely that there would be any significant federal effort to get creative in fighting abortion access. It's not his issue. He'll be fighting a bunch of other battles. But if his nomination fails, and Trump goes for a more "conventional" pick, there's a very good chance that this other Secretary might prioritize getting the agency to restrict abortion access in a way that RFK, Jr. is very unlikely to do.

So, do Democrats possibly take the "win" here? Women's reproductive freedom is their signature public health issue - and they've got a nominee who is on their side on that point. Do you maybe kind of let him alone a bit, rather than aim your resources at him too?