The Half Liz

How much truth should Nikki Haley tell about Donald Trump?

By
318
A composite image of Liz Cheney and Nikki Haley (Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images/Photo by Paras Griffin/Getty Images)

On Friday evening we had a family quarrel in the Dispatch Slack channel. I started it.

It began with this tweet from Nikki Haley reacting to the latest hourly evidence that her opponent’s thriving political career is an unanswerable indictment of America and its people.

As the most insufferably shrill Never Trumper on staff, I naturally shared the tweet with our Slack community and sniffed that Trump being distracted from policy is perhaps not the biggest problem with him manically defaming a woman he was found liable for sexually abusing.

Sure, said a colleague, but Never Trumpers aren’t the target of that tweet. Persuadable Republicans are.

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
318
By
Comments (318)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Mattfrommo

    I have long suspected that the reason that so many writers on the Dispatch and similar outlets want Haley to savage Trump on the campaign trail is that the writers would find it cathartic. Basically, Haley can say what they would say if they had the same platform. This article pretty much confirms that suspicion.

    There is no strategic incentive for Haley to go 'full-Liz' during this campaign. Haley is only 51 and will have more shots at the oval office (by current standards, MANY more shots). Part of her strategy has to be leaving a decent enough impression that Republicans remember her fondly enough in 2028. You don't do that by going after Trump's voters, and Nick says as much. If you think of the Republican party in terms of British politics, Haley has codified herself as 'leader of the opposition.' Not a terrible place to be when the President, either way, will be one of the most unpopular Presidents in American history.

    Collapse
  2. Andrew M

    "Geriatric manbaby" sounds like the name of a '90s alt-rock band.

    Collapse
  3. Bicosan

    I don't necessarily disagree with Nick's analysis, but something that keeps chaffing me when I hear it is that Chris Christie proves the "Full Liz" didn't/won't work. Christie is an 'n' of 1, and not your average 'n' either. Christie has a history with the electorate that Hailey does not. To many, he beclowned himself in 2016. And to those of us who live in the the rest of the US (the South and the West) whose understanding of brash New Jersey personalities comes from movies and TV, Christie can come off as disheveled, perpetually aggrieved, likely corrupt used car salesman who's one false heartbeat away from a coronary. So, not the most appealing guy to be president, and definitely not simply exchangeable with Haley.

    I think many in the commentariat know Christie personally and know that there's more to him. So, they don't realize, to the rest of us, he doesn't necessarily come off as a guy who is more likable or honest than Trump or strike us as a great executive.

    So, to say his fate is Nikki's fate should she go the Full Liz, is to over-interpret the highly limited available data.

    Collapse
    1. Zephyrus

      Exactly. I agreed with everything Christie said about Trump in 2023-24, but I couldn't help but remember that he said much the opposite in 2016, when it mattered a lot more.

      Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Charley Warns

    Nick asks: "What does it mean for a candidate in Haley’s position to be “effective”?" He then notes how she has no chance at all – which raises the question of why she's still in the race. This is how I'd answer: Haley needs to figure out a way to be Trump's running mate without losing face. Recall how Jefferson got to be Adams' Vice President – point being that Jefferson was under no obligation to be Adam's supporter, moreover, not be Adam's critic. Haley needs to see herself in a similar position –as the backup quarterback, willing, wanting, and waiting to start. She should make it clear to Republicans that her job is to take over when Trump gets injured and she is counting on it ... wanting it to happen! What I'm saying is that there should be a frigid relationship between the two. So ... why the hell would Trump agree to that?! It's the only way he's going to get someone like me to vote for him. Hopefully, he'll see it that way, and hopefully, he'll care, lol. Obviously, they'll have to agree on something. What that is will unify us. We can't just let Biden win – mini milk shakes at Del Taco went from $1 to $4.50 during his reign! We've lost control of the southern border.

    Collapse
  5. Scianti7

    Maybe the chiding mother voice will work. At least where I'm from for many years the same woman was the voice over for Republican commercials, with that chiding mother tone. Apparently that is what worked best on Republicans here, I'm not sure if it was nation wide or is currently true.

    There's a LOT to be said for Haley's current approach because Trump values appearing powerful, & she is making him seem impotent/ powerless. Temper tantrums are the works of powerless children.

    I sincerely hope 1. She wins, or 2. If she loses she does not endorse Trump. But I'm fairly used to disappointment.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Jaredmanly77

    Buchanan endorsed HW at convention eventually…the challenge itself is not nothing, especially if you view Trump as essentially the incumbent.

    Collapse
    1. Martin W Kraegel III

      The gulf between HW and Trump is enormous.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Jaredmanly77

        No doubt. Same for Haley and Pat… i merely meant even failed primary attempts where the challenger eventually endorsed the candidate may signal or even contribute in eventual defeat in the general election…

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Mandy B.

      I view him as essentially the asylum inmate... who took over. Time to get the rational people back in charge!

      Collapse
      1. PatThomson

        So this is the “One Flew Over The Coocoo’s Nest” election?
        We’re screwed.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Mandy B.

          Indeed we are.

          Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    ReneFerrerJr

    Excellent analysis, sir. Which is why this "small-dollar-donor" is sending her some some money I'm scraping together in the hopes she stays in 'till Super Tuesday so I can vote for her. After 30 years of being registered as an independent I registered as a Republican out here in California.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Charley Warns

      Your vote won't matter, but she could use the money!

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        ReneFerrerJr

        I concur. I would just like to see it through to Super Tuesday like Brother Stirewalt has talked about just to see what #45 does.

        Collapse
  8. Zephyrus

    What will break Trump's spell? I ask myself the same question often. I can think of two realistic possibilities:
    1. A humiliating electoral defeat that cannot be explained away by the usual whining. Trump's appeal has always been couched in terms of power; if he cannot offer power, then he has nothing. Problem is, I'm pretty sure the Democrats will need someone better than Joe Biden to achieve that level of victory.
    2. Some form of national catharsis, which, in America, usually is achieved by a war. The last time we had a populist movement as successful as Trumpism has been (the Andrew Jackson presidency, succeeded by Van Buren and Polk), we invaded Mexico. Oops, look what Trump is making noises about doing.

    So basically, Trump has to lose by a landslide, or get ready for Mexican War II: Electric Boogaloo. I really, really, really, don't want to vote for Biden in November, but I'm starting to think I might have to.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Citizen60

      It really is the Flight 93 election:

      Trump and authoritarianism
      vs
      Biden’s poor policies

      Collapse
      1. Mattfrommo

        Just to play devil's advocate, one could argue that there are enough checks in place to stop Trump's authoritarianism. After all, even Trump's awful attempt at stealing the election never got anywhere close to succeeding. On the other hand, there are few if any protections against Biden's bad policy if he wins and Republicans fail to take or hold a house of Congress. I am not coming to that conclusion (voting third party again), but I could see how someone would.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Citizen60

          Hope you’re not in a swing state. Old enough to remember Ross Perot holding Bush Sr. To 1 term, and Ralph Nader electing Bush Jr.

          What guardrails? We learned in Trump’s 4 years there were few legal guardrails, and only honor and tradition bound too much of the Presidency. The courts? Think those would restrain Trump? They have no enforcement power, as Andrew Jackson may have stated (“if that’s their decision, let them enforce it.”). Congress? Trump took Congressionally-approved funds from the DOD and put them where he wanted. McConnell refused to eliminate the filibuster but is weaker now.

          No, Trump knows the levers of power now, and what he can do to eliminate most “codified” constraints. Why the Heritage 2025 Plan calls for him instituting martial law on Day 1.

          Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Charley Warns

        That's not what it means. Do you figure what's happening on the border is starting to become an existential crisis? If so, don't you want to find a way to defeat Biden?

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Estoppel Enjoyer

          If only there was a compromise bill in Congress that would fix the asylum problem that is the root cause of our border crisis, and if only Biden would get behind that bill.

          The problem is, Biden is the one trying to fix the problem and the GOP (except for a couple dozen Senators) is trying to thwart that effort.

          Collapse
        2. Zephyrus

          No. Nonviolent immigration is not an existential crisis. The fact that people want to come here is a good thing about America, not a bad thing. The fact that our country is seen as a safe destination for the poor and the persecuted of the world to come to is something that should make us proud, not afraid. If we're worried about criminal activity, we can police the border and look for smugglers in ways that don't assume that all immigrants are guilty until proven innocent.
          If we're worried about our culture changing; first of all, cultures always change, that's a fact of life. If you want to shape cultural norms, don't try to shut down the conversation about how the culture should change, participate in it in good faith. The conversation is always happening and will continue to happen with or without you. And yes, participation does mean that you might have to talk to some foreigners, or some transgender people, or whoever. You might have to look them in the eye, recognize their humanity, and think about how we can actually compromise between our values and their interests. The one thing we can't do in that conversation is dismiss them and say to them, "The country would be better if you weren't here. Go away." They aren't going away, and we have to deal with that.

          Collapse
        3. Avatar photo
          Citizen60

          No. I want the Constitution followed. The House and Senate propose/pass bills that solve the problems of the nation, and that final product is sent to the President to sign or veto.
          The branch of government closest to the electorate is supposed to do the work (Congress) that all parties agree on (gasp! Compromise). No more imperial presidencies.
          I’m a single-issue voter, and the border isn’t it. Only Democrats support my issue—the Republican Party left me in the 70’s.

          Collapse
  9. Sai Ayila

    Sorry Nick, she needs to go full Chris Christie mode instead Liz Cheney mode. Gotta admit Haley is doing a good job tackling trump and fundraising of Trump's sexist and derogatory commentsin the past two three weeks something she should have done long time back instead of pandering to maga base and she was confused on what to do which led of unnecessary gaffes. She hired bad advisors imo. Anyway her republican vote ceiling right now is in the mid 20s to low 30s which is some improvement when compared to six months back. For independents it is in mid 50s. Even if she loses she can still cut into trumps lead and focus on creating her own brand in 2028 so she needs to run at least till super Tuesday. Who cares if it helps Biden, you are stopping a potential convicted felon trump from holding the office while trying to restore the republican brand.

    Collapse
  10. Dougrhon

    If Haley refuses to endorse Trump after she drops out then she might have a political future if and when the party finally vomits out the cult and attempts a return to normality (normalcy is not a word). She will NEVER be acceptable to the MAGA cult assuming it survives post Trump. So she might as well do the right thing.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Mandy B.

      Agree, but as to 'normalcy': Collins says Word origin [1855–60; normal + -cy]

      Collapse
Load More