Nikki Haley's Problem: Her Party Is Nuts
By: Will Saletan
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Iowa and New Hampshire have exposed the pathologies of Republican voters.
NIKKI HALEY HAS NOW BEATEN DONALD TRUMP TWICE, in Iowa and New Hampshire, among two groups of voters who, in a saner world, would be deciding the Republican presidential nomination. The first group is Republican primary and caucus voters who acknowledge that Trump legitimately lost the 2020 presidential election. The second group, which overlaps with the first, is Republican primary and caucus voters who accept that if Trump were to be convicted of a crime, he would be unfit to serve as president.
Haley's problem—and the problem for her party, our country, and the world—is that neither of these groups represents a majority of Republicans or Republican primary voters. Most rank-and-file Republicans deny the results of the 2020 election and are willing to support a convicted criminal for president. The Republican electorate is deeply pathological. And Haley's losses to Trump are a measure of that pathology.
In the entrance poll conducted at last week's Iowa caucuses, Haley easily defeated Trump, 53 to 11 percent, among caucusgoers who acknowledged that Biden legitimately won the 2020 election. (Ron DeSantis and other candidates got the remainder.) But Trump crushed Haley, 69 to 5 percent, among caucusgoers who insisted that Biden hadn't legitimately won. And these election deniers made up two-thirds of the Republican caucus electorate.
On the question of crimes, the numbers were almost identical. Haley beat Trump 49 to 10 percent among caucusgoers who conceded that if Trump were to be convicted, he would be unfit to serve. But only 31 percent of caucusgoers accepted that standard. Twice as many, 65 percent, rejected it—they said a criminal conviction shouldn't stand in Trump's way—and this majority chose Trump over Haley, 72 to 5 percent.
Iowa Republicans also rejected a more basic proposition: that a criminal conviction should make Trump less worthy of their support in a general election. In the final Des Moines Register poll, only 18 percent of likely Republican caucusgoers said a conviction of Trump would make them less willing to support him. Haley led Trump among this small minority. But Trump handily beat her among the 80 percent of likely caucusgoers who said a conviction wouldn't matter or would make them more likely to support him in a general election.
In New Hampshire yesterday, Haley did better, largely because independent voters, who tend to be more reasonable on these questions, made up a larger share of the Republican primary electorate. Again, Haley trounced Trump among voters who said Biden had legitimately won in 2020, while Trump trounced Haley among voters who said Biden hadn't legitimately won. But in New Hampshire, people who said Biden had legitimately won made up nearly half (47 percent) of the primary electorate.
Likewise, Haley easily beat Trump among voters who said a criminal conviction would make him unfit to serve as president, and Trump easily beat Haley among voters who said a conviction wouldn't make him unfit to serve. But in New Hampshire, 42 percent of voters accepted the idea that a conviction would be disqualifying. If 55 or 60 percent of voters had accepted that idea or had agreed that Biden legitimately won in 2020—in other words, if the Republican primary electorate had been, on balance, rational—you can see how Haley, by doing well among those voters, might have won.
YOU COULD ARGUE that the causality runs the other way: that most Republican voters simply love Trump, and therefore they're willing to say that he was the real winner in 2020 or that he'd be fit to serve again despite a criminal conviction. But that's just another way of conceding their pathology. Sensible people don't let sympathy for a politician drive them to such recklessness.
The derangement doesn't stop at election denial. It extends to violence. The clearest illustration comes from a poll of likely New Hampshire Republican primary voters, taken by YouGov and UMass Lowell's Center for Public Opinion from January 6 to 16. The poll asked respondents whether they supported or opposed "full pardons for all Americans arrested for their participation in the riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021." According to the center's director of survey research, John Cluverius, Haley led Trump by 55 to 29 percent among respondents who opposed such pardons. But Trump led Haley by 65 to 18 percent among respondents who supported the pardons.
Haley's problem, mathematically, was that 58 percent of the poll's respondents supported the pardons. Only 42 percent opposed the pardons. She was dealing with an electorate that favored pardons for the January 6th arrestees and therefore, on balance, favored Trump. She needed saner people to show up on Tuesday. And not nearly enough of them did.
National pollsters haven't looked at how Trump voters and Haley voters answer questions about violence, criminal convictions, or election denial. But the general pattern is that self-identified independents are much more reasonable than self-identified Republicans on these questions, and Haley does about twice as well among independents as she does among Republicans.
In a December Yahoo News/YouGov survey, 53 percent of self-identified Republicans said they would approve of Trump pardoning himself if he were to regain the presidency after being "convicted of a serious crime." Sixty-three percent said Trump should appoint a special prosecutor to "go after" Biden and his family. Seventy-one percent endorsed Trump's promise "to be a dictator on Day One but not after." On all these questions, independents disagreed with Republicans. And independents said they were twice as likely to vote for Haley: 17 percent of them supported her, compared to 8 percent of Republicans.
In a January Harvard CAPS/Harris poll, 84 to 91 percent of Republican voters said they would still vote for Trump against Biden, even if Trump were "convicted by a jury for inciting the Capitol riots of January 6th," convicted of "crimes related to his handling of classified presidential documents," or found guilty of RICO violations for "trying to influence the 2020 election results in Georgia." Three-quarters of Republicans said Trump "should have immunity for his actions on January 6th." Again, independents disagreed with Republicans on these questions. And again, independents were twice as likely to vote for Haley: 20 percent of them supported her, compared to 9 percent of Republicans.
NOBODY SHOULD MAKE EXCUSES for Haley's defeats. This is the party she chose to run in, and—like Trump in 2020—she lost fair and square. But what's happening to her is less important than what's happening to her party. One after another, candidates who stood for any semblance of decency, honesty, or acceptance of reality—Mike Pence, Asa Hutchinson, Chris Christie—have been forced out. They're gone because, as Christie put it on a hot mic two weeks ago, Republican voters "don't want to hear it. We know we're right, but they don't want to hear it."
Haley will be the next to go. The Republican primaries have become a test not of the candidates, but of the sanity of the Republican electorate. And sanity is losing.
Tags
Who is online
114 visitors
No doubt, criminals of the state even....
There has never been a shred of PROOF , after three years . A lot of conspiracy theories and speculation, no proof. That is why they are nuts.
For some reason, that reads like deja vu.....
You're just doing bothsidesism. Tell us what the proof is.
Didn't read to me as though he was claiming there was proof. Just comparing conspiracy theories around 2016 and 2020.
It's funny how when most rank and file Democrats denied the 2016 elections it was not an issue. Nor when Democrats select an election denier to lead them in the House. Not to mention the conspiracies around the 2000 and 2004 election. Or even go off the deep end rioting, causing deaths, destruction and billions in damage because they falsely think cops kill thousands of unarmed blacks each year.
But when Republicans believe an election is stolen, it's a national catastrophe.
Please provide links to these denials.
Again? so you can continue to ignore them?
2/3 of Democrats believe russia tampered with vote totals to get Trump elected:
Here's 13 times the man Democrats chose to lead them in the House did:
Here's your VP saying Trump didn't really win
Not according to your own linked article.
Every intelligence agency in the United States has accepted the fact that Russia meddled in the election, primarily through social media. Your 2nd linked article makes no other claims other what is acknowledged as facts about Russie's actions.
Who won the election, as opposed to who was appointed by the electoral college? Who got more votes?
You're really reaching, especially after Hillary acknowledged the results and conceded the election.
Wow, just wow, you do know how we elect presidents in this country right?
Another comment that is a lie, show where all 17 intelligence agencies said this.
Not according to your own linked article
The thing about making a discussion forum work is it relies on members recognizing the existence of reality. For whatever reason, you just continuously refuse to recognize reality and create your own. Maybe you fool yourself, but literate, not crazy people see that You just make shit up and deny what’s been put right in front of your face. You should try being honest one day.
Of fucking course it says what I said it did. Stop playing the fool.
Yes, I’d also like to see where 17 intelligence agencies claimed trump was an illegitimate president and A Russian asset, that Russia put trump In the White House, that republicans stole congressional elections etc
CHUCK TODD: Were there improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials?
JAMES CLAPPER: We did not include any evidence in our report, and I say, “our,” that's N.S.A., F.B.I. and C.I.A., with my office, the Director of National Intelligence, that had anything, that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was no evidence of that…
CHUCK TODD: I understand that. But does it exist?
JAMES CLAPPER: Not to my knowledge.
Todd pressed him to elaborate.
CHUCK TODD: If [evidence of collusion] existed, it would have been in this report?
JAMES CLAPPER: This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government. [99]
Oh, ya, remember that trope?
I only wish they could tell us who the "17 intelligence agencies" were. Was the National Park Service included?
I am looking through the "13 times" and almost immediately found the bs.
This is from one of Hakeem Jefferies tweets allegedly suggesting that Russia helped get Trump elected
Anybody see the problem? He's not talking about 2016, he's talking about Trump's phone call to Zelensky.
I am going to look at the other twelve examples to see how accurate they are. I have looked at three of them so far and their accuracy does not look promising.
No.
Two of the 13 links didnt work, of those that did, most of them are vague references to "illegitimacy" not remotely comparable to the tsunami of hogwash emanating from Trump and his lackies for the past 38 months and counting. Again, the US Senate concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 election for the purpose of trying to help Trump get elected. In these 13 tweets by Jefferies he's not saying a damn thing that the US Senate intelligence committee, controlled by the Republicans, didnt say.
There continues to be an ongoing effort to bamboozle the American people, by right wing media and its tools in social media, by manufacturing a supposed equivalence between what a few Democrats may have said about 2016 and the deluge of lies and nonsense Trump and his minions have been perpetrating en masse for the past 38 months.
Clean your glasses.
Great defense John, Our guy may be an election denying piece of shit, but your guy is a bigger one.
Did republicans steal congressional elections? Was trump an illegitimate president? Did republicans cheat to win?
if your answer to any of these questions is yes, you, like Jeffries, are an election denier.
This is the MAGA and Trump election denial
############################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################################
this is the Democrats election denial
###############
I have seen, over the past three years, dozens of videos where some moron in a red hat says the election was stolen from Trump.
where are the videos of people at Biden events saying the 2016 election was stolen by the Russians ?
Hahahahahahahaha
They don't exist.
Some clown idiot Republican congressman named Ralph Norman was interviewed on tv yesterday or the day before. The interviewer asked him why he sent a text message to Mark Meadows a couple days before the Biden inauguration urging Trump to invoke martial law to prevent the peaceful transition of presidential power. Norman said because he had "questions" about the election. This was after Jan 6. The interviewer asked this asshole if he regretted that text message, now three years later. He said no.
How about Biden himself to an extent?
There isnt a word in that video that is untrue, so what is your point ?
Here John, just in the first few minutes you have Clinton, Harris and Biden all engaging in election denial.
Point is, they have a crutch to use to justify the defeat of Mrs. Clinton. Outside help..................NOT
I watched the first few minutes of that, until they started getting into the Bush-Gore election.
Almost all of the snippets claiming Trump's win was illegitimate were made prior to the 2017 inauguration, in other words weeks after the 2016 election, when there was a lot of (as it turned out accurate) speculation about Russias involvement in trying to effect the vote. Russia DID tamper with our election. The US Senate said so later.
We can know when these various snippets were made because in many cases with these clips there is a box in the lower corner counting down the days to the end of the Obama administration.
We are now 38 months after the 2020 election, not six weeks, and still, virtually every fucking day Trump says the election was stolen from him by the Democrats. And the red hat morons who attend his rallies , still, after 38 months of this garbage keep saying the same thing. Exit polls in Iowa showed something like 80% of people who voted for Trump in Iowa 10 days ago say the election was stolen. 38 MONTHS LATER.
The Clinton, Harris and Biden denials were all later. Biden and Harris denied the 2016 election while campaigning in 2020.
Which has nothing to do with my question. Why are you trying to deflect?
The current GOP is indeed nuts. The title says it all.
The level of delusion is staggering.
No doubt, on both sides....
Hard to justify equating the level of delusion in the current GOP with that of the Ds.
But I am curious to review your attempt.
Okay, but first I would ask a question. Do you think Biden is fit for office? I don't mean in comparison to his likely opponent, but singularly.
And therein lies the similarity in a nutshell.................
I have made it very clear that Biden is too old for the office. Nobody should be PotUS who is substantially passed their mid 60s. By the same token, nobody should be PotUS prior to mid 40s (experience, maturity, etc.)
But the older side of the issue deals with the clear fact that cognitive abilities are in decline. It is true for everyone (although the degree varies per individual) but the further we go past mid 60s the more cognitive decline becomes an issue.
The job of PotUS is far too important and far too stressful, draining, etc. for elderly people. It is best left for a healthy person of middle age.
Thus neither Biden nor Trump is fit to be PotUS due to age alone. Asa Hutchinson is almost in this category even though I believe Asa would make an exceptional PotUS (in terms of temperament, experience, wisdom, etc.). He is at the bleeding edge of where I would draw the hard line and thus he almost qualifies as unfit.
But fitness has levels. While both Biden and Trump are unfit due to age, I can handle dealing with an elderly PotUS if the circumstances force that condition. For example, if we have one candidate who is elderly but rational and the other is youthful but irrational, I will go for elderly and rational over youthful and irrational. The former is unfit but the latter is even more unfit.
I suspect this is sufficient to give you a very clear understanding of how I see fitness.
That is like comparing a bank robber to a shoplifter. The are both thieves (similarity) but would you truly disregard the profound distinction of grand larceny and equate the act with stealing items from a convenience store?
Emphatically. Well said throughout your comment. It has been my position all along that we have no experience as a nation of this presidential scenario that is setting itself up between two near/abiding octogenarians. Also, we have no experience dealing with a diabolical former president (on either side) that would not take "No" to the office once ousted for a myriad of reasons.
Here we are on both accounts!
The stage is nearly set for being compelled to make a choice between two elderly (possibly declining) candidates. . . both pushing themselves upon the voters. Thus, it is what it is.
Agreed. But not because of a physical or mental inability, because he (and others his age) do not relate to the current citizenship of this country.
Disagree. What has Biden done, other than a few stumbles and gaffes to indicate his inability? He has done remarkably with the economy, employment, manufacturing base, handling inflation, handling oil production, and just about every other metric.
The right wing has pretty much dropped everything except border policy, but then block any policy or action he tries to address the border just so they can continue to point at him.
Yes, in that rather long winded comparison answer to my question of your thoughts on a individual you did indeed answer that you don't think he's fit for office. Thank you. The D's have had ample time to bring forth candidates yet haven't. I find that curious, don't you? If you're going to castigate the R's for allowing Trump to become the nominee don't you think the D's deserve some too?...
Like approval of cutting down the wire? That kind of lame assed action?
Typically a yes or no answer comes with qualifications.
Have you seriously not read that very criticism of the Ds from me??
Is this your argument that the Ds are as deluded as the GOP in 2024?
How can you not think they aren't?
I see there is no argument forthcoming.
Carry on then TiG.
Do you approve of killing people who are seeking asylum? Do you feel capital punishment should be approved for legal asylum seekers?
How many have you taken into your home? Fed any? Given any money to but lodging , clothing or food?
My guess, and I know I'm right, is the answer is no.
Why?
Because leftists try and "talk" compassion, but refuse to show it when that compassion is needed in their back yards.
Who is killing people? If they meet their demise, it is their own fault and NO ONE else's. The wire means "You may want to think twice about what you are doing".
At the end of the year, there were 6.2 million cases on ICE’s docket of nondetained migrants.
How many of them have truly suffered persecution due to:
- Race
- Religion
- Nationality
- Membership in a particular social group
-Political opinion
vs being economic refugees?
Do you believe we should tell everyone in the world that they are welcome to come here and the citizens of this country will pick up the tab for everything they will ever need?
Do you believe we should violate federal and international asylum laws?
They are. There is an 85-90% chance they won't be granted asylum.
Here's biden in 2007. first note how coherent he was. He could string words together, rapidly!
He calls sanctuary cities "dumps" and promises to enforce federal laws against them. But on this, as with everything else, Joe Biden demonstrated he's a man completely without principle or backbone. The man never met a principle he wouldn't change if his party asked.
ooooooh pretty damning there.........................
You do realize that a POV, hell even a worldview, can properly change depending on the arguments made for or against it. So it's a nice FYI video, but that is all it is at this point. Give us Biden's views 'today' on immigration.
It's an old video. Some people you support were once democrats in this life, and other former democrats who switch to republican you approve of, so let's not pretend that since 2007 a POV or worldview can't change. . . as we all know better about this!
Do you believe coutries should have borders?
As with everything else, it's whatever his political interests of the moment demand. The left demands open borders, he supports open borders.
Abortion, crime, debt, immigration, you name it. Biden changes his principles like a snake sheds his skin.
That's untrue and more to the point, you should KNOW it is untrue. . . so it begs the question that you bothered writing such disinformation. Let's begin with the obvious FACT that Biden is president of the leading country in the world. . . as president, he is entitled to change his views to MATCH and demonstrate as needed an understanding of 'situational' awareness in and throughout the country on a variety of issues. That he can not or will not match GOP non-negotiable policy proposals does not mean he is weak, it probably means GOP/MAGA should compromise on a more regular basis.
BTW, I did not see any Biden Administration immigration policy statement in your comment. I take it you don't know it or do not care to opine on it specifically.
Are you saying that they should not be able to even apply for asylum since their chances are that low???
every country has a mutually agreed upon border. Well except for Putin who choses not to recognize borders.
They can apply before coming at the Embassy of their choice. I am not sure it is that important to them knowing when they get here there is that same percentage chance, or greater, they will be free to move about the country.
China disagrees.
In Aug 2023, there were about 1 million pending affirmative asylum cases or a backlog of about 6 years for their first before USCIS. Their case and the inevitable appeals will take another year or two.
By then they will have two or more American children and there will be a big push not to send the kids back or split them from their parents.
It's a good deal for those born in poor countries.
So, the whole system does not need a complete overhaul?
How did you deduce that?
Historically, I have liked Canada’s immigration policies although they may now need a tuneup.
The Republican Party is NEVER going back to McCain and Romney.
Obviously you are not speaking literally given McCain is dead and Romney is done with politics.
So you are merely claiming, vaguely, that the GOP will never go back to the 'likes' of McCain and Romney.
Okay, so what are the defining characteristics of 'the likes of McCain and Romney' that you see the GOP never supporting in the future?
Obviously, I'm speaking of the establishment Republicans.
So you are merely claiming, vaguely, that the GOP will never go back to the 'likes' of McCain and Romney.
I'm speaking very clearly. Haley represents the party of George W Bush. That party is gone.
Then just say that. You could have been talking about statesmen vs. partisan opportunists.
Right now, the GOP is unrecognizable. It is hard to say what it will be when it recovers from the infection from the Trump parasite.
You are now! Big difference when you make specific statements rather than vague quips. And, yes, the current GOP is definitely NOT the party of GWB or Reagan or Ike or ... or ... or Lincoln. It is unrecognizable to me. It is a fucking mess.
So will the GOP ever return to a point where it has a significant body of politicians who are trying to do good for the American people rather than party and personal? A party where dishonesty is NOT the leading political tactic?
Alright now, you betta 'read,' Mister TiG! That response takes the head of its class!
Nikki Haley is highly probably not going to survive the primary 'cut.' She can not 'save' liberals from the wrath of Trump. Liberals get off your. . .cushions and get after saving yourselves from the 'Wraith' that Trump has promised he will become on behalf of conservatives pushing and thrusting themselves down your throats.
The GOP/MAGA movement is waging political warfare against liberals with no or few guardrails around the processes/propaganda it uses. Time to face up to it: Liberals you are being openly and boldly attacked for your political existence. Do something about it.
No wonder why the once upper Grand Old Party of Lincoln is now referred to entirely in the lower case as, "the gop". What A Mess!
When the dust settles the Republican nominee will be Trump. He will likely receive as many, if not more popular votes this time as he did in 2020. I'd like to hear from the Biden supporters why they think he will win, considering his miserable record and lousy poll numbers?
Abortion won't be as much of an issue this time around as it has been given to the states to decide, which is the correct outcome. It will be counterbalanced by the left's war on women, as shown by it's all in support of confused males who believe they are women instead of biological females. The left appears to favor the grooming and sexualization of children by offering in appropriate subject matter in grade schools. The left appears to be spilt on the Israel and Hamas conflict.
Then there is the border problem. Here again the left seems to favor illegal border jumpers than protecting its own citizens. The Democrats seem to have been taken over by the hard left progressives who seem to be totally out of touch with the majority of American citizens. Why should anyone vote for Democrats this time around, from the president on down the ballot?
Nobody knows who is going to win.
Yeah, it is very likely Trump will be the nominee. That is not much of a prediction at this point.
But the general is an entirely different matter.
We are facing nine+ plus months of meaningless argument over whether either nominee is competent…to no one’s satisfaction.
Let us all focus on the down ballot issues and candidates…for that is where a vote, a voice, and a vision truly matter. Peace.
. . .too.