Taking a Second Look at Nikki Haley

“It is true that one of the most important rules in politics is that ‘You can’t lose your base,’ but it is also true that in order to win competitive elections, broadening one’s base is essential, and Ambassador Haley might be able to accomplish that.”

In December of 2019, well before the 2020 presidential election and a few weeks before then-President Donald Trump achieved his highest Gallup net approval rating of his presidency following his 2020 State of the Union Address and acquittal at his first Senate impeachment trial, I authored a media criticism column titled “The Next Media Darling of Presidential Politics: Nikki Haley,” anticipating a future Haley presidential candidacy accompanied by relatively warm media coverage, even from the generally left-of-center national press. It was obvious that the former Ambassador to the United Nations and former Governor of South Carolina “harbored,” as they say, presidential ambitions. That much was clear. But somewhat more surprisingly, a national press typically quite hostile to Republican candidates held its fire—not quite embracing her, of course, but refraining from the degree of character assassination typically aimed at Republican officeholders with national aspirations. (1)

To her critics from the Right, this treatment on the part of the press is proof of her deep-seated left-leaning sympathies and a potential future reality that should she be elected President of the United States, she would behave as a Republican-lite, a member of the alleged “uniparty political establishment” that dominates Washington, D.C. and prevents conservative principles promised on the campaign trail from becoming policy. Former President Donald Trump, according to most of those holding this view, is the only person capable of bridging this divide; even Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, arguably the most effective chief executive in recent memory, falls short. (I have heard from certain hardcore backers of President Trump’s that Governor DeSantis is secretly a Democrat, a plant, and the like.) A vote for Ambassador Haley is a vote for the deep state and for war, we are told.

Now, there is little doubt in my mind that former President Trump would be more effective when it comes to implementing prized policy commitments favored by conservatives, particularly of the America First variety, than would Ambassador Haley. And, so there is no confusion, I favored actions such as President Trump withdrawing from the World Health Organization, playing hardball with North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states, and reconsidering aspects of American trade policy, moves that a President Haley would be unlikely to favor. (Differing from some of his detractors on the Right, I consider President Trump to have been a reasonably effective President of the United States, especially considering the fact that he was under relentless investigations, impeachment proceedings, and the like throughout his entire presidency.)