Nikki Haley Doesn't Have to Win Primaries
The last woman standing just needs to stay in the race
Laboring to find something special or interesting to say about former president Donald J. Trump’s 11-point win over Nikki Haley, the last challenger standing, Shane Goldmacher of the New York Times came up with this: “Regardless of what comes next, the win on Tuesday sealed Mr. Trump’s status as the party’s standard-bearer in the history books: Before Mr. Trump, the only Republicans who have ever won both the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary have been sitting presidents.”
This reminds me of when the national network team is calling an NFL game and, unable to say anything interesting about two teams they don’t really know, they offer up bits of trivia generated by a computer or an intern. This is when we learn things like: “Jones is the first rookie running back to score twice from the slot in three games;” or “The Jets break the previous record of three fumbles in the red zone in the same quarter, previously held by the Browns.”
Regardless of what comes next…. well, thank you Mr. Goldmacher. Let the fact that the Iowa Caucuses have only been part of the presidential primary nominating process since 1972 (the Republicans did not start caucusing until the 1976 cycle) not trouble you at this historic moment! Nor the fact that everyone has agreed for some time that, barring a mass conversion experience, Donald Trump would hang onto his most loyal supporters, lose a minority of Republican voters, and have difficulty attracting unaffiliated voters.
And that is exactly what happened in New Hampshire, a very Republican state: 43% of New Hampshire voters who cast a ballot in the Republican primary voted for Haley; only 1 in 5 independents voted for Trump. "Trump's coalition is static and predictable,” Republican strategist Chuck Coughlin told Reuters reporters Jason Lange and Alexandra Ulmer. “His base is too small to win a presidential election."
Let’s look at some other context moving forward.
First, unlike Iowa, primary day in New Hampshire was just an ordinary, bitterly New England day, so there was unusually robust turnout at the polls. Around 300,000 people voted in the Republican primary: close to half of these were independents, who can vote in either primary. Since political journalism is all about hyperbole nowadays, CBS News announced that this numbered “shattered” the previous record for a Republican primary.
Nonsense. The previous all-time high was 287,000; 13,000 more breaks perhaps, but does not shatter, a record. Furthermore, if you keep reading Goldmacher’s piece, you will learn that this accomplishment is not unprecedented. In 2020, 300,000 New Hampshire voters cast a primary ballot for Bernie Sanders, whose campaign promptly withered in March.
Fact #1: winning New Hampshire does not position a candidate to win a national election.
Now, let’s look at some other numbers. About 600,000 voters are registered with the two major parties in New Hampshire: there are slightly fewer Republicans than Democrats, but essentially they are evenly divided. The remaining 400,000 voters, or 40% of the electorate, is unaffiliated. Of this group, 65% who cast a ballot in the Republican primary voted for Nikki Haley, and she won half of women voters. Worse news for Trump is that reports cite many Haley voters’ affirming that they will not vote for him in November. This was true in Iowa as well, where nearly half of Republican voters who caucused for Haley said they would vote for Biden in November.
Fact #2, 3 &4: Trump’s support among motivated voters in his own party is soft, and Haley is providing a contrast that is solidifying an anti-Trump voter base in the party. Trump’s support among independent voters is softer, and it is these voters that the winning candidate must win. And the longer Niki Haley stays in the Republican primary race, the more Republican and unaffiliated voters have the opportunity to decide they will not, under any condition, vote for Donald J. Trump.
She needs to stay in at least through March 5, Super Tuesday, when voters in 15 states will have the opportunity to take a baby step back into reality and not vote for Donald Trump. Which is why Trump wants Haley to suspend her campaign—like, yesterday. Enraged that she had not already dropped out of the race, Trump told his supporters: "I don't get too angry. I get even."
But how do you “get even” with someone who, unlike the majority of craven Republicans, won’t face an electorate again unless she wants to—and doesn’t need your stinking approval to get on with her life?
Last piece of good news: the write-in Biden campaign worked! I am more than. happy to eat crow on this one (readers will recall that I was more than skeptical about the purpose of this campaign, although less so after talking to one of the organizers.) To remind you: the DNC asked New Hampshire to let South Carolina go first, and New Hampshire refused (they have a state law that requires them to be the first primary state), so Biden did not put his name on the ballot. And yet, a scrappy group of state and local politicians organized a write-in campaign; of around 117,000 votes cast, Biden won over 55%. Another 10% of write-in ballots were befouled in some way, and Biden challenger, congressman Dean Phillips of Minnesota won less than 20%.
Facts #5 & 6: There is no market for a Dean Phillips candidacy. In addition, the New Hampshire Democratic Party pulled off one of the best campaign coups of all time, which is to show that even when it is hard to vote for him, voters will leap small buildings in a single bound to support Joe Biden. “I want to thank all those who wrote my name in this evening in New Hampshire,” the President responded. “It was a historic demonstration of commitment to our democratic process.”
Yes, it actually was. So, bravo on all counts, New Hampshire voters. You did well.
Now, on to South Carolina, an open primary state where Republicans vote on February 3, and Democrats on February 3. Nikki Haley doesn’t have to win: she just has to stay in the race long enough to damage Trump from the inside.
Short takes:
Michael Baharaeen looks at the path forward for Joe Biden, and like me, he’s optimistic about Biden’s chances in the fall, despite the yucky poll numbers. “The Democrats’ pessimism misses a couple of key points. First, as our increasingly polarized politics have produced ever-closer results in presidential elections, candidates today can expect to have a high floor of support regardless of their perceived strength or weakness,” Baharaeen writes at Persuasion. Second, there are still a little over nine months until Election Day, and a lot can change between now and then. As Trump re-enters the daily lives of many Americans who have tuned out of politics since he left office, Biden has a chance to draw a clear contrast between himself and his predecessor—and remind voters why they chose him the first time.” (January 24, 2024)
At her eponymous Substack, Jill Filipovic breaks down the New Hampshire vote and sees a few things you won’t see elsewhere. One of the most interesting was this: Trump’s “support was strongest among the youngest voters, those under the age of 30,” Filipovic writes. “That’s not a big group — they made up fewer than one in ten of the voters in CNN’s exit poll — but 60% of them voted for Trump, compared to 51% of voters 65 and up.” At least as interesting was that singles broke heavily for Trump, and while women split evenly between Trump and Haley “married women (33% of the electorate) were more likely by a hair to support Haley, while unmarried women (16% of the electorate) were much more likely to vote for Trump.” Why? As Filipovic argues, “If marriage pulls people more toward the status quo, the safe, and the predictable, then these results start to make more sense. Haley is the “conservative” choice in the sense of keeping things the same. Trump’s politics are more radical and more extreme, but he also threatens (or promises, depending on your view) chaos and a total remaking of the nation. He is in many ways better understood as a revolutionary and radical candidate, not a merely far-right conservative one.” Filipovic is so smart: if you don’t already subscribe to her, you should. (January 24, 2024)
Remember Christian Ziegler, who is married to Moms for Liberty co-founder Bridget Ziegler—and who was accused of raping a woman who he and Bridget had had a threesome with? According to Michael Barfield of the Florida Trident, “The Sarasota Police Department has closed the rape investigation of Christian Ziegler with no charges filed but are forwarding a related case involving video voyeurism to the State Attorney’s Office for review.” According to police the video backs Ziegler’s story that the encounter was “likely consensual.” However, the remaining charges are serious. “In Florida, videotaping a sexual encounter without consent is a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison,” Barfield writes.
Great article/newsletter.
Minor correction: Republican primary is Feb 24, not Feb 3.
Bravo, Professor Potter!!!
I gave up on the New York Times as a paid subscriber about two years ago because I was frustrated with the shallowness of their hard news reporting -- at least in "the paper". Their failure to uncover and call out the lies leading up to the second gulf war, and now a similar failure to put the 2024 election into historical perspective are both unforgivable. I've switched to "new media" for hardcore news and opinion, including Political Junkie, Heather Cox Richardson, Robert Reich, Judd Legum, Jeff Tiedrich -- thank god for him -- Michael Moore, Matt Stoller, and Joyce Vance. (I think The Times is doing a very good job with The Daily and Ezra Klein podcasts.)
"This reminds me of when the national network team is calling an NFL game and, unable to say anything interesting about two teams they don’t really know, they offer up bits of trivia generated by a computer or an intern." KABLAM!!!
"Let the fact that the Iowa Caucuses have only been part of the presidential primary nominating process since 1972 (the Republicans did not start caucusing until the 1976 cycle) not trouble you at this historic moment!" KERRRPOWWW!
"But how do you 'get even' with someone who, unlike the majority of craven Republicans, won’t face an electorate again unless she wants to—and doesn’t need your stinking approval to get on with her life?" OH, SNAP!!!
"Now, on to South Carolina, an open primary state where Republicans vote on February 3, and Democrats on February 3." MAYBE A TYPO?
LOVE YOU,
Me