Ethics Dunce: Nikki Haley

There was a time when I thought that Nikki Haley had an excellent chance of becoming the first female President. That chance is long gone, and Haley is 100% responsible. Her announcement as a candidate for the 2024 Republican nomination is just another bit of evidence of why she is unfit to be President and never will be one.

Haley has proven herself to be a hypocrite, a cynical opportunist, and devoid of integrity. It’s a shame, given her other skills, talents and experience, and it is certainly true that some have successfully reached the White House with the same nauseating concoction of qualities. Haley, however, is not in a position similar to any of those men.

Anyone who is going to wrest the nomination from Donald Trump—and somebody better—is going to have to do so without so thoroughly alienating Republican voters who still favor the previous POTUS that they would be inclined to skip the 2024 election entirely. For Haley, that metaphorical horse has left the barn and taken a  flight to Borneo. Her flip-flopping regarding Trump is so self-evidently calculated and self-serving, except that it hasn’t served her well anyway.

Haley told the The New York Times in 2016  that she would “not stop until we fight a man that chooses not to disavow the K.K.K. That is not a part of our party. That is not who we are.” Then, when Trump was the nominee, it suddenly was who she was, as Nikki accepted the invitation to serve in Trump’s cabinet in the prestige position as U.N. delegate. Ah, but she did it only out of a “sense of duty.” Haley distinguished herself in the job, and  when the 2020 election loomed, Nikki was all in for Trump, saying, “This president has a record of strength and success.” However, Trump lost, and Haley calculated that the Jan. 6 riot (which CNN still calls “the insurrection”) would end his viability as a candidate. So she condemned him, once she sensed that was the way the wind was blowing. She  told the Republican National Committee’s winter meeting, in her keynote speech,

“President Trump has not always chosen the right words. He was wrong with his words in Charlottesville, and I told him so at the time. He was badly wrong with his words yesterday. And it wasn’t just his words. His actions since Election Day will be judged harshly by history.”

Later, she told Politico, “I think he’s lost any sort of political viability he was going to have.” Ah! That explains why she wasn’t sucking up to him any more.

Trump, for all his myriad flaws, has a certain weird integrity. Mitt Romney, the most prominent GOP Never Trumper, has never wavered from his intense opposition. Haley. in contrast, has made it blazingly clear that she lacks integrity, which means she cannot be trusted—just like the last female candidate for the White House, Hillary Clinton. Worse still, her entry into the race is a gift to Trump, and makes his nomination more rather than less likely. Trump’s path to the ticket requires all the  non-Trump candidates to fracture the anti-Trump vote, leaving the stubborn 30% or so of blindly loyal Trump supporters to carry the day.

Well played, Nikki!

She’s not just an ethics dunce, she’s a political dunce as well.

It isn’t as if her Trump schizophrenia is the only example of Haley “blowin’ in the wind,” either. In 2001,  she  listed her race as “white” on her voter registration card, three years before she entered politics. Now, in her announcement video, she says, “I was the proud daughter of Indian immigrants, not Black, not white. I was different.”

The problem with Nikki Haley is that, as a politician, she’s not different enough.

23 thoughts on “Ethics Dunce: Nikki Haley

  1. In some ways, don’t you think that Nikki Haley checks off many of the boxes that the GOP needs to have checked in this “woke” political climate; after all, in spite of her flaws she’s not white, she’s a woman, she’s seen as a decent person, she’s got hands-on leadership and foreign policy experience, and she’s a reasonably viable Republican candidate that’s not Donald Trump thus fitting the niche for all the never Trump GOP’ers. Can she win the nomination after facing down a predictable gauntlet of Trump attacks, I really don’t know, but Trump does have a character boat anchor that’s dragging him down. At this point in time, despite her flaws, I’d support Haley over Trump in the primaries.

    Could Haley win the Presidency if nominated, I don’t know. To be really honest, I’m not sure any Republican can win the White House right now in spite of Biden’s dismal performance and constant lying. The Democratic Party political machine has learned since 2016 how to psychologically manipulate the public and steer an election their way and I think they will steam roll over any Republican candidate that presents themself for the Presidency with pure propaganda ad hominems.

      • If Haley is the nominee, I will vote for the Democrat. I’ve had it with the phoney, sanctimonious Republicans who brazenly pander for votes then do the exact opposite of what they promised 100% of the time. I can’t make the GOP do what the voters ask for, but I can help make sure they lose. The GOP would rather play chicken with the voters than do what the voters ask them to. Time to call their bluff.

        • Null Pointer wrote, “If Haley is the nominee, I will vote for the Democrat. I’ve had it with the phoney, sanctimonious Republicans who brazenly pander for votes then do the exact opposite of what they promised 100% of the time. I can’t make the GOP do what the voters ask for, but I can help make sure they lose. The GOP would rather play chicken with the voters than do what the voters ask them to.”

          In a Haley vs Biden Presidential election and you would choose Biden out of spite?

          Null Pointer wrote, “Time to call their bluff.”

          You’re welcome to do what you like when you walk into the voting booth, but it seems to me to be counterproductive to do that in the general election. Getting your revenge against the GOP in the primary seems to me to be the more productive place for that kind of spite.

          • It’s not out of spite or revenge. It’s out of practicality. We theoretically have a 2 party system, but in actuality what we have is a one party system where the only actual variable that is different between the two parties is degree. Communist and communist-lite leads to nowhere but communism. Unless one side decides to stop being communist, we end up in a communist country either way. The only way to change course is for one of the two parties to stop pursuing communism. Democrats are not going to change course, so the party that needs to change paths is the Republicans. Voting for the communist-lite politicians only encourages them to continue their current course.

            I’ve voted reliably Republican my entire life. What has that gotten me? Time to change tactics.

    • Other Bill wrote, “…why’s she waving around the race and chromosome cards as if she were a Democrat?”

      It’s pure box checking. Yes it’s a bit annoying but in this “woke” political climate that’s been rammed down the throat of our society it’s become two clicks short of being necessary.

    • Because Republicans are ever eager, to the point of desperation, to prove to people who don’t actually care, that they’re not racist or sexist and they’ll support women and minorities so long as the exhibit a base level of conservatism.

      I think this is the entire appeal of Dave Rubin or Candace Owens, just off the top of my head. I don’t know how well that flies at this level, but don’t underestimate the vapid eagerness of conservatives to pedestalize mid-tierly talented tokens.

        • Disappointing. You’d think people could realize she’s a woman and that she’s of Indian descent. Just let it speak for itself? What a concept. Sheesh.

  2. That said… I think you’re huffing gas on this one, Jack.

    I’d support Nikki in a heartbeat and feel good about it. She’s been an effective force for good for years, competent at everything she’s done… I don’t understand the willingness to discount that entirely because 22 years ago she listed her race as white on a voter card. Frankly, unless the behavior is truly disqualifying, these “but they did this thing this one time” criticisms annoy me. They dosn’t allow for change or growth. On that note… Using Romney, who is currently hiding under a rock to avoid apologizing for calling Tusli Gabbard a traitor as the juxtaposition of integrity in politics is… well it’s something.

    More likely, I think, is that you’re basing this almost entirely on the word “insurrection”. I could be wrong, please correct me if I am, but the base acts here are not only uncontroversial, but you also walked that journey: We’re talking about how she criticized Trump during the primary (just like you did) then did the kind of rallying around a president you were calling for in the wake of Trump’s election (which you also did), and then resumed criticism at some point after that (just saying).

    What’s really going on here?

    • Not quite right. For one thing, I recognize that my repeated criticism of Trump (and which I’ve never backed down from) would make me unpalatable to any Trump acolytes, without whom every GOP candidate loses. I would never require Trump to “to disavow the K.K.K.,” which is a cheap shot gotcha devised by Democrats and part of the “Trump is a racist” lie, which, again, I have always rejected. I would, and I have written this, serve at the pleasure of Trump or any President if asked “out of duty”—I don’t believe that was Haley’s motivation for a second. Haley is pandering to the anti-Trump cabal by criticizing his words on Charlottesville: I defended Trump in that fiasco. I was never “all in” for Trump, and you won’t find a record of me praising his “strength and success.” I was all out against Biden. Note also that my role here is not Haley’s role. She is supposed to be trying to see the Democrats be defeated in 2024. Gratuitous attacks on Trump in what she foolishly sees as her own benefit don’t accomplish that.

      Did you really think “(which CNN still calls “the insurrection”)” was endorsing that definition? I have never endorsed it; it’s ridiculous. I mentioned it in passing (hence the parenthesis) because it is mark of the media alliance with the Trump-smearing forces that CNN still uses that legally inapplicable term.

      How is praising Mitt for at least sticking to his guns on Trump “something”? The topic is integrity. he’s been an asshole; his support of the impeachment was legally and politically irresponsible and petty, but he didn’t pretend to be something he isn’t. That was faint praise, as is my praise for Trump’s consistency.

      What’s going on here? Haley has tried to calculate what position benefits her most. I have not flip-flopped on Trump: we should never elect someone with his ethics and pathologies as President; he was and is still preferable and safer for the nation than the increasingly totalitarian-trending Democratic Party; as President, he deserved the respect and support an election to the office is supposed to confer and didn’t get it; his handling of his suspicions about the election were unconscionable, and fulfilled, at the bitter end, some of the worst fears about him when he ran in 2016. Yes, they disqualify him, or should. If he runs against Biden, I’ll do what I did with Nixon and McGovern as well as Hillary and Trump: not vote for either candidate.

      • This is perhaps an evolution from 2020 when we were told in no uncertain terms that it was a duty of citizenship to vote. Or, perhaps of a rationalization back then to justify a vote for Trump.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.