Select Page

Nikki Has a Shot! New Hampshire within Reach and New Koch Network Backing

Nikki Has a Shot! New Hampshire within Reach and New Koch Network Backing

Nikki Haley’s campaign is emerging as a noteworthy challenge to Donald Trump’s dominance in the GOP. Significantly, her campaign is gaining momentum in New Hampshire, a pivotal state in the primary race. Recent polling data indicates a potentially game-changing shift in voter preferences in New Hampshire, with Haley closing in on Trump’s lead. In one poll, Trump is ahead of Haley by 46% to 25%, but another shows Haley just 4% behind. This tightening of the race suggests that if Haley can secure a victory in New Hampshire, it could catalyze a groundswell of support, potentially transforming the dynamics of the Republican nomination.

A victory over Trump in such a small state may appear trivial, but any chink in Trump’s armor, especially one so early, can shift the primary series from a landslide to a nail biter. If she wins New Hampshire, it is almost guaranteed that she will win other states.

Crucial to Haley’s surge is the backing of the influential Koch donor network, which had previously taken a diminished role in presidential politics, particularly after opposing Trump’s rise to power. This network, renowned for shaping GOP politics and stirring apprehension among Democrats, is tiptoeing back into the presidential arena. Its support for Haley marks a strategic shift, indicating a potential reassertion of influence within a party that has been largely influenced by Trump and his policies. This move is also seen as an attempt to appease donors who are keen to be more politically active.

The financial commitment from the Koch network to Haley’s campaign, though modest compared to the overall spending in the primary, is significant. The network has provided $5.7 million in support of Haley, alongside $18 million dedicated to anti-Trump ads and mail. This sum is a fraction of the nearly $1 billion the Koch donors planned to spend on politics and policy efforts during the 2016 presidential race before Trump’s emergence as a key figure. The Koch network’s decision to back Haley reflects its evolving strategy and changing role within the Republican Party.

The Koch network, once a formidable player in Republican politics, had become destabilized during the Trump years. The network faced divisions regarding its opposition to Trump, its rebranding efforts as bipartisan, and its endorsements. Emily Seidel, chief executive of Americans for Prosperity, one of the Koch-funded groups, emphasized that Trump’s rise hasn’t affected the network’s mission. “AFP is a policy-first organization, and we don’t go away in between election cycles,” she stated. Seidel praised Haley’s ability to lead the nation forward, reflecting a notable shift in the network’s political positioning.

Despite the Koch network’s historical opposition to some of Haley’s policies during her governorship, their endorsement signifies a significant realignment within the GOP. The network’s backing is not without its challenges, as it navigates a Republican Party that has undergone substantial transformation. Chart Westcott, a Koch network donor, highlighted this irony, noting the evolution of the network from its founding principles to a more establishment stance.

Haley’s ascendance in the polls has elicited a varied reaction from Trump. While he has publicly dismissed the polls as “fake” and downplayed Haley as a threat, reports suggest he has considered her for a vice-presidential role, indicating an acknowledgment of her growing support base. Haley, capitalizing on this momentum, has been vocal about her campaign’s surge, using Trump’s attacks as evidence of her increasing relevance in the primary race.

As the primary season progresses, Haley’s campaign, buoyed by the Koch network’s backing, poses a credible challenge to Trump’s bid for the GOP nomination. The unfolding dynamics in New Hampshire will be critical in determining the trajectory of the Republican race and could potentially signal a significant shift in the party’s future direction.

Editor’s note: We find it tough to get behind Haley based on one single issue. She has said publicly that her solution to Chinese propaganda in social media is to make sure everyone on social media is identified to the government. This is horrific. We already have enough infringement on freedom of expression in America. The fact that she said this means to us, that she is a philosophical lightweight, and cannot be trusted to be President.

About The Author

18 Comments

  1. Doug White

    While I vote in every election I am not a one party person. After voting twice for Trump as a default candidate I am delighted to have Nicki Haley running for POTUS. She is up to every challenge that the office requires as she continually shines in the debates while the others stumble around trying to knock her down. For once I feel good about donating the best I can as a retired person. to achieve her goal. I believe she is by far the best choice for America.

  2. FRANK STETSON

    Koch Bro’s sans a bro, these guys did more to make the Republican Party than anyone in the last two decades. And then they were shocked at what it turned into under Trump. They did us, did us well, well played Madams. We were sleeping almost as much as Hillary fell asleep at the wheel in 2016. They caused the grass roots with lots of Koch Bro fertilizer.

    Now they are back and I am glad. Because unlike the Horists of the world, these REAL Republicans have stood up and said CHARACTER MATTERS, the Constitution matters, and most important, the oath of office matters.

    Good luck remaining Koch Bro. and glad to see you have a lot of kids. I’ll look to hate you again after you succeed in this one!

    • doug

      Haley, in fact, offered nothing notable in Republican debates unless whining and prevarication amount to important qualifications for White House leadership.

      Haley has always been prone to sidestepping firm policy positions, and if she made any memorable achievements in her career outside of soaring profiteering in recent years, I’d like to see them.

      Haley seems to base her political profile on Mutt Romney’s. Ron DeSantis’ actual implementation of conservative initiatives across the board stands as a polar opposite to Haley’s slithering.

      • tom

        Doug, you don’t get it. Republicans like people who slither. That is why they bow to Trump! He is the head snake!

        • doug

          Changing identities 10 or 100 times a day doesn’t remove the onus to address arguments and questions substantively.

          The comments and challenges below don’t just still stand, they stand more solidly and seriously than ever.

          Here are some examples of responses by the skipping twoll above to earlier challenges and questions directed to him and dodged repeatedly in just the last week or two:

          * Would “he” have sided with not-see Germany or with the U.S. and U.S. allies in WW II? Response: Took the Fifth.

          * Has the U.S. fought any foreign wars since the Revolution in which he would not have not backed the enemy? Pled the Fifth.

          * Name a few or even one of the most influential racists in U.S. history. Response: Took the Fifth.

          * Does he(she) still believe in the pseudo-science of eugenics — white master-race doctrine — promoted by the KKKlan, the not-see party and most of the Donk Party over the past century? Response: Invoked the Fifth.

          * Cite any differences between his/her and the KKKlan’s fundamental beliefs. Same for the twoll and the not-see party. Response: Hid behind the Fifth.

          * On what basis does he continue to defend Franklin Roosevelt’s internship of 100,000 innocent citizens of Japanese extraction for years in WW II AGAINST the recommendations of Edgar Hoover, the top official charged with protecting Americans’ security? Congress and the White House have apologized for that massive miscarriage of justice. Not so with Twinkie the Twoll here.

          * These are 100% substantive questions. Why the 100% refusal to answer? Why the refusal to answer straightforwardly?

          By the way, notice the angry, scornful disparagement of Donald Trunk and his current party, the GOP, at the same time that Senor Tom&FrankIncest invokes the Fifth when asked to pinpoint a single difference between his beliefs and Hitler’s beliefs; he invokes the Fifth again when asked to specify any faults whatsoever in der fuhrer’s actions and ideas (such as, oh, ordering the Holocaust).

    • Tom

      You post an interesting comment once again Frank! Let’s dissect for understanding since your thinking on this matter is much more evolved than mine. You truly are reaching new heights!

      Fast reverse back to 2008. I remember to this day the commercial with Hillary awakening in the early 3 A.M and picking up the land line phone. The tag line was “Who do you want answering the phone?” which was a statement that she was better prepared to handle a national emergency than her opponent Obama. Then this commercial was redone against Trump in 2016 with the same basic message. I do not fault Hillary for being asleep at 3 a.m. – most of us are asleep at that time. What bothered me was that she did not wake up! And it seemed to bother the American Embassy folks in Benghazi. And it did bother many of us Americans because not only did she not answer the phone, she also told the helicopters that were ready to make the trip to save the American Ambassadors to stand down and wait – which gave the radical terrorists time for them to slaughter our American Ambassadors. This is what I remember. And then my next memory is the coffins coming home and a very disrespectful receipt of them by Hillary where she would not even acknowledge she blew it, nor appologize (very Trumpian). And it seemed to me that Obama was not very happy with her performance on this matter.

      So are you saying that the Kock Bro’s seized on this in 2016? It would seem to me that Hillary’s poor performance coupled with her poor receipt of the bodies provided a very rich soil for criticism all on its own without the Koch Bro’s fertilizer?

      Your second paragraph downs Larry and praises the Koch’s as real Republicans. So then in your third paragraph you are planning to hate these (as you say) “REAL Republicans have stood up and said CHARACTER MATTERS, the Constitution matters, and most important, the oath of office matters” Kochs? I thought your new more evolved character would like a candidate that prioritizes Character, Constitution, and Oaths as being very important?

      So do you hate all people that have stood up and said “CHARACTER MATTERS, the Constitution matters, and most important, the oath of office matters” , OR do you just plan on hating the Kochs because they may do a good job at shaping the fundamental message of this 2024 election, that is: Character, Constitution, and Oath of Office all matter!? Please elaborate on why you will hate these Kock folks.

      The only thing I know about the Kochs is that they seem to be an uber rich family that like to spend money on politics. I often wonder, for their large investments in a candidate, what are they getting in return?

      I would like your opinion on the “Editor’s Note”. To me this was the most important little tid bit in the whole damn article. Personally, I wish we did have to be identified for our comments. Haley is correct in that it would deter hate speech, misinformation, et.al. if we had to be accountable by having our names tagged on it? I am under the impression that the social media provider would know your identity but that such identity would not go to the government without subpoena? In the old days of our youth, we only really had two choices: Newspaper ad or the telephone as a way to spread vitriol. And of course, stump speeches. So our identity was always known. Now it seems with this social media, that the “freedom of speech” people want to include immunity from social accountability as part of freedom of speech?

      The 1st Amendment says Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech (I can say what I think and feel) , or of the press (press can say what they think and feel) ; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble (we can get together and talk about it publicly) , and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances (we can complain in writing to our government without being persecuted). So where in any of this does it say I have immunity from being held accountable for my words? (This sounds very Trumpian interpretation of the 1st). What do you think?

      • FRANK STETSON

        The Koch Bro’s realized well before 2010 that they could not take the Presidency. They focused at the grassroots building political power there which ultimately results in the Tea Party ascendency in 2010. Luckily, the TP were brain dead, inexperienced, and therefore ineffective. However, Dems were asleep at the wheel as we continued to lose at the grassroots but take the White House. We blew it, the KBro’s had a great strategy.

        Tangent: Obama cheated to win second election, Benghazi et al, (although a red herring according to the godzillion Republican investigations), should have tanked him. Economy, while steadily advancing, was not fast enough so that should not have helped either.

        FYI: on the caskets. I am pretty sure she was there, she toed the Obama line, but being a lawyer, said it with the same weasel words she’d been using which CYA’d her, but what the relatives heard is what you noted. I read the transcripts where available, and it’s hard to see her actual say what you heard too. I read them all, and even though the casket conversation was not under transcript, based on all the others, I find it hard to see her failing

        By 2016, Hillary should have noticed she lost the heartland, the rural, even hit hard in the Unions, anything below college educated suburbia. The Deplorable tidbit really showed her hand and she did little successful about it.

        So, IMO, the Koch’s paved the way for Trump, the Tea Party became more effective, but luckily are still incredible ineffective, mostly due to stupidity and unprofessionalism and here we are. But the Koch’s said early on, enough is enough, this guy does not have the character et all to be President and they stand there today too. But now they seem to be getting more active at the national level, at the party level, to stand up and say —- We’re the Real Republicans, the Reagan Republicans, and it MATTERS.

        So while I love it now, I will probably hate it later if they are successful. Like Reagan though, if Haley plays it right and pivots a bit to center post nomination, she, like Reagan, may get my vote for season 1. Season 2, like Reagan, will not be assured.

        As far as the rest, yes I like character (learned it from conservatives) and the rest, but before I vote, I also look at policies of course. I would just like to believe that anyone who gets the nomination has the correct character, either party. The Kochs are very good at what they do, their accomplishments speak to that. I would enjoy anyone taking on and taking down Trump, but that does not change my politics. The Democrats are blowing being the party of the middle class, we let the Kochs begin the process of taking that from us. We need to focus there. Hillary is a prime example of what happens when you don’t.

        • Dan tyree

          Hillary is a prime example of corruption. Just like the Biden crime family

          • Frank stetson

            And yet you can’t catch them DT.

            Are they that good?

            Or are you that bad?

            Funny, Hillary was never President.

          • doug

            One-Shoe Shrillary destroyed 30,000 official gummint records. Trump salted away a few boxes and kept them in secure. Quid Pro Groper Joe Bidet illegally stored boxes of official documents in multiple locations, including low-security storage areas at a college and in his garage next to — and maybe in — his Corvette. Obama must have socked away trailer-loads of documents, judging from the complete silence on the subject from the mainstream media.

            Who was targeted by prosecutors?

          • Frank stetson

            And yet you can’t catch them Dougie.
            Keep crying. Cry wolf.

        • Tom

          Yes I think you are correct Frank when you say the Dems are blowing it at being the party of the middle class. I remember when Hillary was running I got disgusted listening to her speeches because she was always blaming white middle class males for all of the country’s ills. I was glad she did not win but later grew to really regret Trump. Nikki has the potential to take a lot of votes from the Dems, both Reagan Dems, Independents, and Trump hating Republicans. And with a fresh injection of Koch cash, she’s locked and loaded. I still think Hutchinson is the most honest and best of all of them but I do not think he has a chance sitting there at about 1%.

          Thanks for your opinion. It was interesting reading!

    • doug

      And here I thought that the Aryan Supremacy Movement hibernated for the winter. Judging by this latest mental breakdown, apparently that’s not true.

      The ASM, by the way, consists of one person and the countless posting accounts he holds — enough that multiple monikers yap seemingly endlessly at each other, trying to impress readers while desperately striving to convey the impression that it represents not just one pitiful cyber-whiner but a mammoth cadre of Jew-enviers and Christ-haters.

      Here are some examples of responses by the swishing twoll above to earlier challenges and questions directed to him (or possibly her, or is the preferred pronoun “they”?) and dodged repeatedly in just the last week or two:

      * Would “he” have sided with not-see Germany or with the U.S. and U.S. allies in WW II? Response: Took the Fifth.

      * Has the U.S. fought any foreign wars since the Revolution in which he would not have not backed the enemy? Pled the Fifth.

      * Name a few or even one of the most influential racists in U.S. history. Response: Took the Fifth.

      * Does he(she) still believe in the pseudo-science of eugenics — white master-race doctrine — promoted by the KKKlan, the not-see party and most of the Donk Party over the past century? Response: Invoked the Fifth.

      * Cite any differences between his/her and the KKKlan’s fundamental beliefs. Same for the twoll and the not-see party. Response: Hid behind the Fifth.

      * On what basis does he continue to defend Franklin Roosevelt’s internship of 100,000 innocent citizens of Japanese extraction for years in WW II AGAINST the recommendations of Edgar Hoover, the top official charged with protecting Americans’ security? Congress and the White House have apologized for that massive miscarriage of justice. Not so with Twinkie the Twoll here.

      * These are 100% substantive questions. Why the 100% refusal to answer? Why the refusal to answer straightforwardly?

      What’s most telling to me is that the twoll routinely excoriates true conservatives and libertarians, such as Clarence Thomas, Mark Levin, Ron DeSantis, Tucker Carlson and Rand Paul, but he won’t even concede that the Third Reich was any less than perfect.

      Ironically, he voices praise — if that’s the proper word for a mostly indecipherable thread of stream-of-consciousness pabulum translated from German to Gooberese — for the Koch brothers for their past misadventures.

      The Kochs are inclined to depict themselves as conservative, but they’ve been most active as proponents of libertarianism. They sought the Libertarian Party’s nomination at least once and secured its vice-presidential nomination. Now the family fashions itself as conservative. Yet it simultaneously welcomes a continued influx of illegal immigrants, an ocean of humanity which relies primarily on generous government subsidies to survive.

      Critics pointed out that influx depresses wages for the American workforce. At any rate, a policy choice to make taxpayers pay for the welfare of millions of foreign people is antithetical for both conservatives and libertarians.

      Readers of the idjut comment above should get a particular chuckle from the juxtaposition of reviling Rand Paul, who may well be the most principled politician in D.C., while slurping all over the Koch family, which variously fancies itself as Republican, Libertarian or Objectivist. Now it’s decided to thrust a John Kasich clone to the GOP presidential nomination.

      Which brings us to your assignment for tomorrow, fellow learners. Your assignment is to decipher some meaning out of this Kamalala Harris-esque jumble of gibberish:

      Koch Bro’s sans a bro,
      these guys did more to make the Republican Party
      than anyone in the last two decades.
      And then they were shocked at what it turned into under Trump.
      They did us,
      did us well,
      well played Madams.
      We were sleeping almost as much as Hillary
      fell asleep at the wheel in 2016.
      They caused the grass roots with lots of Koch Bro fertilizer

      LMAO. With that level of cerebral vacuity, is it any wonder that the not-see party was crushed?

  3. FRANK STETSON

    PBP, “more commonly than not,” that bastion of inappropriate free speech, champion of the ad hominem, protector of irresponsible hate speak, where extremist free speech-ers bask in the reflective glory of Doug’s inane request to establish “…open season for not-see losers…attempt to move out of its path or just take aim.”

    “It’s open season for not-see losers……. attempt to move out of its path or just take aim.”
    “It’s open season for not-see losers……. attempt to move out of its path or just take aim.”

    “I love it because it allows me to crush him.”
    “I love it because it allows me to crush him.”

    Doug loves the lunacy of asking “are you still beating your wife” illogical questions combined with proof of denial for things NEVER said or proof of things Dougie just wants to know, again, NEVER said. He lives in a fictional NEVERLAND world full of Doug doo.

    Double-take, Disinformation, Douchebag Dougie Darko will NEVER respond to: “our resident multiple-personality gnat-seeboy again demands proof that he’s a not-see.” You got that right, Sport, put up or shut up, and I prefer the later.

    Nor can this self-proclaimed “Detroit- N-word Antisemitic” explain:
    1. Where’s the proof that I am a NAZI?
    2. What multiple personality? Tom lives in NC, I live in NJ, you live in delusion
    3. What’s “Gnat-seeboy?”
    4. What’s Not-see?”
    5. What’s “Goebbelsian?”
    6. What’s “Swisher-boy” (ghetto talk from Doug)
    7. What’s “not-see twoll”
    8. When did I “acknowledged that he (or she) would have sided with U.S. enemies in every foreign war since the founding?”
    9. When did I state my “goal of destroying America?
    10. When did I “directly concede that they would have stood with our enemies in every foreign war?”
    11. When did I “endorses the most egregious racism that has ever existed in U.S. history — against native Americans, blacks, Jews, Asians, Christians.”
    12. What exactly is: “promulgating that insidious form of collectivism?” Socialism?
    13. When did I support socialism?
    14. When did I exhibit or write about my “sympathy for the KKKlan, for the German National Socialist Workers Party, for her/his denial that racism exists or existed in the U.S. and for promulgating that insidious form of collectivism.

    For a man with a mouth that big, capable of the copious spewing of illegible hate names at the drop of a hat, a master of the “cut n paste” school of repetitive discourse, has got nothing to say except: “I already proved it.”

    Not good enough, Doug. You have been reviewed, assessed, and measure up less than adequate when it comes to supporting what you claims. You cannot support them for they are not true.

    You said over a dozen times that you already proved it: it’s a simple cut n paste for you then to show us the money, show us what you said that proves that pile of horse shit that the Horist himself enables and NEVER speaks out against. He likes it Mikey, he likes it.

    • doug

      Hilarious, and I don’t mean Alex Baldwin’s and Slick Willie Rodham’s spouses. Not that they aren’t equally hilarious.

      So if I got this right, LMAO, to ask an admitted not-see-slurper, Hamas apologist and stump-dumb Holocaust denier whose side they would have been on in WW II is an “are you still beating your wife” question, LOL.

      Asking them to specify any of the worst racists in U.S. history is akin to “are you still beating your wife”?

      Asking if eugenics — white master-race doctrine — is a credible scientific theorem is like “are you still beating your wife”?

      Nyet. I mean nyuk.

      Asking a cross-dressing goosestepper to reveal any examples of his or her criticisms of the not-see party, if any is somehow not a straightforward, legit question?

      I’ll skip over his continued labeling of me and my family as “darkies.” He or she doesn’t know what a “Geobbelsian” is but he waxes eloquent indeed with his choice of verbal snot-rags to throw. Why is it, by the way, that only woke leftist goobers bleed for Hamas and call people like me “darkies?”

      But about those questions that so ruffle Horst’s ridges: They’re all straightforward. I can answer them myself and have often done so.

      My take on the United States’ foreign wars over the past century: I would have rooted for the U.S. in WWII. I would have regarded the Korean and Vietnam wars as examples of insidious betrayal by the Truman and LBJ administrations to seek personal benefit at the expense of hundreds of thousands of soldiers’ and civilians’ lives. I rate the Persian Gulf wars as well-intentioned but supremely botched. One-Shoe Shrillary’s military adventure in Libya was wholly illegal and political. Hmmmm: So how is it Tom+FrankIncest can’t answer these simple questions without involving his imaginary wife but I have no trouble?

      Po’ l’il Goebbelsian. He knows he’s crushed. And these comment boards are all he has to keep him occupied in his dilapidated trailer somewhere in Canada. He’s so desperate to lure a pen pal or not-see clone, but I leave him in tears in every encounter, whining, whimpering and simpering in self-pity.

      Even though he has yet to answer any of my clear questions, I’ve answered some of mine and will now sheetcan a few of his:
      (1) Proof of his not-seeism lies in his (or her) taking the Fifth under at least multiple monikers when asked about his not-see sympathies and Jew envy. (2) His Personality Multiplication Syndrome (PMS) is obvious in the nature of his mock conversations with himself and with his similar or identical uses of English (broken English, to be sure) among other tells. I won’t specify more because that would help him clean up those tells. (3&4) Gnatseyboy and not-see are other incarnations of Frank/Tom/Horst. (5) “Goebbelsian” is how a knot-sea like Tom_FrankIncest talks and spits — habits learned while enrolled in a Pakistani madrassa catering to wayward run-aways — human and canine.

      That’s more than the swishy twoll can absorb in a week, so I’ll return to examples of questions and challenges that have been dodged dozens and dozens of times, and it’s a certainty that pattern will remain firmly in place.

      So let us review:

      * Would Mustafa the drop-out have sided with not-see Germany or with the U.S. and U.S. allies in WW II? Response: Took the Fifth.

      * Has the U.S. fought any foreign wars since the Revolution in which he would not have not backed the enemy? Pled the Fifth.

      * Name a few or even one of the most influential racists in U.S. history. Response: Took the Fifth.

      * Does he(she) still believe in the pseudo-science of eugenics — white master-race doctrine — promoted by the KKKlan, the not-see party and most of the Donk Party over the past century? Response: Invoked the Fifth.

      * Cite any differences between his/her and the KKKlan’s fundamental beliefs. Same for differences between fundamental beliefs of the not-see party’s and his own. Response: Hid behind the Fifth.

      * On what basis does he defend Franklin Roosevelt’s internship of 100,000 innocent citizens of Japanese extraction for years in WW II AGAINST the recommendations of Edgar Hoover, the top official charged with protecting Americans’ security? Congress and the White House have apologized for that massive miscarriage of justice. Not so with Twinkie the Twoll. He still can’t answer how questioning the internment camps constitutes a “beating your wife” question.

      * These are 100% substantive questions. Why the 100% refusal to answer? Why the refusal to answer straightforwardly?

      What’s most telling to me is that the twoll routinely excoriates true conservatives and libertarians, such as Clarence Thomas, Mark Levin, Ron DeSantis, Tucker Carlson and Rand Paul, but he won’t even concede that the Third Reich was any less than perfect.

  4. Frank stetson

    Doug: Show pbp readers one time I pled the fifth?

    Frank.

    • doug

      I accept this not-seeboy’s full concession of being thumped into semi-consciousness.

      I swear that I didn’t throw him into a cement mixer.

      ‘Twas his neighbors and family that did so.

      Now he has no one to help him decide every morning which baffroom to use that day.

      S*I*G*H

  5. doug

    This article makes believe that campaigns are static — that circumstances don’t change. At the same time the author consciously practices more middirection that Harry Houdini.

    The New Hampshire primary is NOT the first opportunity for voters to influence the nomination race. The first such event is far from New Hampshire; it’s all the way to Iowa, and Iowa voters couldn’t care less about how the things are evolving in New Hampshire.

    On the other hand, the Iowa caucuses can build up or dissolve a massive amount of momentum for a candidate.

    The author here isn’t mentioning Iowa because he wants his story to seem more important. At this stage of the presidential race, Iowa’s returns are considerably more important than New Hampshire’s or ANYONE’S. And I don’t recall seeing any accounts of Iowa turning toward Haley.

    In fact, candidate Kasich — I mean Haley — is vastly underperforming in terms of what she needs to do to knock Trump over. And she won’t build up a head of steam if she keeps getting emotional as she did in the debates, and if she refuses to answer legit questions and if she keeps flipping about subjects like abortion, national defense and illegal immigration.

    Nor will she win admirers for demanding that the government should be able to access everyone’s personal Internet activity. She’s only a quarter-step at this point from insisting all our postal mail should be subject to gummint spying without a warrant.

    Trump strikes a loud chord with Republicans who clamor for straightforwardness, sincerity and simple expressions of policy. Haley is like Kamalala; both are recognized as dominated by guile. Both come off as phony. Both come off as self-serving. Unless Haley is able to learn quickly how to camouflage that she’s faking it, voters are likely to drift away.

    And to that point, a headline this evening: Trump Consulting On The Idea Of Haley As VP