With Nikki Haley as the last remaining significant challenger to Donald Trump, media coverage of her has focused overwhelmingly on the question of whether she can win and on her gaffes. Skepticism about her prospects certainly makes sense, given Trump’s commanding poll leads.
Still, comparatively little attention has been devoted to the question of how the two would govern differently as president of the United States.
You might think the answer would be simple: Trump would be his unhinged self, and Haley would be more of a “normal” Republican. Trump would pose a dire threat to democracy and the rule of law, and Haley would not.
And that’s a big part of the story — arguably, most of the story. Trump doesn’t respect election results, can inspire mob violence like that of January 6, and wants to turn the Justice Department against his critics. None of those apply to Haley.
On domestic policy, reports suggest a second-term Trump would use executive power very aggressively to crack down on immigration and fire vast swathes of civil service employees, and perhaps to reshape US trade policy as well. There’s reason to doubt Haley would go so far on any of these issues.
The complication is in foreign policy. There, the combination of Trump’s erraticism and his “America First” instincts presents risks to global stability. But Haley has campaigned as the avatar of a hawkish GOP establishment that has been responsible for major foreign policy disasters. The current obvious area of contrast is that Haley staunchly supports Ukraine and Trump does not, but their differing instincts could play out in other yet-to-erupt conflicts in unpredictable ways.
Trump vs. Haley on democracy
Read the full article here
