Nikki Haley vs the unbeatable Donald Trump: Can big name donors get her to first place?

Sign up for the daily Inside Washington email for exclusive US coverage and analysis sent to your inbox

Get our free Inside Washington email

Please enter a valid email address

Please enter a valid email address

SIGN UP

I would like to be emailed about offers, events and updates from The Independent. Read our privacy policy

Former South Carolina Gov Nikki Haley has had notable momentum as she fights to become her party’s 2024 nominee, but her chances of surpassing Donald Trump still seem slim to none. The recent influx of donors and endorsements could be a game-changer.

Polls show the South Carolina Republican now neck-and-neck with Florida Gov Ron DeSantis – but both are significantly lagging behind Mr Trump.

Her rise in the polls so far has run parallel to her debate performances; every time she takes the stage, her ratings seem to soar.

During the December debate, she quickly became the target of attacks from the other three candidates. “I love all the attention, fellas,” she retorted.

She’s undoubtedly garnering attention on and off the debate stage, as she’s seen a rush of support from notable donors and endorsements in recent weeks.

Ms Haley seems well-equipped for the fast-approaching Iowa caucuses, but will she be able to pull ahead of her GOP competitors, including Mr Trump?

Ms Haley has racked up a number of high-profile endorsements.

This week, New Hampshire Gov Chris Sununu endorsed Ms Haley. He leads the nation’s first primary state.

She also scored the coveted Koch network-backed super PAC Americans for Prosperity (AFP) Action on 28 November. In a memo, AFP Action wrote that Haley “offers America the opportunity to turn the page on the current political era, to win the Republican primary and defeat Joe Biden next November.”

The backing is particularly significant, as this is the first time the organisation has engaged in a presidential election, according to the super PAC.

High profile endorsements “demonstrate momentum in the press,” Rob Godfrey, Gov Haley’s former deputy chief of staff, told The Independent. However, they don’t seem to sway voters.

A December Des Moines Registerpoll showed that 71 per cent of likely GOP caucus-goers said the AFP Action endorsement doesn’t matter. Similarly, more than half of those polled also said endorsements for Mr DeSantis — Family Leader president Bob Vander Plaats and Iowa Gov Kim Reynolds — don’t matter.

Donations, on the other hand, could create pathways to influence voters, strategists say.

In addition to key endorsements, Ms Haley has seen a flood of donations.

“She’s still got a long way to go” in the polls, conservative strategist Chip Felkel told The Independent, but, “money is the mother’s milk of politics.”

Reid Hoffman, a Democrat and LinkedIn co-founder, gave the Haley super PAC a whopping $250,000 earlier this month. The donation came after Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, encouraged Democrat donors to put cash into Haley’s campaign coffers as the alternative to Mr Trump.

The AFP Action’s endorsement means that the organisation would give Ms Haley access to its expansive grassroots resources, the memo stated; these funds would go toward mail and TV campaigns to advance its on-the-ground efforts.

Mr Godfrey said if he had the choice between new endorsements or new donors, he would choose “new donors every time.”

The influx of cash allows the candidate to “fund the infrastructure and paid media efforts it takes to win a campaign,” he added. That infrastructure, Mr Godfrey said, includes direct mail efforts and knocking on doors to “reach voters in every corner in every early primary state.”

Consistently, Ms Haley’s poll numbers have risen following each debate.

“The debates have always been a strength” for Ms Haley, dating back to when she was running for governor, Mr Godfrey said.

At the latest debate, the former UN ambassador quickly became a target for the other three on stage, putting her in a more defensive stance than usual.

But no matter how well a candidate performed, each debate is suspect, seeing as Mr Trump isn’t participating. “Any debate without all of the candidates is an incomplete discussion,” Mr Godfrey said. Mr Trump has “robbed candidates of a chance to present serious and concrete contrast in style and policies to the frontrunner,” he added.

By drawing contrast, Mr Godfrey continued, each candidate can give “voters a reason to peel off of” the frontrunner.

Antjuan Seawright, a Democratic strategist, told The Independent that blasting Mr Trump “could backfire” for Ms Haley because, he added, “she will still have to face him as the nominee.”

Despite his absence, the 2024 candidates on the debate stage — except for Chris Christie — refused to take a swing at Mr Trump. During the debate, Mr Christie even mocked that the other three were dodging any talk of “he who shall not be named.”

Mr Seawright similarly described this decision as Ms Haley “running away from Trump while embracing Trumpism.” He accused her of having “cuddled and played footsie with extremists every step of the way” while appealing to moderates.

The former New Jersey governor later went so far as to accuse his opponents of positioning themselves for 2028.

When asked why Ms Haley might not be attacking the absent Mr Trump, Mr Felkel opined that she might be trying not to “burn bridges” in case she plans to run again in the future.

When asked if he thought Ms Haley was trying to make a play for 2028, Mr Godfrey immediately waved off the idea. Knowing her, he said, “she got into this race because she thinks she can win it.”

Her star may be rising as she vies for second place, but, Mr Seawright said, “second place doesn’t matter in a Republican primary.”

Mr Felkel took a different view, agreeing with Mr Christie. He said that she has to take advantage of the “momentum” she has generated to reshape her strategy: to become the Trump alternative.

To do that, he argued. “She needs to take the same tack that Christie’s taking.” Mr Felkel advised that she should “present [Trump] as unacceptable” and “get people to see him as the threat that he is.”

He called her reluctance to slam Mr Trump a “misconceived strategy” in thinking that his base will be swayed. Instead, he said she should be focused on convincing “disaffected Republicans, Independents, and Democrats” to cast their vote for her.

Mr Felkel remarked again on her momentum. This would be the moment to become “more forceful” in taking on the frontrunner, he said: “She was walking, now she’s jogging, and she’s got to start running.”