Presidential candidate Nikki HaleyJohn Locher/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Today, I think we’ve seen the entire 2024 Republican presidential primary writ small. Let’s start with specifics and then go broad.

This morning, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley announced she is running for president. She did so at a relatively normal rally with a pre-Trumpian tone, a reminder that once a “BYAH” could sink a campaign. And it was so startlingly normal, the commentariat must have looked at it and wondered: Is this a moment to take this rather odd contender seriously? (Most said “no”—except Bret Stephens, who said someone told him car dealership owners like her.)

Other pundits noted that much as she presented herself as the sweet voice of moderation, Haley still is far from a centrist herself, not the least in her appeasement of Trump. What’s even harder to stomach, as my colleague Inae Oh noted, was Haley’s admiring shoutout to the radical pastor John Hagee, who former GOP presidential nominee John McCain once described as “crazy and unacceptable.” (When the rally ended, the new Republican presidential hopeful walked off to “American Girl” by Tom Petty. A fitting choice: Petty, too, had his period of believing the Confederate flag is not racist.)

Trump responded by launching an email attack about the “real” Haley. He noted a specious connection between his former UN ambassador and Hillary Clinton. He harkened back to Haley’s support for reforming Social Security and Medicaid. He questioned her desire to find a “peaceful” solution in Ukraine because she has publicly discussed funding fighter jets that (he says) “fuel the war.”

Got it? And so we have the pattern that is going to be repeated over and over and over again:

  • A presidential candidate will announce a run against Donald Trump.
  • The candidate will (cautiously) attack Trump.
  • And, some will ask, is there an opportunity for this Republican—just maybe? Look at how their attacks clearly signal their independence from Trump!
  • Then, wait, is that candidate really so different from Trump? She or he is connected to fringe ideas too. And is a Republican. And, probably to varying degrees, has a history of having sold out to Trump.
  • And so, with all of that, why in the world are people even imagining that the challenger has a chance?
  • Finally, Trump attacks.
  • In his attacks, he will highlight the reasons why he won in 2016 (and, of course, again in 2020). He will respond by being in some way bigoted (specious Clinton connection) but also strong on issues that alienated the mainstream Republican party from a potential base of voters (“entitlement reform” and foreign wars).

And this is how most of the Republican primary will play out.

Imagine these stages as if they were an old standard song. A series of notes that can be doggedly followed or wildly adapted. Think of the difference between Julie Andrews‘ and John Coltrane’sMy Favorite Things.” How Republican challengers move through them in this primary will either be direct (like Haley) or evasive (like DeSantis) but the essential structure will be the same.

It’s clear why this loop seems inevitable: If you were actually capable of making an honest case against Trump that is sufficiently strong to run against him, then you are not likely to remain enough of a Republican to run as the party’s nominee in 2024. There is no way to imagine carrying forward his ideas without him.

Let us call this Haley’s Paradox: Any 2024 campaign against Trump in the primary must explain both why Trump would be a bad enough choice for them to need to run (vote for me, not him), and why it is also not a criticism of Trump (vote Republican!). The candidate must be a synthesis of pre- and post-Trump Republicanism, and yet that means this person will obviously carry the flaws of both. Haley can be criticized for her fealty to Trump (her role in his administration on foreign policy) and also as indicative of what he stood against (her actual foreign policy positions). This contradiction will be at the heart of this endless cycle in the primary.

Still, paradoxes are just bouts of the illogical; politics has never really made rational sense. There is no reason to believe this means Donald Trump will inevitably be the nominee. It just means that on most days, as we wait and ponder what will finally happen in the 2024 presidential election, we also will see if any candidate can solve Haley’s Paradox. I doubt the theory’s inspiration has a chance.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate