Trying to win?
Another arrest and a debate. The former, as of now, seems will have a much more lasting historical significance than the latter.
Donald Trump, the former president who lost re-election in 2020, got criminally indicted for a fourth time. This time was in Fulton County, Georgia, in connection with the investigation into Trump trying to overturn the presidential election results in Georgia.
And this one is different (the charges, of course, are different in each case). The Georgia case could involve some prominent Republicans in the case against Trump (part of this case involves Trump’s conversation with Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger in 2020 where he pressed him to “find 11,780 votes” so that Trump could win Georgia). It’s more difficult to blow this off as a “partisan witch hunt” when some of the key figures could be from Trump’s own party.
Now back to the debate…Wednesday night’s Republican presidential candidate debate in Milwaukee on Fox News was the first one of the cycle. Trump skipped it. The Republican National Committee will likely do nothing about his decision.
Eight other candidates who qualified for the debate did show up (including North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, despite blowing out his Achilles tendon in a pickup basketball game with staff the previous night).
But how much will this debate really matter in the campaign that leads up to the January 15th Iowa GOP Caucuses? I really wonder.
Asa Hutchinson, the former Arkansas governor, and Chris Christie — the former New Jersey governor who previously advised Trump — both criticized Trump. They are among the select few who do that regularly. But neither — at least so far — is doing much in the national polls (and Christie hasn’t been campaigning in Iowa and instead focusing on New Hampshire).
Both Hutchinson and Christie said during the debate that they wouldn’t support Trump (if Trump again became the party’s nominee) got convicted of a crime. That’s a public position that makes sense for two men trying to each beat Trump in the race and who each question Trump’s fitness to hold office again. Might be tough for them to beat Trump in a crowded race with positions like that. But they do provide alternatives for Republican voters who don’t want to support Trump.
But neither got many obvious opportunities to talk about Trump since the Fox News moderators spent little time in the debate’s allotted two hours discussing Trump. Why not?
Since these eight people on the debate stage in Milwaukee supposedly want to win the nomination instead of Trump, shouldn’t they have to answer questions that force them to contrast their own ideas and beliefs publicly versus the man who’s already previously held the position? Shouldn’t they have to answer questions about whether they believe Trump is innocent of all the charges against him instead of just getting by with generic blanket defenses of a “two-tiered justice system” where Republicans get treated one way and Democratic get treated another way?
Wouldn’t this line of questioning be significant resource to voters? I would think so.
Former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley (one of the three people on stage who used to work for Trump) had a strong debate. I haven’t heard her campaign much about Trump in the past other than saying that the country needs a younger president (Haley is 51, Trump is 77, Joe Biden is three months shy of 81).
But Haley did have an effective line where she lumped Trump and three other GOP presidential candidates together (former vice president Mike Pence, U.S. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis — who previously served in the U.S. house) to show that Republicans share blame in the country’s rapidly escalating federal debt and not just Democrats.
"The truth is that Biden didn't do this to us. Our Republicans did this to us too...You have Ron DeSantis, Tim Scott, Mike Pence, they all voted to raise the debt. Donald Trump added $8 trillion to our debt,” Haley said.
In traditional election cycles, a line like that could be especially effective. She identified a potential vulnerable spot for four challengers and came after them in one burst.
But this isn’t a traditional election cycle. Now, perhaps, Haley’s strong performance will boost her donations, increase her support and eventually make her one of Trump’s one or two biggest threats for the nomination. Perhaps, it’s possible.
But are those comparisons that Haley made what caucus/primary voters want to hear? Do they want anyone in the party to rip Trump?
After all, you may have heard some of the responses the debate crowd gave Ohio business executive Vivek Ramaswamy as he repeated some of his often-used campaign buzzwords like “revolution” and “patriotism” and criticized the U.S. support of Ukraine in its defense from Russia’s attack?
The candidates spent more time coming after Ramaswamy than they did Biden. DeSantis may not have been complaining about that, though, as opposed to feeling the wrath of attacks of competitors directed at him instead.
Ramaswamy, who effusively praises Trump, could reach a ceiling with voters since they can just vote for Trump if they like Trump. But he got plenty of attention during and after the debate.
And, perhaps, DeSantis and Scott can somehow increase their support by staying out of the arguing during the debate and also refraining from criticizing Trump.
There’s still so much time left before the Iowa Caucuses, Trump faces four criminal investigations (will there still be more?) and much could still happen before voters officially weigh in. But as of now, most of Trump’s challengers refuse to say much about Trump. That seems like a curious campaign strategy to defeat a man who has already lost the job once but has about the same support in the early 2024 polls as his dozen challengers combined.
(Dave Price is a native Midwesterner and Iowan by choice for the past 22 years. He has written two books on the uniqueness of presidential campaigns in Iowa).
Thanks for reading and please consider checking out other members of the Iowa Writers Collaborative, a group of independent writers across the state.
Jim, thanks a lot catching this. I really appreciate it.
There’s an error at the beginning of your post. The three indictments other than Georgia are not all federal. The first one is a New York State indictment. Thanks for writing your Substack. I enjoy reading it.