Conservatives Just Can’t Figure Out Why Trump Chose Nikki Haley as UN Ambassador


Donald Trump has named South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley as his ambassador to the UN. This is, as Dan McLaughlin says over at National Review, a little puzzling. It’s puzzling first because it’s not clear why Haley would want the job. And it’s puzzling second because she has no foreign policy background and has criticized Trump in the past:

Does the willingness to hire Haley tell us much about Trump? I doubt we will see much in the way of ideology as the basis of any of Trump’s hires outside of the jobs that handle immigration and trade policy. Sure, it shows Trump hiring a former critic, but first, Haley endorsed Trump in the general election and stuck by that endorsement without wavering (unlike, say, Kelly Ayotte or Joe Heck, who now seem persona non grata with Trump); second, it could sideline a potential (if unlikely) 2020 primary threat by bringing her inside the tent without giving her a position of great influence; and third, it rewards an early Trump endorser, South Carolina Lieutenant Governor Henry McMaster, who will now become Governor and could run in 2018 as the incumbent.

Conservatives just can’t bring themselves to admit what Trump is up to, can they? So let’s cut through the chaff and go straight to Wikipedia:

Haley was born Nimrata Nikki Randhawa in Bamberg, South Carolina, on January 20, 1972, to an Indian Sikh family.

Haley is a woman, and she’s the daughter of immigrants. Trump wants a few non-white non-males in his cabinet, and he likely couldn’t care less about the UN. So why not? He’s not rewarding anyone and he’s not worried about 2020. Nor does he care that Haley is bizarrely unqualified for a job that dozens of people would kill for. He’s just checking off a box.

Trump’s win was a victory against the malevolent forces of political correctness, right? So surely there’s no longer any need to let political correctness stop us from pointing out the obvious?

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight 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

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.