ConWebWatch home
ConWebBlog: the weblog of ConWebWatch
Search and browse through the ConWebWatch archive
About ConWebWatch
Who's behind the news sites that ConWebWatch watches?
Letters to and from ConWebWatch
ConWebWatch Links
Buy books and more through ConWebWatch

Newsmax's Anti-Haley Shenanigans

Newsmax's coverage of Nikki Haley's Republican presidential campaign was largely negative. Was it because she didn't place enough ads on Newsmax?

By Terry Krepel
Posted 5/20/2024

Nikki Haley

Newsmax got caught last year in some election coverage shenanigans -- lavishing attention on fringe candidate Perry Johnson, who had been paying Newsmax to air a reality show about his going-nowhere campaign, while attacking Vivek Ramaswamy, who claimed that Newsmax offered him a pay-for-play scheme of better coverage if he bought ads on its TV channel.

Judging by the coverage she's gotten during her campaign, Nikki Haley apparently didn't take Newsmax up on a pay-for-play offer either. As a result, there were things like Paul du Quenoy's Aug. 30 column raging at Haley because she made a joke about men:

“If you want something said, ask a man. If you want something done, ask a woman,” said former South Carolina governor, U.N. Ambassador and now Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley at last week’s GOP debate.

Haley’s misandrist quip was her response to an invitation asking the eight candidates who participated to state their case for their party’s nomination.

Was it just a joke?

A folksy needling from a chromosomal underdog?

An attempt at levity as seven male rivals recited their resumes in crisp soundbites?

It could have been any, all, or none of these things, but that’s not the point. We all know what would have happened to any man who attempted to advance himself — or simply make an observation — by mocking the opposite sex.

Just ask former Harvard University president Lawrence Summers, who was forced to resign after merely speculating — in off-the-record comments based on empirical data — that women might have slightly less aptitude for science than men, a proposition in which he hoped he would be proved wrong.

By any right, Haley’s crude stereotyping of half of humanity as feckless dolts who cannot get anything done — and dismissal of all of her rivals on the basis of gender — should disqualify her from any position of responsibility.

Du Quenoy then defended the honor of men, who he thinks have done many more important things than women have:

The 1.1 million men who have died in our country’s wars might take great exception to Haley’s sexist implication that men don’t “do” anything.

The country she lives in, the state she governed, the laws she enforced there and seeks to enforce as president, the countries that welcomed and educated her immigrant parents, the rights she enjoys, the institutions in which she studied, the organization where she served as an ambassador, the political party whose nomination she is pursuing, and the format and technology that allowed her to reach a large audience were all created by men.

Those who fought for Haley’s freedoms at Valley Forge, Gettysburg, Normandy, and a thousand other places were men.

A man wrote the Declaration of Independence, inspired by ideals of liberty and self-government developed by other men.

Men wrote the Constitution, and over a century ago men amended it so that Haley and her sisters could vote and hold public office.

He then ranted that typical women’s jobs involve only saying, while men’s jobs are all about doing:

Contrary to Haley’s derogatory comment, it’s in fact women who gravitate more toward careers that involve “saying” rather than “doing.”

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), women account for 81.5% of social workers, 79.7% of elementary school teachers, and 72.9% of human resources managers.

Men, on the other hand, comprise 93.8% of firefighters, 97% of bricklayers, and 97.8% of electricians, jobs defined by “doing” things that Haley could scarcely live without.

Men eschew college education in greater proportions than women to pursue such vocational careers, in significant part because educational and white-collar professional environments are now often so openly hostile to men.

From there, du Quenoy portrayed men as the real victims of society:

Our family law courts routinely discriminate against men in child custody and divorces, the overwhelming majority of which are initiated by women.

At terrible cost, our social services and public culture incentivize the absence of fathers from their children’s lives and disdain nuclear families as outmoded and oppressive.

Our elite professional culture admonishes men that they are “privileged” and insists that they therefore yield authority, opportunity, and participation to women, even though women in such environments have long earned and advanced equally to or better than men.

Government agencies, educational institutions, and employers regularly award benefits and recognition to women in programs that exclude men, despite civil rights laws that explicitly prohibit such discrimination against either gender.

Our Department of Education requires educational institutions to employ vast bureaucracies to police male sexual initiative with biased investigations that deprive men of basic rights, privilege female testimony over male testimony, and dispense with time-honored evidentiary standards to impute guilt and impose life-altering sanctions on men.


Nikki Haley is nowhere to be seen on any of these vital issues. Instead, her casual sexism accepts and endorses the sick, sad status quo.

Du Quenoy concluded by bashing Haley some more:

Haley’s revolting attitude could help explain why she is polling nationally in the single digits, trailing in third place behind two abler men even in her home state, and conducting her failing candidacy in a way that looks embarrassingly like an audition for employment under one of those men.

We can only hope that when that man wins his party’s nomination, he has the wisdom and foresight not to entrust Nikki Haley with any amount of responsibility.

Whether he does or not, we can sigh with relief that this woman’s place will almost certainly not be in the White House.

So bizarre was du Quenoy’s rant that Newsmax felt compelled to add this disclaimer to the end of his column: “The views expressed in the preceding column are solely the author’s.”

Jeff Crouere’s Nov. 20 column attacking Haley wasn’t as extreme as that of du Quenoy, but but Crouere is mad that that Haley worked to erase symbols of insurrectionists and traitors to the U.S.:

One issue that is important to many conservative voters is preserving our nation’s history. Conversely, liberals want to erase our history in the name of fighting “racism.”

As Governor of South Carolina in 2015, Haley became a national political figure when she successfully pushed for the removal of the Confederate flag from the state house grounds. This was done in response to the murders of African American churchgoers in Charleston, South Carolina by a racist killer.

Haley said she was “proud” of her actions, which catapulted her political career.

While removing the Confederate flag did not make South Carolina a more racially unified state, it did inspire other politicians to pursue similar actions.

Haley started a national movement which has continued to this day. A recent report by the far-left group, Southern Poverty Law Center, noted that 482 Confederate “symbols” have been removed since the murders in Charleston. Yet, countless other monuments of previous U.S. Presidents, including Abraham Lincoln, and Founding Fathers, have also been removed across the country.

To protect our history, President Trump signed an executive order on June 26, 2020 to prevent “American Monuments, Memorials and Statues “from being vandalized or removed.”

Crouere offered no evidence that Haley had any non-Confederate monument or statue removed, nor did he explain why getting rid of Confederate monuments is a bad thing. Arguably, Confederate statues and monuments are not covered under Trump’s order since they are not, but definition, “American.” 

The rest of Crouere’s column is boilerplate right-wing talking points, largely focused on how Haley is allegedly “in sync with the big military and business powerbrokers and is extremely comfortable with big government.”

Morris on Haley, DeSantis

Dick Morris serves as an adviser to Donald Trump — but that tended not to get mentioned when he appeared on Newsmax to trash Trump’s presidential competition. Morris attacked Haley in a Nov. 18 TV appearance:

While former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley has surged ahead of Florida GOP Gov. Ron DeSantis, presidential campaign adviser Dick Morris tells Newsmax that “there’s no prize for second place.”

“I think that nobody’s told Haley that there’s no prize for second place,” Morris told “Saturday Report.” “You don’t get to be vice president by finishing second. You get to be vice president by somebody picking you for VP who’s finished first.”

Note that writer Eric Mack described Morris as only a “presidential campaign adviser” but failed to specify that he was advising Trump.

Morris went on the attack over Haley’s botched answer about slavery in a Dec. 30 appearance, declaring it the end of her campaign:

GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley’s comments about the Civil War and slavery will likely be the “epitaph” for her campaign, political consultant Dick Morris told Newsmax on Saturday.

“In every cemetery where they should mark the grave of a presidential contender, there’s an epitaph about a stupid quote that they did; and this is what Nikki Haley’s epitaph will be,” Morris said on Newsmax’s “Saturday Report.”

“I think that Nikki’s comments will hurt her very badly. And, more importantly, they reflect the idea of an inexperienced candidate, of somebody who’s not used to handling this stuff,” he added. “When they’re scripted and they get a question on the script, they’re OK. But when it comes from nowhere, they don’t handle it.”

Writer Sandy Fitzgerald also noted that Morris “Morris discussed the polls that are showing former President Donald Trump as the clear front-runner in the Republican primary race and said he believes Trump will clinch the nomination in March” — but she didn’t disclose that Morris is a Trump adviser.

Morris used a Jan. 10 column to accuse Haley of trying to “hijack” the New Hampshire primary by the completely legal means of encouraging non-Republicans to vote for her:

Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley has mounted a strong effort to steal the New Hampshire Republican primary by packing it with crossover Democrats who claim to be independents. Her New Hampshire campaign is based on attracting non-Republicans to vote against Donald Trump in the Republican primary. And it’s working.

(Unlike most states, New Hampshire permits independents to vote in the Republican primary.)


Were Haley’s support among independents a manifestation of broad-based electoral appeal to those voters who are not in either party, it would be a show of strength worth considering. But it isn’t. Rather, it’s the result of a stop-Trump campaign largely waged by Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents. Their flirtation with Haley is entirely opportunistic — they just want to defeat Trump and afterward, they will go back to voting for Biden.

Morris repeated this line of attack in a Jan. 13 TV appearance.

As Haley ended up being the lone survivor of the non-Trump candidates, Morris ranted about her staying in the race in a Feb. 18 TV hit:

Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley is relying on Democrat voters and anti-Trump funding to keep her GOP primary campaign afloat, but it is only a matter of time before it all sinks, according to presidential campaign adviser Dick Morris on Newsmax.

“I think the only reason she’s running is she has money,” Morris told “Saturday Report.” “She got campaign contributions from suckers who were determined to stop Donald Trump at all costs and would have given money to Mickey Mouse to do it.

“And now that Nikki Haley’s candidacy is unraveling, they’re not jumping ship. They’re still there, and their money is still in the bank account. And I think that Haley is just milking that for as long as she can, because she has the money. You have the money, you stay in.”

Regardless, Haley is throwing good money after bad despite having “zilch, zip, none, nada” hope to win next Saturday in her home state, according to Morris, the host of “Dick Morris Democracy,” which airs 3:30 p.m. ET on Newsmax.

Again, Mack described Morris as only a “presidential campaign adviser” but didn’t disclose that he was advising Trump.

Morris whined further about Haley in a Feb. 24 appearance:

Former presidential adviser Dick Morris told Newsmax Saturday that former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley faces significant challenges in her presidential bid, saying she has virtually no statistical path to victory as the primary season progresses.

Morris outlined the pivotal upcoming Super Tuesday, where approximately “4,500 delegates” will be allocated, emphasizing the significance of states like California and Texas, “where if you win more than 50% of the vote in the primary, you are assured the entire delegation.”

Under these conditions, Morris stated, it is increasingly evident that former President Donald Trump will secure a prevailing portion of delegates, rendering Haley’s chances negligible.


Morris likened Haley’s situation to rooting for the second-place team after the leading contender has secured victory, emphasizing the futility of her efforts to maintain relevance in the race.

He criticized Haley’s tenacity in clinging to her candidacy, describing it as “disgraceful” and “disgusting.”

This time, Jim Thomas called Morris a “former presidential adviser” but didn’t tell readers that he’s currently advising Trump.

Morris made sure to take shots at the other main non-Trump candidate as well. He devoted a Jan. 22 column to a post-mortem on Ron DeSantis’ campaign:

Early in 2023, DeSantis had very good momentum, coming off his re-election victory in Florida in November of ’22 amid the debacle of the failed Republican Senate campaign in Pennsylvania. Indeed, a CNN survey on March 8, 2023 showed the Florida governor two points ahead of Trump among Republican primary voters.

But the moment passed and Trump began to pummel DeSantis over his support for raising the Social Security retirement age and lowering the cost of living adjustment.


Meanwhile, DeSantis, in one of the biggest blunders in political history not only failed to answer the social security attack, but did not advertise all until he finally announced his candidacy on May 24, 2023. Way too late.

Morris likened DeSantis to Mitt Romney, who he claimed similarly “waited too long to answer the negatives being thrown at them by their opponents.” He failed to disclose that he’s a Trump adviser.

Primary coverage (plus Trump-fluffing)

Newsmax served up some basic coverage of the Jan. 10 Republican presidential debate between the two remaining non-Trump candidates, Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley:

Earlier in the day, Newsmax had published a wire article insisting that the election should be about President Biden, not Donald Trump. Speaking of whom, Newsmax devoted a few articles to the town hall Trump held instead of taking part in the debate:

This was all followed by a Jan. 11 column by John Gizzi who effectively declared that the winner of the DeSantis-Haley debate was … Trump:

“Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley were like a couple in a bad marriage,” Chapman University (California) professor Luke Nichter told Newsmax following the Wednesday night debate in Iowa between Donald Trump’s two leading opponents for the Republican presidential nomination.

But Nichter, author of the critically acclaimed “The Year That Broke Politics: Collusion and Chaos in the Presidential Election of 1968,” flipped back and forth on television between the DeSantis-Haley showdown on CNN and Trump’s town hall televised by Fox News.

He concluded the Trump event was “a refreshing format – questions from actual normal, voting Americans as opposed to moderators armed with prompts vetted by focus groups.”

In contrast, Nichter added, “The two governors – perhaps because their views are so similar – resorted to scripted digs that, to this viewer, made each more unlikeable.”


Gerard Gibert, Mississippi’s most-listened to radio talk show host, concluded, “overall, I felt the governors showed that they are fairly closely aligned on major issues, the exception perhaps being support for Ukraine.”

But, he quickly added, “rather than focusing out how they differed from the other candidate on economic and tax policy, healthcare, immigration, school choice, and abortion, DeSantis and Haley attacked each other on their opponent’s failure to live up to the policies that achieve the outcomes on which they’re largely aligned. They did this by exposing each other’s resumes as governors and Mr. DeSantis’ time in Congress.”

Those policy positions, Gibert continued, “are mostly aligned with Mr. Trump’s. For voters, it’s a question of who you want steering the ship filled with the same cargo headed to the same destination.

“Winner, former President Donald Trump.”
Later in the day, an article by Mark Swanson touted how “Donald Trump’s presidential campaign released a new TV ad Thursday that targets former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s plan to raise the retirement age and cut social security benefits.”

As the primary season continued and Haley stayed in the race, Newsmax did publish the occasional article that covered her mostly uncritically, but much of its coverage was very anti-Haley. Closer to the norm (and the narrative) was a Feb. 2 column by Patrick Dorinson complaining that Haley said mean things about Donald Trump and, thus, ruined her political career:

Nikki Haley in her speech [after the New Hampshire primary] was tougher on Donald Trump than she had ever been.

She didn’t pull any punches and she let it be known that she was in it to win it however remote that possibility is.

If you don’t believe me, just watch the beginning of Trump’s speech that night as he laid into her with a special dose of venom.

Gone was the magnanimity that he employed on the night of his Iowa victory.

My guess is she knew she would get that reaction the minute she finished her speech.


There will be no next time in 2028 no matter what the geniuses on TV and in newspaper columns tell her.

This is it. And she knows it.

So, she did the only thing she could do.

Like Cortes she took the big gamble.

She burned the ships that could carry her back to the safe harbor of a future in the Republican Party.

They are smoldering wrecks on the beaches of New Hampshire.

And unlike Cortes she will not be triumphant and have her name etched into history.

She will be but a footnote.

The negative coverage continued through February. For example:

Morris made his own anti-Haley contribution in a March 2 TV appearance:

Some might have viewed the 2024 Republican presidential primary as a contested one, but presidential campaign adviser Dick Morris took a bow on Newsmax for having declared it over before it began — as the results have proven.

“I don’t want to dislocate my shoulder patting myself on the back; but in my original book that I wrote, ‘The Return,’ I predict that Trump will win, that he’ll get the nomination, and that he might even get the nomination unanimously by acclamation,” Morris told “Saturday Report.”

“And that’s becoming increasingly likely, given the results shaping up in Super Tuesday.”

Everyone could see the Trump victory coming swiftly, except Haley, of course, Morris lamented to host Rita Cosby.

“I think afterwards it’s sayonora,” Morris said. “I think she goes away; she fades; and she occupies this space in history a little bit like Liz Cheney, you know — talking a lot, but no political power.

“I think that Trump is going to wipe Haley out in these primaries — state after state after state. And I don’t think she can recover from that.”

Writer Eric Mack didn’t disclose that Morris is advising Trump.

That was followed by another anti-Haley shot by Trump supporter Richard Grenell, who declared that Haley’s “political career is over” because she argued that his legal issues should be dealt with before the November election. It did, however, also publish an article a couple days before Super Tuesday noting that Haley “expressed uncertainty about whether former President Donald Trump would adhere to the Constitution if reelected in 2024.”

After Super Tuesday’s primaries, the headline on a March 5 article by Michael Katz declared, “March Madness: Trump Swamps Haley on Super Tuesday.” It did publish another article seemingly lamenting that “Nikki Haley prevented a clean sweep of Super Tuesday by Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump with a win in Vermont.”

When Haley did finally drop out after Super Tuesday, Newsmax took a couple more shots at her:

After an article noting that “a Biden campaign official invited her supporters to join the Democrat [sic] incumbent’s reelection bid,” a surprisingly non-negative March 6 article by Eric Mack reported on Haley dropping out of the race.

Send this page to:

Bookmark and Share
The latest from

In Association with
Support This Site

home | letters | archive | about | primer | links | shop
This site © Copyright 2000-2024 Terry Krepel