"Primary elections are where most of those who govern us are chosen. Can making them nonpartisan—or eliminating them altogether—diminish the impact of ideological fringes? What has happened in Louisiana suggests that it can," writes Richard Barton, assistant teaching professor of public administration and international affairs and policy studies.
Trump “is a former president. He is, whether we like it or not, a legitimate candidate for the nomination. So I think it is entirely appropriate to host a town hall,” says Grant Reeher, professor of political science.
An Economist/YouGov poll last week asked respondents whether or not they wanted Trump to run for president again in 2024. A resounding 57 percent said no, while just 30 percent said yes. “That is the lane” for other Republican candidates says Grant Reeher, professor of political science.
“This is not the end of what may happen,” says Margaret Susan Thompson, associate professor of history and political science. “It may in fact be the beginning. We've never seen this before, and I don't think we can dismiss it as a partisan political act. Certainly, there have been other presidents who have had strong opposition in the past and yet they have not faced this kind of jeopardy.”
"Selecting our nation’s leaders is becoming increasingly complex and challenging, but we can make it more effective by ensuring the processes—for elections as well as appointments—reinforce democracy rather than erode our confidence in it," says James-Christian Blockwood, adjunct professor in Maxwell's Washington programs.
"Nikki Haley has to negotiate the very thin line between differentiating herself from Donald Trump and still appealing to—or not alienating herself from—his supporters, who still constitute the vast majority of CPAC activists and GOP primary participants," says Margaret Susan Thompson, associate professor of history and political science.
“If Republicans get in the mindset of, ‘The first attribute we need is the ability to beat Joe Biden,’ then she becomes a very attractive candidate,” says Grant Reeher, professor of political science and director of the Campbell Public Affairs Institute.
"If Trump, unable to accept losing, ignored the available evidence confirming the election’s integrity and really believed it was fraudulent, then his dearth of intellectual honesty renders him cognitively incompetent to hold the most powerful office in the world," says Dana Radcliffe, adjunct professor of public administration and international affairs.
"If people decide that they will vote for somebody, regardless of what they may have done in their past, that's one thing," says Margaret Susan Thompson, associate professor of history and political science. "But if they vote under the misconception that somebody is what they say they are and then they find out later when it's too late that [it] is wrong. That's a very different situation."