Connect with us

Politics

Christie ramps up attacks on Haley as she closes gap with Trump in New Hampshire polls

Published

on

Christie ramps up attacks on Haley as she closes gap with Trump in New Hampshire polls

Read this article for free!

Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!

Please enter a valid email address.

By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

With less than three weeks to go until New Hampshire holds the first primary in the battle for the Republican presidential nomination, former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is turning up the volume on his verbal attacks on rival former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley.

The former New Jersey governor is accusing Haley of acting “immature” in response to her viral comment that New Hampshire voters “correct” the Iowa caucus results. He argues that if former President Trump, the GOP nomination front-runner, asked Haley to be his running mate, “she would take it in five seconds.”

Advertisement

Haley, the former South Carolina governor who later served as United Nations ambassador in the Trump administration, has enjoyed plenty of momentum in recent months and has soared in the latest polls in New Hampshire, which suggest she has significantly closed the gap with Trump.

However, this week, two new comments by Haley were instantly used as ammunition by Christie, who is once again staking his presidential campaign on a strong finish in New Hampshire as he runs a second time for the White House. Christie stands in third place in most Granite State surveys, far behind Trump and Haley but ahead of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and multimillionaire entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

FIRST ON FOX: INFLUENTIAL CONSERVATIVE GROUP LAUNCHES MASSIVE AD BLITZ ON BEHALF OF HALEY

Campaigning in Milford, New Hampshire, on Wednesday, Haley told the large crowd that “we have an opportunity to get this right. And I know we’ll get it right, and I trust you. I trust every single one of you. You know how to do this. You know Iowa starts it. You know that you correct it.”

Pointing to her home state, which on Feb. 24 will hold the first southern contest in the Republican presidential primary schedule, Haley added “and then my sweet state of South Carolina brings it home.”

Advertisement

The comment appeared to be tailored to Granite Staters, and the crowd cheered Haley’s remarks.

WAR OF WORDS BETWEEN HALEY AND DESANTIS REACHES FEVER PITCH

On Thursday night, Christie took aim.

“You don’t have to correct anything that Iowa does or doesn’t do. That’s not New Hampshire’s responsibility. Your responsibility is to do what you think is right. You don’t have to worry about what Iowa does,” he told the crowd at a town hall in this New Hampshire town along the state’s southern border with Massachusetts.

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a 2024 Republican presidential candidate, speaks with voters at a town hall in Hollis, New Hampshire, on Jan. 4, 2024. (Fox News – Paul Steinhauser)

Advertisement

Minutes later, he told reporters, “I think people in Iowa saw here yesterday that she’s willing to say anything to an audience to try to curry their favor.”

“She mocks Iowa voters just to try to get a laugh out of New Hampshire voters,” he argued. “I mean that’s like just immature. Grow up.”

Christie was not the only rival to blast Haley.

DeSantis, who is staking much of his campaign on a strong Iowa finish, charged Thursday in a local radio interview in the Hawkeye State that Haley was “incredibly disrespectful to Iowans to say somehow their votes need to be corrected.”

Haley, during a CNN town hall Thursday in Iowa, said her comment was intended as a joke, noting “we’ve done 150 plus town halls. You got to have some fun, too.”

Advertisement

FIRST ON FOX: HALEY FUNDRAISING SOARS THE PAST THREE MONTHS

In recent weeks, DeSantis and Christie have taken aim at Haley for not being vocal enough in her criticism of Trump. Both candidates have argued Haley has an ulterior motive.

“She will not answer directly, and she owes you an answer to this: Will she accept a vice presidential nomination from Donald Trump? Yes or no?” DeSantis said at a town hall in New Hampshire last month.

Additionally, Christie, on multiple occasions over the past month, has emphasized that, “Ron DeSantis and I have both ruled out accepting the vice presidency from Donald Trump. Nikki Haley has not… That’s why she’s not saying strong things against Donald Trump.” 

Haley has frequently repeated that she is not running for second place in the GOP 2024 presidential primary.

Advertisement

Given the opportunity in a Fox News Digital interview Tuesday ahead of a town hall in New Hampshire to categorically rule out serving as Trump’s running mate if asked, Haley reiterated she is running to win.

“I have said from the very beginning I don’t play for second. It’s offensive for anybody to think that I would do all of this to play for second. And so I have said that. I will continue to say that. If people aren’t satisfied with that, I don’t know what else to say,” Haley said.

Haley also told Fox News that Christie and DeSantis have “criticized me for everything. Let’s be clear. That’s what happens when you’re losing.”

ONLY ON FOX: HALEY PUSHES BACK BUT DOESN’T CATEGORICALLY RULE OUT BEING TRUMP’S RUNNING MATE

Pointing to the Fox News Digital interview, Christie told reporters on Thursday night “she won’t answer. She gives this bull answer ‘I never play for second.’ Like, what’s that mean? It’s simply yes or no. Would you accept vice president from Trump or wouldn’t you.”

Advertisement

“She won’t answer. And you know what that means in politics when you don’t answer a question. That means it’s because you know the answer and you don’t want to say it out loud,” Christie claimed. “I will tell you right now, if Donald Trump offered her vice president, she would take it in five seconds. Five seconds. And that’s why she’s not answering the question.”

Pointing to South Carolina’s Feb. 24 Republican presidential primary, Christie argued that Haley “wants the wiggle room to be able to do that later on when she doesn’t do as well as everyone thinks she’ll do here and when she loses her own home state, which she’s going to do.”

In an interview with the New Hampshire Union Leader, Haley claimed that ruling out serving as running mate would make “the news for days” and stifle her momentum.

Christie, a longtime vocal GOP critic of Trump, has faced plenty of pressure in recent weeks to drop out of the race and back Haley to prevent any fracturing of the anti-Trump vote.

Referencing the crowd of close to 300 people who showed up at his town hall, Christie said “you saw all these people tonight who don’t want me out of this race. They want to vote for me. And I suspect a lot of these people here, if I dropped out, wouldn’t vote at all, because she’s unwilling to take Trump on.”

Advertisement

When asked by Fox News where he needs to finish in New Hampshire to continue on, Christie said “I have to come in second or like a very, very close third. I don’t think there’s any mystery to that. That’s what I have to do.”

 

Trump holds an extremely formidable double-digit advantage over DeSantis and Haley in Iowa – whose Jan. 15 caucuses kick off the GOP nominating calendar – and enjoys an even more massive lead in national polling in the Republican race.

However, with the latest polls indicating Haley narrowing the gap in New Hampshire, where independent voters have long played an influential role in the state’s storied primary, Trump’s campaign this week launched an attack ad on Haley in the Granite State.

Former President Trump speaks at a campaign rally, Saturday, Dec. 16, 2023, in Durham, New Hampshire. (AP Photo/Reba Saldanha)

Advertisement

Neil Levesque, the executive director of the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, told Fox News that “Haley has what every candidate wishes they had – which is momentum. And she’s closing the gap with Trump.”

Haley landed a big boost last month with the endorsement of popular Republican New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, who has joined Haley on the campaign trail at her town halls since backing her.

She is also supported by Americans for Prosperity (AFP) Action, the political arm of an influential and deep-pocketed conservative public advocacy group with strong grassroots outreach.

Greg Moore, a longtime New Hampshire-based conservative activist and an AFP Action senior advisor, emphasized that “one thing we know about the New Hampshire primary is that they are often decided by momentum. We’ve seen that – for example – with John McCain twice, where he was a candidate with momentum in both 2000 and 2008. That’s where you want to be. Frankly, I think I’d rather be where Nikki Haley is right now than where Donald Trump is.”

Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more at our Fox News Digital election hub.

Advertisement

Politics

Video: President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order

Published

on

Video: President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order

new video loaded: President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order

transcript

transcript

President Trump Reclassifies Marijuana With Executive Order

Marijuana was downgraded from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug on Thursday. The reclassification does not legalize cannabis, but it does ease restrictions on the substance and allows for more research.

Today, I’m pleased to announce that I will be signing an executive order to reschedule marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III controlled substance with legitimate medical uses. We have people begging for me to do this. I want to emphasize that the order I am about to sign is not the legalization or it doesn’t legalize marijuana in any way, shape, or form, and in no way sanctions its use as a recreational drug — has nothing to do with that.

Advertisement
Marijuana was downgraded from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule III drug on Thursday. The reclassification does not legalize cannabis, but it does ease restrictions on the substance and allows for more research.

December 18, 2025

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump quietly signs sweeping $901B defense bill after bipartisan Senate passage

Published

on

Trump quietly signs sweeping 1B defense bill after bipartisan Senate passage

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Trump signed into law a nearly $1 trillion defense policy bill Thursday and approved what looks to be the largest military spending package in U.S. history.

The fiscal 2026 National Defense Authorization Act authorizes $901 billion in military spending, roughly $8 billion more than the administration requested, according to Reuters.

It also delivers a nearly 4 percent pay raise for troops, provides new funding for Ukraine and the Baltic States, and includes measures designed to scale back security commitments abroad.

In a release shared online, Rep. Rick Allen said: “With President Trump’s signature, the FY2026 NDAA officially delivers on our peace-through-strength agenda with a generational investment in our national defense.”

Advertisement

TRUMP ADMIN ANNOUNCES $11B TAIWAN ARMS SALES DEAL

U.S. President Donald Trump signs an executive order in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. December 11, 2025. (Al Drago/Reuters)

“Not only does this bipartisan bill ensure America’s warfighters are the most lethal and capable fighting force in the world, but it also improves the quality of life for our service members in the 12th District and nationwide,” he added.

As previously reported by Fox News Digital, the Senate passed the NDAA on Wednesday, sending the compromise bill approved with bipartisan support to the president’s desk. 

Trump signed it quietly Thursday evening, according to Reuters.

Advertisement

The NDAA includes $800 million for Ukraine over the next two years as part of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which pays US firms for weapons for Ukraine’s military.

It also includes $175 million for the Baltic Security Initiative, which supports Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

TRUMP TOUTS BRINGING COUNTRY BACK FROM ‘BRINK OF RUIN’

President Donald Trump announced his proposal for a ‘Golden Dome’ missile defense system in the United States on May 20, 2025. (Reuters/Leah Millis/File Photo; Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The bill prohibits reducing U.S. troop levels in Europe below 76,000 for more than 45 days without formal certification by Congress.

Advertisement

The legislation also restricts the administration from reducing U.S. forces in South Korea below 28,500 troops.

Trump ultimately backed the bill in part because it codifies some of his executive orders, including funding the Golden Dome missile defense system and getting rid of diversity, equity and inclusion programs, per Reuters.

TRUMP TO HAND OUT $2.6B IN ‘WARRIOR DIVIDENDS’ — AND THE SURPRISING POT HE’S PULLING THE MONEY FROM

The seal of the Department of War is displayed inside the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. (elal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)

“Under President Trump, the U.S. is rebuilding strength, restoring deterrence, and proving America will not back down. President Trump and Republicans promised peace through strength. The FY26 NDAA delivers it,” House Speaker Mike Johnson had said in a statement Dec. 7 on the new measures.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

State regulators vote to keep utility profits high, angering customers across California

Published

on

State regulators vote to keep utility profits high, angering customers across California

Despite complaints from customers about rising electric bills, the California Public Utilities Commission voted 4 to 1 on Thursday to keep profits at Southern California Edison and the state’s other big investor-owned utilities at a level that consumer groups say has long been inflated.

The commission vote will slightly decrease the profit margins of Edison and three other big utilities beginning next year. Edison’s rate will fall to 10.03% from 10.3%.

Customers will see little impact in their bills from the decision. Because the utilities are continuing to spend more on wires and other infrastructure — capital costs that they earn profit on — that portion of customer bills is expected to continue to rise.

The vote angered consumer groups that had detailed in filings and hearings at the commission how the utilities’ return on equity — which sets the profit rate that the companies’ shareholders receive — had long been too high.

Among those testifying on behalf of consumers was Mark Ellis, the former chief economist for Sempra, the parent company of San Diego Gas & Electric and Southern California Gas. Ellis estimated that the companies’ profit margin should be closer to 6%.

Advertisement

He argued in a filing that the California commission had for years authorized the utilities to earn an excessive return on equity, resulting in an “unnecessary and unearned wealth transfer” from customers to the companies.

Cutting the return on equity to a little more than 6% would give Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric, SDG&E and SoCalGas a fair return, Ellis said, while saving their customers $6.1 billion a year.

The four commissioners who voted to keep the return on equity at about 10% — the percentage varies slightly for each company — said they believed they had found a balance between the 11% or higher rate that the four utilities had requested and the affordability concerns of utility customers.

Alice Reynolds, the commission’s president, said before the vote that she believed the decision “accurately reflects the evidence.”

Commissioner Darcie Houck disagreed and voted against the proposal. In her remarks, she detailed how California ratepayers were struggling to pay their bills.

Advertisement

“We have a duty to consider the consumer interest in determining what is a just and reasonable rate,” she said.

Consumer groups criticized the commission’s vote.

“For too long, utility companies have been extracting unreasonable profits from Californians just trying to heat or cool their homes or keep the lights on,” said Jenn Engstrom at CALPIRG. “As long as CPUC allows such lofty rates of return, it incentivizes power companies to overspend, increasing energy bills for everyone.”

California now has the nation’s second-highest electric rates after Hawaii.

Edison’s electric rates have risen by more than 40% in the last three years, according to a November analysis by the commission’s Public Advocates Office. More than 830,000 Edison customers are behind in paying their electric bills, the office said, each owing a balance of $835 on average.

Advertisement

The commission’s vote Thursday was in response to a March request from Edison and the three other big for-profit utilities. The companies pointed to the January wildfires in Los Angeles County, saying they needed to provide their shareholders with more profit to get them to continue to invest in their stock because of the threat of utility-caused fires in California.

In its filing, Edison asked for a return on equity of 11.75%, saying that it faced “elevated business risks,” including “the risk of extreme wildfires.”

The company told the commission that its stock had declined after the Jan. 7 Eaton fire and it needed the higher return on equity to attract investors to provide it with money for “wildfire mitigation and supporting California’s clean energy transition.”

Edison is facing hundreds of lawsuits filed by victims of the fire, which killed 19 people and destroyed thousands of homes in Altadena. The company has said the fire may have been sparked by its 100-year-old transmission line in Eaton Canyon, which it kept in place even though it hadn’t served customers since 1971.

Return on equity is crucial for utilities because it determines how much they and their shareholders earn each year on the electric lines, substations, pipelines and the rest of the system they build to serve customers.

Advertisement

Under the state’s system for setting electric rates, investors provide part of the money needed to build the infrastructure and then earn an annual return on that investment over the assets’ life, which can be 30 or 40 years.

In a January report, state legislative analyst Gabriel Petek detailed how electric rates at Edison and the state’s two other biggest investor-owned electric utilities were more than 60% higher than those charged by public utilities such as the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. The public utilities don’t have investors or charge customers extra for profit.

Before the vote, dozens of utility customers from across the state wrote to the commission’s five members, who were appointed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, asking them to lower the utilities’ return on equity.

“A profit margin of 10% on infrastructure improvements is far too high and will only continue to increase the cost of living in California,” wrote James Ward, a Rancho Santa Margarita resident. “I just wish I could get a guaranteed profit margin of 10% on my investments.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending