Before I dive into the results from last night on the Republican side, I want to point you to an article we have up authored by Josiah Lee Auspitz. Mr. Auspitz takes a long look at how the GOP allocates its delegates to the national convention and determines that the net effect is to overrepresent red states and underrepresent blue and battleground states. This could have an impact on who the nominee will be if there is a contested nomination on the convention floor, and it will almost certainly result in a party platform that is unhelpful. But, perhaps more certainly, it has an ineffable cultural impact on the party that makes it difficult for them to adapt their policies or their message in a way well-designed to win 270 electoral votes. It’s fascinating to see how the rules have changed over time, and reforms that took place in the 1970’s to help Ronald Reagan are now biting the party of Lincoln in the ass because California went from a winner-take-all red state to a winner-take-all blue state. What this means is that a system designed to align the party to an electoral majority now comes close to locking them into a permanent minority coalition. Please read the whole thing. I promise you that you’ll learn something.
The Republican results in Iowa yesterday were surprising on three fronts. Cruz seemed to be fading, making blunders in the final lap. But he pulled it out. Trump looked like a solid favorite but barely managed to hold onto second place. And Marco Rubio came in a strong third place, staking out a solid claim to be the choice of the Establishment. Below the top three, there weren’t any surprises. It was confirmed that Jeb Bush’s campaign is moribund, and also that no one else had any juice. Ben Carson came in a weak fourth place and is now probably fatally wounded. Mike Huckabee dropped out. Santorum might as well drop out. Kasich, Christie and Fiorina failed to get any momentum going into New Hampshire, where they each need a very strong finish. Rand Paul finished in fifth place, but with a paltry 4% of the vote.
Iowa Republicans have a history of nominating losers, Dole in 1988, Huckabee in 2008, Santorum in 2012. So, Ted Cruz must be grateful to have exceeded expectations and to have deflated Trump’s massive ego, but he is anything but home free. What he is, now, is clearly in the top tier.
It’s Rubio who had the best night, but he has a new challenge in New Hampshire. Someone besides Cruz, Trump and Rubio will come in in the top four in the Granite State. If they’re a strong fourth place (or better) finisher (and their name isn’t Ben Carson) then they’re likely to become Rubio’s main competition to be the choice of the Stop Trump/Cruz forces. The Real Clear Politics poll aggregator currently shows Kasich polling in third place (11.3%) in New Hampshire, Jeb polling in fourth place (10.5%), and Rubio in fifth (10.2%). Rubio’s strong finish in Iowa could easily vault him over Kasich and Bush, but they’re grouped together right now.
So, this sets up a three-way battle and a two-way battle between Kasich and Bush.
Rubio’s momentum will be badly blunted if he doesn’t take at least third place. Even if he does manage a third place finish, however, he’ll have to contend with one of the others. Bush is obviously a weak campaigner with a bad campaign staff, but he has the potential to bounce back if he finishes strong in New Hampshire. Kasich had been getting most of the newspaper endorsements there (and in Boston and New York) but he needs a breakthrough moment. Emerging in the final four is a real possibility for him, but he can’t finish behind Jeb.
We’ll also have to watch what happens with Trump now that his bubble has popped. He’s vulnerable to a sudden drop but he’s currently leading Cruz 33.7% to 11.5%. That’s a lot of room to fall and still pull out a victory.
There’s a very small chance that Chris Christie or even Carly Fiorina could finish in the top four and give their campaigns some life. More likely, they’ll be following Ben Carson out the door after the results come in.
I’ve seen a lot of chatter that pressure will be brought on Jeb not to campaign negatively against Rubio, but given that they’re virtually tied in New Hampshire right now, I’m not sure that he’ll follow that advice. He shouldn’t if he wants to keep his campaign going. But, really, he ought to be more concerned with beating Kasich and assuring himself a spot in the final four.
The main things to watch for are what happens to Trump’s big lead, will Cruz get a strong bump that separates him from the second-tier pack or will Rubio launch in front of him, and who will emerge as the fourth candidate.
I don’t know how it works out, but I’m “rooting” for Trump in NH.
A bitter and protracted primary battle doesn’t help the Republicans, I don’t think.
I doubt if this article will hold up, but I found it hilarious:
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/howie_carr/2016/02/carr_marco_surging_if_you_ignore_poll
s
You have to know that between the Herald and the Globe is animosity equaled in Massachusetts only by Red Sox/Yankees and Patriots/Everybody in the whole damn world.
I will always have a warm spot reserved in my heart forHowie Carr, if only for the following truly vicious takedown of John Kerry that was first published in the Boston Herald in January, 2004. Before he copped out on the Bush II vote count fix.
Riiiiight…
Just sayin’.
Front-runner Dems have always been shady. Ever since Mr. Bill.
HRC just continues the tradition.
Rubio?
Another potential tomato can in the quadrennial presnidential fix.
Trump lost in Iowa?
And Cruz won?
Hmmmm…
If I were HRC, I would much rather run against Cruz than Trump. Cruz looks like a villain; Trump looks like a…funny person.
HMMMMmmmm…!!!
It won’t happen…it didn’t happen at the crooked polls in the 2000 or 2004 elections…but I would love to see some talented hacker hack the Microsoft-run Iowa polls and see who really won.
Just sayin’…
A fix is a long-term cheat, in boxing as well as in politics. Once the cheat is on, everything is allowed. No holds barred.
Until you get caught, of course.
I reflexively believe none of this primary season’s results. The fix is in for HRC and that’s all there is to it. It has many levels, including Bloomberg’s possible entrance into the fray. But unless HRC is somehow injured in political battle…a catastrophic primary loss, a true breakdown of some kind in the debates, some provable scandal…everything that happens is suspect.
Watch.
Watch with your eyes wide open instead of wide shut.
Please.
AG
I suppose that ridiculing your conspiracy mongering is also part of the fix that you tell us is so definitely in.
This whole country is one gigantic criminal conspiracy now, JDW. A corporate-owned and operated criminal conspiracy.
WTFU.
AG
From Oui’s post here, Organized Mayhem by Democrats in Iowa Caucus
Coincidences?
I ask you…when do you believe that coincidences end and conspiracies unfold?
Really.
This reporter…fladem…is an experienced Democratic party operator. I’ll repeat his words:
Wake the fuck up.
Once one agrees to lie and cheat in order to win…common professional wisdom being that this is the only way to win, witness the ascendency of pros like James Carville and Turdblossom Rove, let alone the mafia help that JFK got in West Virginia primaries over 50 years ago…then anything and everything is on the table.
The usual rationalization? From both sides?
I call bullshit.
Why?
Because once the lying and cheating start one can never be sure about anything.
The great Roman politician, philosopher and orator Cicero said it best way back in Julius Caesar’s Rome.
WTFU.
AG
I chatted with an old friend who has lived in Davenport, Iowa for the last decade, and who attended a Democratic caucus. He reported nothing of the sort described above. Nothing that made him think “the fix was in.” And FWIW he was a Sanders supporter.
The problem with conspiratorial thinking is that once you go down that rabbit hole, your inclination is to force every observation to conform to the conspiracy hypothesis, and to dismiss and disrespect anyone who begs to differ.
AG’s corollary:
I have lost all faith in the honesty of this system. I assume it is crooked because it been proven crooked… to my own satisfaction since at least the assassination ’60s…so many times before.
You apparently choose to forgive and forget? (Forgetting being the easy part.)
So it goes.
Don’t feel bad. You’re in the majority.
AG
What, we’re supposed to forget that AG used his vaunted sociological technique to promise us that agitated white people would make Trump an unstoppable force on Election Day?
Ain’t over yet. Don’t count your chickens before they roost.
AG
The Donald does look like he will take New Hampshire. However, the GOP electorate is not the general electorate.
He just got the boost of an endorsement from Scott Brown, for whatever that’s worth.
Yeah?
What is “the general electorate,” as far as your understanding goes?
In mine, it’s one that has managed to elect Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Butch I and Butch II. 7 terms in all if you don’t count Nixon’s helicopter ride. 28 years.
You think that “the general electorate” is somehow created in your own image?
Good luck wid dat.
“The general electorate” that counts is the majority of voters who actually turn out to vote. Duh. And even that can be jiggered by intelligent use of the Erectile Collage…oops, so sorry, I meant the Electoral College…and digital vote fraud.
Get real.
AG
P.S. “Erectile Collage.” Perhaps a good new name for the mass media?
Who knew?
Fiorina is too stupid to know she has lost. I suspect she wants to be Sarah Palin, but shockingly, has even less charisma.
Bachmann did better in Iowa than Fiorina did and she dropped out after the caucuses. OTOH she was broke and Carly still had, as of 12/31, $4 million in her campaign kitty.
Is Fiorina looking for some sugar daddy (aka Koch brother or similar) to give her some sort of golden hand shake to leave the campaign? That seems to be her MO.
Bachmann, for all of her crazitude, was more or less a “real” politician – or what one passes for in this day and age – and realized it was time to cut her losses.
But I get it that Fiorina still has money burning a hole in her uber expensive pockets.
Does Fiorina have less charisma than Palin? Now that’s a tough one, but it’s really sort of comparing apples to oranges. My guess is that Palin probably does have more charisma to her true believers (and they still exist). I cannot fathom how anyone could find Fiorina remotely appealing on any level for anything.
Fiorina is in the race because of a sugar daddy. She doesn’t need this gig for her own personal financial well-being but her ego demands attention. She’s working on “being famous” for “being famous.”
Palin had a high level of charisma in ’08. It’s stale at this point because she only plays one note.
Fiorina is a dumb person’s idea of what a smart and savvy businesswoman is like. In her day the business press (and pro-feminist writers) lauded her for her skills and charisma. Those outside her charm circle never saw or experienced much of either. Fiorina reminds me of Lieberman; what they see in their mirrors is much different than how others see them.
When Fiorina ran for CA Senate in 2010, I had some otherwise plenty smart friends (GOPers) who openly spoke often about how “smart” Fiorina was and what a great business person she was and so forth.
I’m not sure how these people feel now (lost touch due to end of a relationship), but I do witness her getting almost no traction this time around.
True story: was friends with some HP workers back in the day when Fiorina ascended the throne there. I owned HP stock; was value neutral vis Fiorina’s hire; my friends were caustic about how horrible she was. I called them on being sexists, etc. They told me: you wait and see. Yes, HP is an Old Boys network and is sexist to an extent, but this, THIS person is horrible. It has nothing to do with sexism.
And the rest, as they say, is history.
I guess Fiorina does have some sugar daddies somewhere. I don’t know why they see her as a credible candidate & choose to fund her, although some people have more money than they can possibly spend in many lifetimes. Her Senate race in CA was a disaster equal to her performance now. Fiorina simply sucks in every way possible.
Heh — I was familiar with Carly’s tenure at Lucent. When a business associate, and former HP employee who still owned shares in the company, asked me what I’d do in his position with the HP stock, my response was, “Sell it.” Oh, I’m sure someone would label me as a self-hating woman for that response, but in that same time period, I actively refused to have any business dealings with Tyco and MCI based on their CEOs, who I believe were both men.
You think Sister Sarah had little charisma? It seemed to me in 2008 that she was a right wing rock star … even after she opened her mouth.
It was just sane people who thought she was a strident, know nothing, obnoxious ….. person.
Precisely.
One person’s rock star is another’s yelping asshole.
That’s what makes horse races.
And elections, too.
AG
Thanks for the very clear, straightforward analysis (as always).
Decision time in the Granite state for the “establishment” type Republicans. Rubio may be the current favorite of a certain portion of the big money and establishment elites and pundits, but it remains difficult for me to see that he fits the bill for NH “establishment” voters.
It could still go a few different ways.
Someone will drop out after New Hampshire and certainly after South Carolina. By then all the establishment candidates will have been tried in the Midwest, Northeast and South. Certainly after Nevada tests the West. The power brokers will make their choice along the way. (R)’s don’t expect to take the Pacific coast anyway.
Two of the four that I identified as drop-outs by today have already done so. Gilmore is apparently stubborn enough to see how far he can go with no bucks and no votes. Santorum is checking out how much further in debt he can go with 1% GOP voter support.
Best chuckle of the day, Trump’s twitter: “I don’t believe I have been given any credit by the voters for self funding my campaign, the only one. I will keep doing, but not worth it!”
Methinks the Donald’s poor loserisms are just in the beginning stage. Establishment may be able to keep their monies as Trump will do himself in.
Or maybe voters factored in how little of “his own money” that he has spent so far. He’s down there with the 2015 campaign spending of Paul and Fiorina. Cruz and Rubio spent nearly $30 million to Trump’s paltry $12 million and didn’t get the media free ride. A mega-super-star might have been able to get away with no organization and cheapskate spending, but not a silly TV show guy. Sheesh — even Reagan had that one figured out.
Let’s not write the vile fucker off too early, he still finished pretty strongly in second.
Not writing him off, but when a “tough guy” candidate begins to whine, he begins to lose the “tough guy” creds.
What his outburst said to me, which is of no interest or notice to Republican voters, is that his working knowledge/skills for a campaign are virtually nil and he hasn’t bothered to hire anyone that can do it for him (along with teaching him the basics). Carson and Trump are running on nothing other than the strength of their personality/character. The difference is that Carson has had a team devoted bringing in the bucks (which fell apart in the past in the last 45 days of 2015). Both are now whining. Carson never had any real chance, but Trump failed to get serious and build on his entry advantage.
listened to lots of rw talk radio last week [in IA] . there were 2 items vs. Trump in favor of Cruz – Trump expressed willingness to compromise [“make a deal”] and had no credibility as a Christian.
listened to lots of rw talk radio last week [in IA] . there were 2 items vs. Trump in favor of Cruz – Trump expressed willingness to compromise [“make a deal”] and had no credibility as a Christian.
What a great discussion thread. Between John Kerry’s sugar mommas and Fiorina’s sugar daddies, we’ve covered lots of stereotypes, haven’t we?
You mean “stereotypes” don’t at least partially suggest in some respects the attributes of certain people?
Yes, Kerry is indeed fits a “stereotype.” That’s why the line dropped on him by the guy waiting on line to see the Stones resonates so beautifully.
Boston humor at its most trenchant. Gotta love ’em. It’s a tough, tough town.
AG
Stereotypes are a substitute for critical thinking. Every time I hear something along the lines of, “Well, there must be an element of truth in such-and-such stereotype,” I know I’m listening not only to someone who is lazy, but more problematically, to someone who is willing to act on the basis of stereotypes. And being of an ethnic group that has been the target of people acting on stereotypes, I’m kind of sensitive to the issue.
So John Kerry acted like a jerk. And some other guy was rude as hell towards Kerry and then bragged about it afterwards. So Boston is a “tough, tough town.” Big deal.
I live in the Pacific Northwest, where the generalized public rudeness that AG celebrates is not appreciated.
Where is Burns, Oregon?
True enough that in general those on the left coast are more polite. Might have something to do with not having a formal slavery legacy and from inception being more ethnically and racially mixed than most of the country.
Burns is in southeastern Oregon. High desert. Stark but beautiful in its own way. Nothing at all like the wet part of the state west of the Cascade Range, where most of the population is.
Actually the ethnic diversity here has been small until recently. There was no black population to note until WW2 brought workers to shipyards in Portland. Many SE Asians came after our wonderful wars in their homelands. Latino population has been growing by leaps and bounds.
Just to note, the Malheur wildlife refuge is a migratory bird stopping point of some importance. Many people from the west side of the state go there to see the birds. One of those people is the author Ursula LeGuin, who published a column about the “standoff” in The Oregonian. We don’t really want Y’all Qaeda messing with the place.
Kerry has “acted like a jerk” for well on 40 years. He deserves whatever grief people give him.
Do you remember the “Don’t tase me, bro!!!” cries of a young student who wanted to question Kerry during a Constitution Day forum at the University of Florida in 2007 and was forcibly pulled off of the mic and then tasered?
Watch the whole thing if you can stomach it.
Kerry didn’t do shit except the same thing he always does. Mumble platitudes from the safety of his protected position and wait for the PermaGov revolving door to save his faux patrician ass.
And as far as this goes…???
You sound like a potential Cruz voter, looking down on “Northeast urban values.”
I fit in very nicely in the northwest. Vancouver, BC is my favorite city in all of North America, and I am no kind of NYC thug that can’t appreciate the values associated with Portland and Seattle. But when it’s time to call a spade a spade, it’s that time in any and every time zone as far as I am concerned.
Including wherever your ass is parked.
Get a life.
AG
Give it a rest, Mr Gilroy. Take a frigging sedative fer chrissakes. It’s not actually you against the world.
Me against the world?
It’s the world against the corporate-owned Permanent Government of the U.S./NATO.
Which side are you on?
You think that you…and the rest of the so-called “Progressive” neo-liberals…are the world!!!???
Wake the fuck up.
Go to almost any other area in the world…including the brownish inner cities/excluded exurban working class projects of the U.S. and Europe…and try running that shit on the street.
You’ll be lucky to get away alive.
Bet on it.
AG
Wow. Talk about willful misinterpretation of my words. Of course I am not “the world”.
You write as if you’re the only person who actually understands reality and that anyone who disagrees with you is deranged, a sell-out, or otherwise a hopeless fool.
I suppose if you want to do that in the anonymity of the on-line world, fine. But it must be a pretty lonely life if you treat the living human beings you encounter the same way.
I repeat:
You have been consistently arguing against my ongoing point that the Federal Government of the United States (and the governments of its closest allies as well) is a well-functioning, corporate-owned conspiracy that is operated against the best interests of most of the people of the world…including most of the citizens of the U.S…and for the so-called “1%” that own and control most of the wealth of that world. It is totally anti-democratic…totally elitist…but it cloaks its behavior in a faux “pro-democracy” facade. It does so because it rightfully fears the power of the billions of people that it seeks to control.
I am convinced that this is the case. You are apparently not. The only class of people in this country who are mostly not beginning to see this fact is the middle and upper middle class that has been installed to act essentially as overseers of the system and rewarded with some sort of financial security, and recently even parts of that class are seeing their “security” threatened by the rampant greed of the controllers. In my experience those who do not see this are either:
1-Too stupid to come in out of the reign.
2-Still hypnotized by the massive brainwashing under which they grew up. (I include almost the entire educational system and the entire corporate-sponsored mass media system in that “brainwashing” rubric.)
or
3-Still so well taken care in terms of security that they actually buy into being junior members of the 1%.
It sounds to me like you belong to groups 2 and/or 3.
So it goes.
Go vote for Hillary.
AG
Bush’s “Right to Rise” superPAC is already running attack ads against Rubio, has been for at least a couple of weeks. I live in northeastern Massachusetts and see them often enough on NECN, the regional cable news channel. Don’t know if they’re also being run on the ABC/NBC/CBS/Fox stations that serve the area since I don’t watch them.
Kasich’s campaign is running a pretty good ad against Bush.
Are the ads any good? And do they also persuade viewers to jump from Rubio and undecided to Bush?
MA is an expensive media market, but realistically, the Bushes have never been strong in NH GOP primaries. So, if not Rubio, who do NH GOP primary voters move to?
The Right To Rise ad hits Rubio on immigration, credit card abuse, missing votes, stuff like that. I think if it pushes voters away from Boy Marco, they’ll more likely migrate to Trump than to Jeb, based on immigrant-hatred. How effective? Don’t ask me; I’m too disdainful of the whole sorry lot of them to be a good judge, other than they seem well-produced and not instant hit-the-remote fodder.
The Kasich ad is actually kind of clever; in dingy black and white, it shows a man in a suit standing immobile in a tree-fringed pasture, leaning on a stick. He and the stick are totally plastered with mud. A man’s voiceover chides Bush with amused contempt for trying to attack his opponents and failing miserably. Kasich has also run at least one more traditionally positive ad about himself.
I have no informed read on NH voters, but given how many in the more populous southern part are ex-Bay Staters (often still working in Boston and its suburbs), I think it’s relevant that what I see of GOP tribal identifiers in my neck of the woods (coastal exurb north of the Hub) is trending Trump. Not many yard signs or bumper stickers, but of what there is, nada for the other candidates, other than one or two sad Carson stickers. I can’t see a big evangelical swell in NH; it’s not in character for New England.
Thanks. And never dismiss your observations and impressions.
The Kasich ad sounds a bit avant garde.clever for a political ad. I generally like such attempts, but the most clever ads for any product tend not to be effective; people remember the ad but not the product.
Rubio might have hurt himself in NH with his god talk “victory” speech in Iowa. With the airwaves filled with political ads at this point, probably no room to put together a negative Rubio ad using snippets of his speech. But there’s always the internet.
For what it’s worth: Scott Brown, one-term senator from Massachusetts subsequently whipped by Elizabeth Warren, then failed candidate for Senate in New Hampshire, still is a mover in GOP politics, and he has just endorsed Trump. Whether that will overcome some of the loser miasma now gathering over The Donald remains to be seen.