Home » What happened to Trump in Wisconsin?

Comments

What happened to Trump in Wisconsin? — 18 Comments

  1. Trump gamed the system and the media perfectly. In a large field, he had the most name recognition. He also knew that his style of presentation and outsider/underdog status would generate lots of media attention. This translated into 20-35% support in a fractured field.

    I really resent this guy and I am really tired of his con artist act.

  2. “Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad”… someone so full of himself that he imagines he can dance blindfolded through a minefield.

  3. And, already making excuses and blaming everyone but himself with all the self-reflection of a slug.

  4. GB,

    If you can furnish the blindfold, I might be able to concoct a few mines with primers and gunpowder. 😉

    Trump will not reach 1237. After the first ballot delegates will start going to Cruz. I think we may see a Cruz/Rubio ticket unless the 40b rule is negated.

  5. parker:

    At this point, I’d be happy to see a Cruz ticket with almost anyone (Trump excepted) as VP. I’d be delighted with Carly Fiorina as VP. There are other choices that could work well. Cruz/Rubio would be interesting, although frankly I don’t see that working.

  6. And I will never forgive Fox – especially Hannity – for foisting their NYC buddy on us.

  7. I’d said it before (for which I was criticized; HA! In your face, Neo-neocon! 🙂 ), but now I have done the statistical analysis to back it up:

    When there were enough polls prior to a primary to generate an average on Real Clear Politics, the candidates’ numbers were:

    Trump: Average = [polls] + 0.96%, Std Deviation = 3.56%.
    Cruz: Average = [polls] + 3.57%, Std Deviation = 4.97%.

    For those not familiar with statistical jargon, that means that 68% of the time Trump performs from [polls] – 2.5% to [polls] + 4.5%. Since most polls are +/- 4% margin of error, that means Trump performs almost exactly as you would statistically expect.

    68% of the time Cruz performs between [polls] – 1.5% to [polls] + 8.5%. He is very skewed to the positive side because late deciders almost always break overwhelmingly toward him.

    That last trend is so pronounced and consistent that Nate Silver has incorporated it into his models so that in CA, where Trump leads Cruz by an average of 8% with 20% undecided, Silver says Cruz has a 61% chance of winning.

    If the polls narrow any further, Cruz will destroy Trump in CA.

  8. parker,

    Never interfere with an arrogant man busily constructing his own demise.

    Cruz/Rubio would in principle, be a sellout and pragmatically offer little. Fortunately, Cruz can dismiss Rubio on policy grounds, what advantage to the ticket can a man offer, who couldn’t even win his own state?

    On the other hand, Carly Fiorina would appeal to the female vote as an implicit promise of a future Republican female President. That would go far to counter Hillary and would diffuse the “war on women” meme.

    Cruz is unlikely to win outright on the first ballot. That’s when the GOPe will seek to use Rubio and Kasich’s delegates as leverage to force their choice for VP upon Cruz.

    And that is when we will learn whether Cruz understands the difference between compromise and collaboration. A test Ryan failed and Cruz has yet to pass.

    Cruz needs to firmly turn down the GOPe choice on strategic rather than ideological grounds, thus undercutting the GOPe rationale. Cruz should argue that in 2016, winning the election has to be the Republican party’s first, last and only priority.

  9. Daniel in Brookline,

    FLA has a lot of electoral votes, so Cruz as the nominee will give Rubio serious consideration if the research (I am certain he as a team or teams on the VP search) shows Rubio can make a big difference in the state. I have a great deal of respect for Fiorina, and think she would be a fine VP. But I don’t think she gives a Cruz/Fiorina ticket a boost in VA.

    What I do know for certain is that Cruz has a first class organization. The VP choice will be determined on the basis political compatibility and harvesting 270 in the Electoral College.

  10. GB,

    Other than the gang of 8, which is a big issue, I do not see Rubio on the ticket as serious sellout. I had the opportunity at a campaign rally to tell Cruz that I considered Fiorina an excellent VP choice. However, while women who vote republican would be thrilled by that choice, I don’t believe she would bring ‘independent’ women to the gop side in November.

    Now if he picked Kasich that would be a big sellout, even though Kasich would be an important asset in Ohio. I think we can rest easy, Cruz stands up well against gope pressure.

  11. Parker – I would love to see Carly on the ticket — I supported her early on as she was the only candidate who seemed to have given a thought to what she would do on her SECOND day in office. It’s not necessary that she bring Democrats and independents out to vote for the ticket; it would suffice if she merely prevented the traditional women non-voters from coming out to vote for the Evil Empress just because she was the only woman in the race.

    Much as I hope Cruz beats Trump, there is one thing I would have loved to hear the Donald say to Hillary in a debate: “I know you’re corrupt because I bought you!”

  12. Richard Saunders,

    I was for Fiorina early on after Walker dropped out. I shifted to Cruz in the run up to the Iowa caucus when I decided she had no realistic path to the nomination. That lead me to become a Cruz volunteer and caucus captain. Her decision to support Cruz is not surprising. If Cruz becomes the nominee and goes on to win in November I see her as Secretary of State. Foggy Bottom needs to be purged and she is the person to do it.

  13. parker,

    A man who, for personal gain will break his word will do it again and again.

    Fiorina, given the opportunity, would demonstrate an even greater impressiveness.

    In negotiating with the GOPe, Cruz ‘standing firm’ would prove insufficient. As they can work with the corrupt (Hillary), while the virtuous (Cruz) are a potentially uncontrollable threat. So, without giving away the farm, Cruz has to convince the GOPe that he can be ‘reasonable’. That will take really being the smartest man in the room.

  14. GB,

    Unlike bho, Cruz is generally the smartest person in any room around the globe. He is also not on the short side of crafty. He does not have to be reasonable, he has to be decisive and convincing. In the general Rubio would be a good VP attack dog, not better than Fiorina, but more convincing to the wishy washy independents. It is all about winning in November. That is the only game that matters. Rubio as VP is under the thumb of Cruz as a potential POTUS. He is a young boy who is willing to take his own shot at the golden ring. After 8 years.

    And, I think Rubio, for practical purposes, has learned the lesson. As you note, losing your home state in the primary is a face palm moment. I think Rubio gets that.

  15. Rubio is damaged goods and needs 40 months wandering in the Sinai desert for his sins.

    Fiorina — in office — would be awesome.

    But.

    She’d be a non-classical VP — as I can’t see her bringing ANY state’s electors over to the GOP.

    That calculus must be made much closer to the election final.

    It was obvious — to me — from the first — that Carly was always running to be V-P.

    Which no V-P candidate can ever admit.

    Fiorina’s niche is to be the anti-Shrew, the anti-Hillary.

    In that capacity, she’d be a multi-state — and gender — asset.

    All during the Fall she ought to be used to shred Hillary’s vacuous ‘policies.’

    While Ted takes the high road.

    Easily done when the Shrew troughs the swamp.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>