Later this evening, we will get the first look at how the races for the Democrat and Republican Presidential nominations are going. I’m betting that ground game will be the biggest factor in both races in Iowa.
Here’s my fearless forecast—
Sanders edges out Clinton. O’Malley doesn’t make it to 5%.
Cruz beats Trump who doesn’t do much better than Rubio. Fiorina does better than expected. Bush doesn’t make 3%. This prediction is based on the level of low-level organizational effort from each campaign. Trump has done a lot of promotion, but he doesn’t appear to have brought new voters into the process the way Ron Paul did previously. Cruz and Fiorina have worked at their ground games, and I believe those efforts will pay off for them.
Be prepared to point and laugh at my predictions in a few hours.
UPDATE—DaTechGuy takes a look at who beside Trump benefits from Trump beating Cruz this evening.
Bottom line, with the exception of Marco Rubio every single other candidate has an incentive to stop Ted Cruz from winning Iowa, even if it gives the win to Trump.
Read the whole thing and stay tuned.
I think Trump might surprise you and run away with it. Unfortunately.
I’m figuring he’ll have a two to seven paint spread. My real concern is how close Rubio can stay. Hopefully Trump & Cruz suck all the oxygen out of the room,
John has a point about the ground game though.
From your fingertips to God’s ears. Big Cruz supporter because Donald Trump isn’t a conservative and will flip flop issues in a general election and bring down the House and Senate with him.
You mean no one is going to think Christies going to win?
This year I think Iowa is going to be ignored because its a consensus. Its like a jury that starts out 7 to 5 to acquit and ends up 0 -12 to convict.
There are too many candidates for a forum like this – a win would be like CPAC’s straw pole – and President Ron Paul never ever happened.
South Carolina is usually the first real primary, but hey this has been the longest most organized political campaign yet.
Iowa has always been a caucus, so that’s not suddenly a reason to ignore it this time. No doubt you hope it will be, because your ‘best candidate’ Bush will be lucky to get over 2%. NH will also not suddenly be ignored due to what? Being a tiny state with a less-conservative than average Republican contingent? Nothing new. The winner will still claim ‘momentum’ and SC voters will be slightly influenced by that, as usual. None of the early states has a good predictive record by themselves, but if an excellent ground game or just overwhelming support pulls two or three out of three, it takes a total implosion to end that candidate.
I hasn’t picked a nominee in decades. It’s a cute relic of a different age.
A relic that has an oversized role in both food and energy policy in the US. Much like some malcontents in FL helped drive our Cuba policy for a long time.
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 5:41 PM, hogewash wrote:
> Gus Bailey commented: “I hasn’t picked a nominee in decades. It’s a cute > relic of a different age.” >
Yup. “Hey y’all, let’s take all this nutritious corn and burn it in our cars! Sure it creates just as much but we’ll be rich!”
“Hey you don’t sweeten that soda with real sugar! Use this goo instead!”
Gah!… just as much POLLUTION
I couldn’t agree more.
Given the Dem’s “viability” rules for the caucuses it’s possible O’Malley might actually register a big fat 0.
Given that he’d have to take 15% in at least one caucus to even be on the board, it’s possible he can’t even make that cut.
Read today that 25% of government employees say they will/ might quit if Trump is elected.
Was this a news report put out to spike Trump’s support among conservatives?
And government contractors.
On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 9:17 PM, hogewash wrote:
> malclave commented: “Read today that 25% of government employees say they > will/ might quit if Trump is elected. Was this a news report put out to > spike Trump’s support among conservatives?” >
Late returns could theoretically still give Bernie the win, but batting .500 ain’t bad.