Replies

Sounds like someoneâ€™s wet dream.

Unfortunately, the analysis is spot-on as to why we wound up with losers like Romney and McCain in the last two Presidential election cycles, and why we may be stuck with Rubio or Jeb this time around in spite of their low poll numbers. I don't like it any more than you do, but the delegate math means that we have an uphill battle in what's basically a rigged game.

I guess you’ve been missing the polls where Trump is dominating those blue states? He’s not just leading, he’s leading by 20 points all over the place.

Bush or similiar will get people the excuse to cast their vote for history — the first female prez.

[That assumes that Clinton’s health holds up. Per some articles, she is very ill. Per some recent threads, Huma cautions that Hillary is easily confused and needs ‘direction’.]

Unfortunately, the analysis is spot-on as to why we wound up with losers like Romney and McCain in the last two Presidential election cycles, and why we may be stuck with Rubio or Jeb this time around in spite of their low poll numbers. I don't like it any more than you do, but the delegate math means that we have an uphill battle in what's basically a rigged game.

I'm a Cruz supporter, but the analyst hasn't yet figured out that Trump, as an unconventional candidate, CLEANS UP in Blue States. Look at the polling. NY, MA, CT, RI, Trump is leading LARGE. He can fade and still win big, of the votes he loses, they are NOT going to John Ellis Bush or Carly Fiorina. Some will go to Rubio or Cruz, and mostly Cruz. A side effect of the Democrats completely obliterating the Republicans in Massachusetts and Connecticut is that the number of Weickercrat/Weldcrats have diminished. If you are in a state like Massachusetts and you are a Republican, it is because you HATE everything the Democrats stand for. Yes, the folks who have been there forever may still be Weicker/Weld/Romney types, but the bulk of the voters in the primary are not those people.

Trump energizes them because he speaks to a northeasterner LIKE a northeasterner, and because he cannot be shamed out of saying what he has to say. And people reckon he cannot be bought.

A LOT of independents and 25% of blacks support Trump. That completely messes up ALL of the models that northeastern analysts on all sides have. And dismissing Trump (Carson is less of a factor in the northeast) because the election hasn't unfolded that way in the past is FOLLY. The party rules are different. The PAC rules are different. The country's mood is different. A lot of Romney voters who said this is the LAST time actually meant it, come Hillary or high water. We have a sample size of elections with no incumbent running that you can count on your hands. The reliance on "History" when that history is barely 40 years with an event once wvery four years minus incumbents means that the "past performance may not equal future results".

We've not had a Trump running before. As Rush says, this is uncharted territory. We are down to a field of four (though I still want to drive a stake through #5, John Ellis Bush's heart). Only one of the four is Establishment.

Look what happened to the Republican establishment in states like Texas. The good guys (Abbot over Dewhurst) won, and the results will be long lasting. We cannot all be Texas, but the Old Guard is moving out, and they are running out of resources. Cruz has more cash on hand than John Ellis Bush, who must rely on PACs who will pay triple what Rubio pays for ad time.

I can also tell you that Cruz has a first class field operation, and I am proud to be an unpaid part of it.