|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Posted on 02/10/2016 3:19:55 PM PST by SoConPubbie
There's no question that Donald Trump scored an epic win last night in New Hampshire. But there's still a lot of primary season left, and one item that shouldn't be easily glossed over is Texas Sen. Ted Cruz's surprisingly strong performance in the Granite State.
New Hampshire is not Cruz country in the way that Iowa was: He appeals to the party's tea party and evangelical base, and they're simply not as prevalent in the flinty Northeast. The Iowa electorate was 62 percent evangelical and 40 percent "very conservative," according to exit polls – but only 27 percent and 25 percent respectively in New Hampshire. Cruz's people knew it wasn't friendly territory, so he didn't spend a lot of time there. And yet Cruz edged out the stumbling Floridians – former Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio – for third place in the state. Granted, he benefited from having a crowded field. As the insightful Ron Brownstein pointed out:
In NH @SenTedCruz wins 8% of non-evangelicals, 9% of somewhat conservatives. Not broad enough yet 2 go the distance @KevinMaddenDC— Ronald Brownstein (@RonBrownstein) February 10, 2016
That is true. But remember that the next stop in the campaign is South Carolina, which is much more hospitable to his brand of politics, with evangelicals making up nearly two-thirds of the electorate there in the 2012 primary and strong conservatives making up more than one-third. And beyond that, much of Super Tuesday (or the "SEC primary" as some have taken to calling it) will play out across the Bible Belt.
And as the Washington Examiner's Philip Klein wrote last night, Cruz heads into the race's first southern contest with religiously focused competitors like Mike Huckabee of Arkansas and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania having bowed out and Ben Carson having proven himself an afterthought. Further, "Cruz has a ground game in place and the electorate is much more tailored to his strengths."
This while the non-Trump, non-Cruz scrum – presumably down to Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Bush and the faltering Rubio – not only failed to achieve much clarity last night but are gearing up to hammer each other in the famously brutal Palmetto State, each hoping for a clear shot at Trump. "Bush plans scorched-earth attack on Kasich, Rubio," Politico reported last night.
It's not like Cruz is getting a pass; Trump has gone up on South Carolina television with an attack ad painting him – implausibly – as a Washington insider. And the Texas senator's campaign is gleefully engaging the fight, unveiling a genuinely funny Web ad skewering Trump as a big government pretend-Republican. As Hot Air's Ed Morrissey notes, "Ridicule can be a powerful tool in politics, and it might be the only kind of attack that will work on Trump."
In any case, if you're Ted Cruz you're delighted to be in a scrap with the front-runner rather than trying to drag yourself clear of the also-ran knife-fight.
And in a conservative state like South Carolina, that fight could also play to Cruz's strengths. The Examiner's Klein again:
Furthermore, now that the field has narrowed down and Trump has won a primary and proven himself a serious threat, there will be a lot more focus on his liberal record – on abortion, guns, healthcare, property rights – among other issues. It won't dissuade his strongest supporters, but it doesn't matter, because it will discourage enough very conservative voters and evangelicals to give Cruz the victory.
Suppose Cruz manages to close the gap on Trump while Jeb! emerges from the rotating group of establishmentarians, leaving that lane as muddled as it is today. This could very quickly become a two-tier race.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Just remember how Iowa turned out with Cruz doing the heavy lifting of retail politics and smaller gatherings with potential voters and Trump, being lazy or believing his own hype, relyed solely on large gathers and Cruz whipped his butt.
It was 3rd place, yes. Don’t know how ‘strong’ it was, but that is the result. I could vote for either Trump or Cruz.
Funny how when Trump finished a close #2 in Iowa they called is a “loss” but when Cruz finishes a very very distant 3rd in NH, it’s called a “silent success”.
I guess that’s easier to spell than “a shellacking”.
I'm for Trump but if Cruz beats him fair and square for the nomination, I become a Cruz supporter.
Best presidential election ever so far. I actually have two candidates in the running that I can enthusiastically support as we head to South Carolina. Four years ago at this time, I was beginning to accept the fact that it might end up being Romney. Eight years ago at this time, I was coming to terms with McCain.
I’m for Trump but if Cruz beats him fair and square for the nomination, I become a Cruz supporter
Of course. But Cruz has not proved he has played fair and square.....we will see how he behaves going on.
Thankfully in a couple weeks most of this will be over.
Cruz spent a year living in Iowa and millions of dollars.
Trump, a fraction of the time, and next to no money, and left with one less delegate.
He now leads the delegate count.
Again more of the myth-making to pump Cruz up as being a superhuman character.
“And in a conservative state like South Carolina, that fight could also play to Cruz’s strengths. The Examiner’s Klein again”.
The South Carolina GOP is dominated by RINOs and all have endorsed either Rubio or Bush. SC used to be a fairly conservative state, but with the invasion of liberals from Yankeeland, especially in the coastal areas, liberal Lindsey Graham is sent back to the senate every four years to backstab the Republican Party.
Trump will take SC. He gets a cross-section of all voters. Go home Jebbie, your mama couldn’t help you in NH and your dimwitted brother will be no help in SC.
Just keep laughing.
See how that works?
Sounded silly and overblown, both ways.......two states, two outcomes, more to come.
Donald Trump nearly came in 3rd in Iowa. Ted Cruz spent a fraction of $$$ in NH vs other candidates. $580,000. The nearest candidate spent upwards of $15 million.
3rd place finish in a uber-liberal state like NH is quite an accomplishment, beating out Yeb and Rubio.
Exciting stuff. Can't wait for SC and Super Tuesday.
Cruz Bots . I bet there are more people behind Trump in Clemson tonight.
Cruz put it on the line in Iowa, where his natural constituency dominates. He mailed it in in New Hampshire, where he didn’t have a prayer.
Everything went as expected in both states. Time will tell what happens now, but I wouldn’t bet against Trump at this point.
“every four years”
For the Senate?
Not at all. Politics is about perception. Trump was expected to win Iowa according to the polls, and he exacerbated that expectation by constantly bragging about the polls. So when he underperformed the polls by 8% (from a 5% lead to a 3% loss), especially with as much effeort as he put into the state, it was viewed as a big failure.
Conversely, Cruz was not expected to do well in NH. Many pundits even expected him to wind up 4th or 5th. So by ending up 3rd, Cruz outperformed expectations - and he did so while spending least amount of any candidate and spending the least amount of time in the state. So the perception is that Cruz did really well in a state where he was not expected to do so.
Exactly how I feel. Just as in Texas pro football, I have two teams...Texans and the Cowboyz. lol
If Trump captures the nomination, I will enthusiastically support him to November. Our adversary is the socialist/communist.
What I would not mind seeing is a Trump/Cruz ticket. Trump as president, Cruz as president of the Senate.
That’ll chap McConnell's @$$.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.