Again, you’re trying to conflate the voters of the open primary in the state of New Hampshire into being the voters of South Carolina and other Super Tuesday states by repeating the same talking point while excluding Iowa on the basis that Trump losing that state’s primary excluded it from consideration. You seem to begrudge the notion of letting voters like me cast a vote in my states primary all the while assuring me I’m a Trump voter based on your demographic transference scheme.
Oh, the irony is pretty thick here regarding an immoral huckster (using eminent domain private property grabs, buying and bribing politicians admittedly, and violating Federal Laws by knowingly hiring illegal aliens) by candidate sleaze who never fails to reach into his bag of ad hominem attacks while offering detailed healthcare plans of “something terrific” (no joking, that was his healthcare proposal).
I don't know why you keep making this obnoxious, false, and stupid point. Helllooooo, if we take the moderates out, if we take the independents out, if we take the Democrats out, Trump still wins. Are you stupid or suffer from a mental disorder or what?
Iowa doesn't have a primary, open or otherwise. Surely you knew that. Iowa has a caucus, which most states don't use.
Most states have primaries, and it is Donald Trump who won the nation's first GOP primary of the 2016 election cycle. In any event, Cruz's victory in Iowa's caucuses resulted, apparently, in little or no momentum for Cruz in New Hampshire's primary. That should be of deep concern to Cruz supporters.
We will soon see whether Donald Trump's victory in the New Hampshire primary has given him any momentum for South Carolina's primary.
Setting aside wishful pronouncements regarding "conflating" and "talking points", I suspect that the SC primary results will probably be quite similar to the New Hampshire primary results, at least on the GOP side...