Posted on 03/15/2016 6:36:57 PM PDT by WilliamIII
Summary: Keeping John Kasich in the race divides the anti-Trump vote.
Two months ago, based on a computer model I developed of the Republican delegate race, I wrote in The American Prospect that the GOP’s nomination rules tilted the playing field to Donald Trump’s advantage. For Trump’s opponents, the time window for counteracting many of those advantages and winning a first-ballot nomination has passed. Now the campaign enters a new phase, as Trump’s rivals try to deny him a majority of pledged delegates going into the convention. Simulating the remaining contests based on current polling data, my model picks up an unexpected wrinkle: Trump’s strongest position comes if he loses the primary in Ohio on Tuesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at prospect.org ...
I know you ignored my reference to two other fields that weren’t real estate. I know you misstate Trump supporters not having confidence in Trump’s abilities when the issue is GOPe perfidy.
That seems like enough to me.
To my great surprise, I've been very accurate, in most cases getting every candidate in each race right to within 3 or less percentage points. The delegates are harder to predict due to some of the bizarre rules in some states, but I've been surprised at my accuracy there too.
If I maintain anything even close to that accuracy level, then I can safely predict that Trump will not get the 1237 delegates he needs, but instead come up about 150 delegates short. And Cruz will likely be another 200 delegates behind Trump. So, in my opinion, they are quite likely to form a team--it really becomes the smartest and easiest way for each of them to avoid disaster.
But that ISN'T the issue. With Trump and Cruz having 80% of the delegates there's virtually nothing the GOP can do to stop them if they deal together. Look at the history of contested conventions. It's about dealing. That's why they are sometimes called "Brokered". If Trump could make a deal with Cruz they have the ticket in the bag. But Trump's constant litany of calling Cruz the worst liar he's ever seen may have already made that deal an impossibility. I guess that depends on whether Cruz is a bigger man.
Television and "branding" are two fields I DON'T have experience in. Well, "branding" isn't really a field, more of a discipline or skill. Advertising is a field and I'm assuming you mean that. Whatever. That is why I ignored them, not out of any dishonesty. For all I know, they may be like real estate where the same rules apply. I remain unconvinced that Trump will be a good political deal maker.
So if Trump doesn’t want the deal YOU want, he can’t make deals?
As for why you ignored my references, can you not understand how, you as a person with some obvious success and experience, would appear to be exhibiting the stereotypical management flaw of treating that which you don’t know as incidental?
What are you talking about? I don't want Trump to make a deal that leaves him as the nominee. Trump wants that. I'm just pre-emptively pointing out that if Trump fails to get the nomination in a contested convention then it's more about his failure to make effective deals than it is about an establishment conspiracy against him. Not as if that rational thought will penetrate many pro-Trump heads.
As for your other comment, I explained my rationale as to WHY that was incidental. I pointed out Trump's characteristics that work AGAINST being an effective deal maker in some fields, including, in my opinion, politics. When I make a statement that some things are X, pointing out that other things are Y genuinely has no bearing on the truth of my statement. It's simple logic, not a management flaw.
http://prospect.org/article/losing-ohio-improves-trump%E2%80%99s-chances-win-nomination
Why Donald Trump might win by losing Ohio [”Trump fares worse in a one-on-one race. This is intuitive...”]
For the purposes of the stop-Trump movement, it might be better if Ohio Gov. John Kasich lost his home state Tuesday.
By Peter Grier, Staff writer March 14, 2016
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2016/0314/Why-Donald-Trump-might-win-by-losing-Ohio
“Yes. Based on what poll evidence I could find, I assumed that Trump would gain 1 of 7 Rubio voters, and that Cruz and Kasich would gain 3 of 7 each. I could be off in those assumptions by a little, but frankly, in most states Kasich doesn’t have enough support that votes to him make any difference. It’s the Trump/Cruz ratio that matters, and it’s hard to imagine there were all that many Rubio voters left whose second choice was Trump. “
Ok, makes sense.
So in CA Cruz and Kasich split and Trump wins?
“No. Because Trump and Cruz were/are already neck and neck in California with Kasich way behind them.”
Right, but that was then, now, since Kasich won Ohio he’s got some “momentum”, and more importantly he’s getting a lot more press time.
So shouldn’t that translate into more votes?
And won’t those new Kasich votes be taken out of Cruz not Trump?
“So the Rubio votes push Cruz ahead of Trump, but Kasich remains a distant third. California is a closed primary which helps Cruz, and winner-take-all by congressional district, which makes a big delegate gain in the state tough for either candidate in a close race. “
Ok, I was just thinking the OH win would negate the Rubio votes going to Cruz.
“Next week will be interesting to watch. I believe Cruz has a good chance of winning 98 delegates to none for Trump in Utah and Arizona. “
Really? Last AZ poll taken on RCP shows Carson up by 2%!
I think you’re right with UT, Cruz will win that.
Are there any recent polling for AZ?
And won’t those new Kasich votes be taken out of Cruz not Trump?"
I doubt there are more voters to be found for Kasich. Despite the "momentum" most people understand he has no chance whatsoever. I think it's more likely that people who would be inclined to vote for him will vote for Cruz, because Cruz has a shot. Especially in California, where Cruz's chances get really good with Kasich voters moving to him. So I think I'm being fairly conservative against Cruz when I give Rubio's support half to him and half to Kasich. I suspect it will move more like 75%-25% to whichever candidate is polling best against Trump in each state.
Another possibility is that Kasich will start bleeding support just like Rubio did when it was obvious he was on his way out. Kasich may be able to get a few delegates here and there, and Cruz voters may move to him in northeast states just to stop Trump in those states. But overall, I think it's really a two man race just like Cruz says.
Don't get me wrong. It would be far better for Cruz if Kasich dropped out too. Going into Tuesday a Trump win in Ohio to knock Kasich out, as well as Rubio getting out was the only scenario I modeled that showed Cruz passing Trump in delegates before the convention.
There's no recent polling for Arizona, but even that old poll bodes well for Cruz, with Trump at a very low level. Considering more of Carson and Rubio's voters move to Cruz, I think it looks good for Cruz there.
New Mexico has similar demographics to Arizona, and it has a more recent (February) poll that also shows low Trump support.
Finally, both Arizona and New Mexico are closed contests in which independents and Democrats can't vote. Trump has lost more of these than he has won so far.
So, if Trump is 50 short of the requisite votes and Cruz is 400 short, you would be fine with a contested/brokered convention?
Fuunny how we get really pissed when most politicians work specifically against the will of the People but for some of the "special" politicians, we will allow them to look down their nose at us and tell us how they know so much better what we really want/need - Barbour and them meddled like that in Mississippi and most folks on FR recognized it for the treachery it was - many of the same folks on FR seem to think it's "different " when Cruz does it.
At this point, Rubio showed more class than Cruz as Cruz now focuses more on stopping Trump than an honest win - he's willing to go down some dark roads to thwart the apparent will of the People.
ONE-HUNDRED PERCENT!
You talk about the will of the people, but so far something like 5 million more people have voted AGAINST Trump than for him.
If he can't get 50% of the delegates plus one, he doesn't deserve the nomination.
Hey, here's an idea. How about letting the states re-vote that voted before Paul, Huckabee, Fiorina, Bush, Carson and Rubio dropped out? Do you REALLY think that Cruz would not get a large majority of their votes? And that Trump would not fall even more short of the 1237 required? And that Cruz would not then have more delegates than Trump?
There are rules for a reason. A nominee should AT A MINIMUM have 50% plus one vote of support from the party.
To date, Trump has only 37% of the popular vote. So, what YOU are saying is that a 37% minority should triumph OVER the will of the People.
Just checking back in with you. Cruz has now won Utah and two other states (Wisconsin and Colorado) since your prediction. And there are something like 15 more states to go to make you even more wrong. Cruz will get at least a few of those. Don't quit your day job.
b) If there WAS such a thing as GOPe, Cruz voters are not and never have been part of it.
c) Colorado still counts as a win in terms of needing to win the majority of 8 state delegations, which was what this thread was discussing at the time. Not that that would matter to someone of your intellect, I'm sure.
I expect you to continue to whine and cry when Cruz wins at least Nebraska, Montana, and South Dakota.
And as for being morons, Trump has won more states than the average IQ of his supporters.
Need proof: telling people to F themselves whose votes you will need in November is the height of stupidity. Better start making nice with GOP voters, with or without that stupid lower-case "e" you like to add, because you can't beat the Democratic nominee without them, Peanut-Brain.
Well, if Trump is as dumb as you, that's over 6 million votes who might vote for him, just flushed down the toilet.
You really want a candidate that stupid?
Now it is true that my vote doesn't matter. I live in California which is already a one-party state and will give its electoral votes to Hillary even if the Republicans nominated Jesus Christ himself.
As for going away. You're the one with the potty mouth, which is probably against the rules of this forum, so why should I go away? Why don't you go away? You've already proved:
a) You're poor at predictions. Cruz has already won more states than you thought he would and there remains over a dozen to go.
b) You're a complete jerk who uses rude and foul language.
In fact, I don't see where you add any value at all to this Forum. There are enough other Trump voters here, and a handful are better predictors and slightly nicer than you, so maybe you should go away.
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.