...and actually I think it’s more likely we’ll see a repeat of 1980, where people being polled didn’t want to let it be known that they were ready to vote for the ‘extremist’, so they just said Carter. In fact, the polling just prior to election night all said “too close to call”.
I think we’ll see that effect as people publicly say one thing regarding how they’ll vote, but privately vote in the way they see best, which, of course, means Trump.
Or not
For a guy who was going to fade away and had no ground game at all in Iowa,Trump seems to be confounding the pundit class
Time will tell all
I guess the author’s theory doesn’t apply to the Clinton/Sanders race.
America lives and dies for reality TV and you see it here on FR how a Reality TV star carries more water than a true conservative
In Iowa, “vastly inflated” equaled about 4 points. If that holds true for the rest, he commands a pretty hefty lead in a lot of areas.....
There was a bit of “name recognition” with Ronald Reagan, too, and he did pretty well, IIRC.
I’ve said it before. Trump doesn’t have a lot of supporters. Most of what he has is fans. People who come out for the show. Supporters turn out at the polls and fans don’t. I think Trump wins tomorrow but by a narrower margin than the polls show. And what will he blame that on come Wednesday?
The NH results will provide better intel regarding the polls.
Iowa had two issues that hurt Trump.
#1 Democrats who changed registration to stop Trump. In entrance interviews there were many who said they were there to vote against Trump. Note those answers not for a candidate.
#2 Despite what Cruz supporters want to argue, the Carson deal hurt Trump.
Hopefully neither of these issues will be big in NH.
This would be validated by Trump winning by less than 10 points in New Hampshire. (Too many people splitting the not-Trump vote.)