Here is the reality of the situation:
Posted on 02/02/2016 5:31:18 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Why take negative views into account?/s
wow was just looking at an article from 2011, De Javu...
Trump really made hay out of the ‘birther’ issue and as the resonance of that has declined, so has his standing. In February we found that 51% of Republican primary voters thought Barack Obama was not born in the United States. Now with the release of his birth certificate only 34% of GOP partisans fall into that camp, and Trump’s only in fifth place with that now smaller group of the electorate at 9%.
I don’t think The Donald can do much to recover at this point. He can’t erase his spotty record on changing positions and he can’t take back what he’s already said in the past few weeks. Trump garnered the press for his outspoken, direct attacks on President Obama. If another GOP candidate can do the same, albeit in a similar but distinctive manner, it is clear to see how a front-runner could emerge.
The question remains, which candidate has the spine and charisma to be Donald Trump without the baggage? Some on the right believe that man could be Herman Cain. He has the business experience but none of the baggage and showmanship surrounding Trump.
It remains to be seen in the coming months but the race is fluid and open for anyone to step forward.
Read more at http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2011/05/donald-trumps-poll-numbers-collapse-1st-to-5th/#Qous6wFjqaEggc50.99
Cruz has been going to Iowa sine 2013. He spent a lot of time there.
3) What scared Trump wasn’t Cruz, but Rubio.
Then why was he focusing all his attacks on Cruz?
Since 2013.
Could be.
I'm no big Trump supporter, but Iowa is completely irrelevant to the Republican race. Last night the ghouls on PMSNBC were lamenting how poor Trump was going to bounce back from this and recover.
He bounces back by winning New Halpshire by 20 points, and a majority of the other 49 states. The only consequence from last night is that Cruz gets 6 delegates and Trump gets 5. Whoop-tee-doo.
The media's fascination with this silly caucus process in Iowa overstates its importance by a factor of 1,000.
“We told you Trump guys that he had no organization on the ground, just a web site. And we also told you that Cruz’ organization on the ground was second to none”
And what did that net him? All of that organization, and money spent?
1 more delegate than Trump and Rubio. Boy that sure seems like it was totally worth it.
Donnie didn’t think he needed a ground game. He doesn’t have time now to get one for NH. Sarah sounded just like him with her rant against Steve King.
Predominantly because Trump is not a conservative.
We’ll get back with you after New Hampshire.
“Iowa means nothing”
I am fairly certain that would not be the message on FR if Trump had pulled off a win in Iowa instead of tying for 3rd with Rubio.
Ted Cruz did a good job and he won!
GO TED CRUZ! VOTE TED CRUZ!
Yup, Trump spent probably a tenth of what Cruz spent and got almost the same number of delegates. It shows Cruz isn’t as a great a manager of resources as Trump is.
1 delegate and a swing in momentum. The intangible was the biggest prize up.
You attack the bigger target, and that was and is Cruz. Rubio will get his turn. The people can’t process three-way contests. One domino at a time, for public consumption.
“Then why was he focusing all his attacks on Cruz?”
Because if Trump wins Iowa, he takes away any momentum Cruz would have going into NH and SC. Since Iowa to Trump was a throwaway, it makes sense to go after the evangelical rather than the establishment candidate who hasn’t won there since 2000.
Rubio is a distant 2nd there. Cruz is nowhere to be seen."
Have you seen the polls in New Hampshire?
According to the RCP average, it has:
Trump 33.2
Cruz 11.5
Kasich 11.5
Bush 10.3
Rubio 9.5
So while there is no question that Trump has a commanding lead, Rubio is not a distant 2nd, he is a distance 5th.
And the assertion that Cruz is "nowhere to be seen" is laughably false. He is in second place right now.
Then you add this little sour grapes comment "we can finally stop wasting time on a state that will vote for the Democrats in the fall anyway" when you should be aware that the same assertion could be made of New Hampshire, who hasn't voted for a Republican candidate since 2000. Iowa last voted for a Republican candidate in 2004.
I know it can be hard to actually use facts to argue, but please try.
I expect Rubio to be the nominee come November.
Banned Words:
“Evangelicals”
“Surge”
“Caucus”
Interesting Fact:
43% of Iowans identify themselves as Socialists. WTF is wrong with the state of Iowa?
So a second to none ground game got Cruz 6 delegates to Trump's 5, out of over 2,200 yet to be cast for the nomination.
Yeah, Cruz won big, ha.
What a joke. Iowa is irrelevant.
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.