Posted on 02/02/2016 5:31:18 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
WEST DES MOINES, Iowa -- Donald Trump's supporters showed up at the Sheraton Monday night fully expecting their man to win the Iowa caucuses. And why shouldn't they? Trump had held a lead of varying sizes in 13 of the last 13 polls listed in the RealClearPolitics average of Iowa polls. How could that not win?
"Beats the hell out of me," said Michelle Tepley, a Trump fan from Waukee. "It doesn't make any sense."
"Sad," said Kimberly Hawn of West Des Moines.
"I don't know, I don't know," said Steve Brewer of Norwalk.
Months ago, before Trump took the lead in Iowa, a number of analysts argued that he wasn't a "good fit" for the state's Republican electorate, made up heavily of voters who describe themselves as born-again evangelical Christians. Then Trump took the lead and -- in the polls at least -- fought off challenges from Ben Carson and eventual winner Ted Cruz. So analysts thought Trump might not be so bad a fit after all.
But on caucus night, some of Trump's supporters returned to the old "bad fit" theory to explain Trump's surprise loss.
"It was the evangelicals," said Dick Stoffer of West Des Moines. "They've done it before -- they did it four years before with Santorum, they did it with Huckabee before that."
"The evangelicals," said Carol Anne Tracy of West Des Moines. "We've got a lot of evangelicals, and I just don't think they felt that [Trump] praised God enough."
"It's happened before -- the guy with the biggest Bible wins Iowa," said Ken Crow, a Tea Party activist from Winterset.
The caucus results -- Trump soundly beaten by Cruz, finishing barely ahead of Marco Rubio -- seemed to confirm another nagging suspicion about the Trump campaign: that it had not paid sufficient attention to turning out its voters.
Most of the people at the Trump event had attended caucuses earlier in the evening. At those caucuses, the presiding officer asked whether there was a representative from each campaign present to speak, and, if not, whether anyone attending would like to speak on a particular candidate's behalf. At the caucus I attended, in Pleasant Hill, a suburb just east of Des Moines, there was no one to speak for Trump -- no representative of the campaign -- and no voter willing to stand up and speak on his behalf. (The precinct ended in a Cruz landslide: 110 votes for the Texas senator, versus 36 for Trump and 34 for Rubio.)
At the Sheraton, some Trump supporters had similar stories.
"We were at a caucus and Trump didn't even have anyone there to speak for him," one man told me.
"That's insane," added a man nearby.
“And the assertion that Cruz is “nowhere to be seen” is laughably false”
Oh I’m sooooo sorry I goofed and said Rubio instead of Kasich, whom you so “factually” forgot to mention is tied with Cruz. And with the press talking about Rubio non-stop, I can only imagine that his numbers will be the ones shifting up.
“when you should be aware that the same assertion could be made of New Hampshire,”
NH has an actual NORMAL voting process. Not this “hey let’s pick whomever because we’re Iowa and special” stuff we get out of them every 4 years, just to end up with that person losing in the end. There is nothing “sour grapes” about it. Only an idiot seriously thinks that system makes any sense. But it gets Iowa millions in revenue every 4 years, and no one is willing to get them out of the first spot.
“...who hasn’t voted for a Republican candidate since 2000. Iowa last voted for a Republican candidate in 2004.”
Oh.....Well that means what? That both states mean nothing? Bush barely won the state in 04.
Boy I hope you are on the money. Write in Trump if Rubio is the media pick. At least we will feel better.
Nice! Go Trump!
Initally I called this election for Cruz and Santorum because of the many reports that Trump had no groumd game and his flippant dismissal of the idea.
Trumps idea of campaigning is doing a top down retailing brand name sale buiilt around personality not principles. Using the MSM, tv oommercials, and rallys but not doing any personal one on one tours which he thinks is a waste of time.
Think about it. The most evangelical state and almost half are socialists. Wait until they poll the other states. President Sanders
Right lol. And last night Bernie was already talking about the Revolution he was bringing to the table. I thought Obama already had the head start on that. Revolt against the Constitution, laws and country.
And those who are rabid Trump supporters wonder why they are sometimes criticized for their lack of grasp of politics.
Iowa did two very important things in this race. It destroyed two “truths” at one time.
First, it harmed Trump’s subconscious message that he was a winner. Winners win, as it has been said, and he encouraged that motto. It makes sense, an air of inevitability is the most powerful force in an election. Bush had it before Trump jumped in the game. Clinton had it before the caucus last night on the Democrats side. And Trump cultivated it in October/November last year. Last night slowed his victory train down, and now he can’t portray the image of an unstoppable force.
Second, it destroyed the theme that Cruz couldn’t win. That has been a constant refrain from his detractor. “Yes, he says all the right things, but what has he done? He hasn’t had any victories! He can’t beat Clinton in the general election.” That would have picked up steam if Trump had won Iowa. Cruz put that theme to rest last night.
I’ve heard, right here on this thread, that all of Cruz’s work only got him one more delegate. (For example, in the comment I am replying to.) But Cruz hasn’t just been preparing the ground game in Iowa. He had two bus tours of the south this summer. He had been building a ground game in all of the Super Tuesday states. He has almost twice as much money on hand as Rubio, and has been building his ground game for months and months, which means he is well prepared to fight beyond South Carolina. No candidate, other that Trump, is similarly situated. His win in Iowa last night means that Cruz will be one of the last two or three standing. That puts him in a very good position.
The public record is there to see for anyone who doesn't want to deceive himself.
Sales resistance used to be a virtue.
This was simply suppose to be Donalds pre-inauguration party.
A loser who helps of Vets? Really now.
It goes further, Cruz is an open-border, amnesty loving, GOPe establishment RINO.
What must be in their Kool-Aid?
Yes. If you judge New Hampshire by the same criteria as Iowa, both states mean nothing.
Of course, narrative, momentum, press attention, and other intangibles mean a lot in politics.
What if TV was flooded with those gabillionaires (that ARE beginning to show up) with that message
Hi ... I made my money bu working hard and learning how to successfully conduct business ... you LIKE my (whatever product) ... and I learned how to serve you because of Donald Trump's influence and leadership"
Looks like Donald throwing a fit about FOX News and taking his ball home, missing the last debate, didn’t play well in Iowa?
That's significant. It shows either that Trump wasn't even trying or that in some places he was such a non-starter that he couldn't get a single person loyal enough to take the heat. If the latter then not that big a deal, Iowa is a tough room for a New Yorker. But if he didn't even make an effort it brings back the suspicion that Trump isn't a serious candidate, that he's just doing this on a lark.
I wonder if Trump even knew that it was essential to have someone at each caucus willing to speak for the campaign? That too would be a bad omen.
shell-shock?
Trump spent less money.
Didn’t have to camp out there for a year.
Gain, lost, and gained the lead in Iowa polls several times.
Still walks away with only one delegate less than Cruz.
So who got the better end of the deal?
Iowa is done...it means little, ask Huckabee & Santorum, etc. Donald Trump...ya gave it a good shot ad got tons of votes...just not enough. This race is just in the first lap....there are 49 more laps to go!!! Failure and loss are good for the sole & heart of the achievers.....ONWARD,....Donald Trump!!! Time to get into the pits and make some adjustments for the long run to the nomination!!! GO DONALD TRUMP!!!
Speaking of Byron York, I ran across an article by him this morning. It contained a disturbing quote (made just after the Dec. 16 (?) debate:
“I’m here tonight, and I want to make this super clear to everybody, so put me on the record on this: Sen. Cruz unequivocally, unequivocally, does not support legalization,” national campaign chairman Chad Sweet told the Washington Examiner’s David Drucker after the debate. When Drucker asked what Cruz would do with the 11 or 12 million immigrants in the U.S. illegally, Sweet answered, “His plan is attrition through enforcement. He’s following the rule of law...If we enforce the law, ultimately there will be attrition through enforcement. And in the end, though, what the senator is trying to do, as well, is save and expand our legal immigration system.”
I thought Cruz was a pure conservative. We import over a million legal immigrants per year. Why is he so interested in importing more democrat voters?
And this: Yeah BUT: Cruz won't have them in NH or SC.
Is that suggesting that there are no Christians living in either of those states? Is that kind like calling them STUPID......
That didn't work in Iowa, but keep up the name calling and don't be surprised what NH and SC think of those insults, worked so well in Iowa. But hey, I don't want to be the one to tell you what to do. go for it.
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.