The delegate count is not relevant. No one even cared how many delegates were up for grabs until the media broke it out, and no one cares (or even knows) how many delegates are necessary for the nomination even now.
The significance of the caucus is simply optics and momentum. Trump is a brand, not a platform, and his brand is now tarnished because he did not win. I believe that New Hampshire is now a must win for him, and I concede that his win seems pretty likely given his big poll numbers there. But he has lost momentum and the aura of invincibility, and since he is a brand that is a significant loss.
Cruz guys like me can’t get too cocky about it because you’re right on the ground game point. Trump’s approach to the Iowa campaign was effective enough to collect 24% of the votes, and Cruz’s approach is not scaleable to the entire nation, and perhaps not scaleable to any other location. There is little evidence that the lengthy and expensive investment Cruz made in Iowa tells us anything about the future campaign.
But the simple fact is that the guy who calls himself a winner is *not* the winner today. The media is no longer covering him as a winner, and he’s not acting like a winner. I think he likely will be a winner in NH next week, but he’s damaging his brand, and his chances, even now.
Interesting spin, but... ugh, no. Trump, a New York guy, with flash and sass, comes into IA, where Cruz has been tub-thumping and preach-a-fying for two years, and both are locked into a threesome with an amnesty candidate and you say Trump's brand is tarnished. Ugh, again, no.
Fact is, Cruz could not put them away. I understand the polls. But the arm-twisting system and the easy dirty-tricks availability make IA more than just show up and vote. But, with Cruz tactics he still could not put the competition away. IA is the best Cruz will ever do and should be the worst that Trump will ever do. So who is tarnished?