|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
This is great for Rubio, though. Cruz winning in an evangelical state is no surprise, Trump has painted himself into a corner by claiming to be invincible while Rubio can showcase a result similar to Trump and Cruz in an unfavourable state to the party elite and demand that they line up behind him. Once the party forces the single digit crowd out of the way and throws its PR and financial might behind him, Rubio should have an easy time winning the nomination.
Clinton has also done enough to stop Sanders from gaining momentum. Without it, I can't imagine Sanders surviving February as the demographics are all wrong for him, and Iowa shows that he doesn't really beat Hillary among any other category besides young voters.
|
This is a big loss for Trump even if he wins NH. Carson and Paul supporters (4th and 5th) almost universally prefer Cruz/Rubio as a second choice.
|
On February 02 2016 11:59 GreenHorizons wrote:Anyone know how CNN went from 69% reporting to 63%? Show nested quote +On February 02 2016 11:59 frazzle wrote:
I haven't seen any good analysis on the nature of final precincts. Like, any chance pcts turn around due to demographics etc. Definitely on the Dem side. They favor Bernie as they are the more populous and college areas.
Des Moines says hello. It's going to remain roughly as it is until the end.
|
On February 02 2016 12:00 Ghanburighan wrote:This is great for Rubio, though. Cruz winning in an evangelical state is no surprise, Trump has painted himself into a corner by claiming to be invincible while Rubio can showcase a result similar to Trump and Cruz in an unfavourable state to the party elite and demand that they line up behind him. Once the party forces the single digit crowd out of the way and throws its PR and financial might behind him, Rubio should have an easy time winning the nomination. Clinton has also done enough to stop Sanders from gaining momentum. Without it, I can't imagine Sanders surviving February as the demographics are all wrong for him, and Iowa shows that he doesn't really beat Hillary among any other category besides young voters.
yeah I can see rubio doing well as the not crazy option. I don't want to say trumps out since its one state but the way his campaign is I don't see him doing a ton. if he can shrug this off and win a couple though hell be back in it.
|
I want GH to go full Karl Rove 
Edit: Trump is by no means done.
|
On February 02 2016 11:59 GreenHorizons wrote:Anyone know how CNN went from 69% reporting to 63%? Show nested quote +On February 02 2016 11:59 frazzle wrote:
I haven't seen any good analysis on the nature of final precincts. Like, any chance pcts turn around due to demographics etc. Definitely on the Dem side. They favor Bernie as they are the more populous and college areas.
maybe the updated dem number instead of rep number. republican precincts are about at 62-32 percent atm
|
To hear what $100 million sounds like as it is flushed down the toilet head to the Bush camp. Hasn't even cracked 4 percent...
|
Trump may not have been a sure shot to win, but it has to hurt him. Cruz gets a boost, but he will fizzle. Rubio is justifiably making this a 3 person run in Iowa. He definitely is the 'winner' tonight.
|
pbs just updated it to make hillary/sanders closer. this could get interesting. 78 percent reported though. hopefully we dont have the situation where 3 weeks later we learn the wrong person got credited as the winner (in either party)
hillary at 50.3 Bernie at 49.
|
Karl Rove is amazing as a character study. One day they will make an Oscar winning movie about his self delusion. Probably played by Tom Cruise once he makes the transition from action hero to tired old man.
|
On February 02 2016 12:03 Introvert wrote:I want GH to go full Karl Rove Edit: Trump is by no means done.
He's not done, but this is pretty much the worst possible outcome for his campaign that was in the realm of plausability. Underperforming his poll numbers substantially is not good, especially when Cruz and Rubio both took theirs over their knees and Rubio broke the numbers' backs.
These numbers demonstrate convincingly that coalescing behind Rubio is the establishment's best hope.
But the night (and the season) is young anyway.
|
On February 02 2016 12:03 Introvert wrote:I want GH to go full Karl Rove Edit: Trump is by no means done.
Haha Well it's a win already, it's not supposed to be so close.
|
538 and pbs with radically different polling numbers. pbs says trump up 3 percent on Rubio according to 538 its 1.7. weird.
|
On February 02 2016 12:09 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 02 2016 12:03 Introvert wrote:I want GH to go full Karl Rove Edit: Trump is by no means done. Haha Well it's a win already, it's not supposed to be so close.
don't deny me!
Edit: I have decided I am endorsing Sanders for Dem nominee.
+ Show Spoiler +
I want chaos in that primary.
|
On February 02 2016 12:09 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
538 and pbs with radically different polling numbers. pbs says trump up 3 percent on Rubio according to 538 its 1.7. weird.
Noticed that as well. Something wacky going on. They also talked about 64% reporting when it's 62...
|
|
|
|
|
On February 02 2016 12:15 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
O'Malley will be missed.
O'Whooley?
|
Bernie will likely lose by a little, but that's ok
|
We're getting to the point where percentages changing are misleading in the Dem race, as inflating numbers of votes counted makes the percentages converge. To see whether Sanders is catching up, one needs to count the "votes". That difference has been ~15 for the last 30% of precints. At the highest point, Clinton had 18 votes over Sanders, now it's around 14-15. But the lack of significant change in that difference tells the story.
Edit: As I wrote this, Sanders gained 2 votes. Might be interesting after all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
