(bolding added)
I mostly agree, but why do you think Trump first, followed by Cruz, then Kasich would be bad for Kasich? I think it would give him a significant bump in credibility.
There is room for one or two “insurgents” and one or two “mainstreams” moving forward, especially if they differ as much as Cruz v Trump and Rubio v Kasich. A tie, even a Sanderesque virtual one, for the mainstream lane, would give him the free exposure that he needs and prevent the coronation of Rubio as the sole owner of that lane. OTOH if Rubio is the sole mainstream lane contender finishing in the top three, Trump and Cruz one-two, with a meaningful gap to fourth? Maybe some would keep going but the race is then down to three with major advantage Rubio.
IOW Rubio does not need to win but he needs to lead the mainstreams, and if by a few points, he is sitting pretty, especially if both Trump and Cruz emerge viable, as they likely will.
Kasich needs at least a virtual tie with Rubio for third.
I choose Gilmore for last place, but just barely behind Fiorina.
If he gets as close as Rubio did, yes, but if it’s something like Trump 35, Cruz 25, Kasich 15, then I just don’t think that gets it done. Not because it’s not credible, it is, but because unlike Rubio and Bush, Kasich doesn’t have resources to continue the fight and it’s unlikely that just getting 15% would bring those resources in. So yeah, he’d probably get SOME momentum heading into SC and NV, but without much money he wouldn’t get very far.
Rubio 24%
Trump 23%
Kasich 19%
Cruz 10%
For the Dems I’m going out on a limb and saying:
Sanders 51%
Clinton 45%
Trump 27%
Kasich 26%
Rubio 17%
Last: Santorum
Trump 26 %
Rubio 24 %
Cruz 16 %
Last place will be Jim Gilmore.
Do independents who support Sanders see an impending Sanders blow out and decide to vote to impact the GOP process instead?
They are correct that he will still win the state without them … who would they vote for if they decide to have their votes matter more by voting in the more up in the air GOP primary instead?
How much less of a blow out would his victory be if many of those voters are no-shows in the Democratic side? I don’t think it would drop so low as single digits but given that this is a friendly of turf as he is likely to ever find dropping into single digits would not be the win he is looking for.
Sanders supporters are going to stick with Sanders. Given expectations, Sanders has to blow Clinton away in NH. If she makes it close then it counts as a win in the perception game.
Aren’t NH GOP a bunch of minarchist psychos? That bodes well for Cruz, or maybe Paul, who is the more principled minarchist.
I have done no research and these numbers are arbitrary, because I don’t care, I just wanted to ask if they really are all anti-government psychos up there:
Bush 21%
Cruz 17%
Christie 13%
last: Carson
It’s hard to call a state where people are so well off a land of anti-government psychos. They do pretty well for themselves without an income or sales tax or gun restrictions.
Not so sure about being psychos or not albeit the love for Trump makes me question their sanity but then again the fact that 31% of likely Democratic voters there call themselves “socialist” seems a bit at odds with being very anti-government.
Of course the no income or sales tax has to go hand in hand with the third highest property tax in the country, high “sin taxes”, high “meal and room” taxes, high corporate taxes, and high in-state college tuition. And not providing all that much in services.
As much as heroin and other drug abuse is being focused upon as a horrible issue in NH, needing Federal attention, the state of New Hampshire, unlike other states around them, does not invest in prevention or recovery very much themselves. I guess they feel that is Big Gubbermint’s job … or their motto actually is Live Free AND Die. Especially since they also have twice the suicide rate of neighboring Massachusetts. But hey, another neighbor, Bernie’s Vermont, has citizens who kill themselves even more frequently, so all’s good. They are well off … offing themselves that is.
The Sanders buffer is huge but it does seem to be softening …
Given the media attention to his two to one, or at least solid double digit lead, that it is a neighbor and well, very White, state, I ask again, how bad would it be for him to not hit a double digit win there? 538 agrees with you addie that he needs to win big, but is a game over moment if he “only wins by” 8 or 9?
I don’t think it will be game over for him.
After Super Tuesday it will be.
My guess for top 3:
Trump - 36.5%
Rubio - 18.2%
Cruz - 17.8%
Last - Gilmore <1%
Trump 28%
Rubio 15%
Kasich 14%
That’s kinda like saying, “White has a forced mate in seven. It’s not game over yet for Black, but it will be in seven moves.”
The thing is, NH is about as good as it gets for Bernie. Even a 10-12 point win would take the wind out of his sails. If he doesn’t win big in NH, it narrows the number of states where he has the potential to win at all. IMHO, if his margin of victory is anything less than mid-teens, it really ceases to be a race.
After watching Rubio shit his bed last night, I think you can put some butter on him because he is toast. NH will go like this:
Trump 35%
Kasich 15%
Cruz 12%
Christie 12%
Rubio 10%
Bush 6%
Carson 5%
Trump 32%
Rubio 19%
Cruz 14%
Kasich 13%
Bush 8%
Christie 5%