Can we now change Jeb! to Jeb… ?
Rubio has rebounded with a vengeance. In terms of the media narrative, 3-5-2 is probably better than 3-2-1.
Kasich is the moderate, and Carson is at the bottom, so that leaves Cruz as Rubio’s only real competition at this point.
I’m not surprised that Jeb dropped out. Placing 4th in a Bush family colony is awfully embarrassing.
Let’s dispel with this fiction that Marco Rubio isn’t an extremist . . .
Ted Cruz just said he defied expectations. Which is true. I don’t think anybody was expecting him to be looking at a third place finish in a state like South Carolina.
Looking at the current totals on the official South Carolina results, I’m doing pretty good on my prediction from page 1.
My Prediction Current
Trump 34% 33%
Cruz 29% 22%
Rubio 14% 22%
Kasich 9% 8%
Jeb! 8% 8%
Carson 6% 7%
Maybe I should go into this predicting business…
I am a bit surprised that Rubio did so well after the debate fiasco, and that Cruz did not do as well as I thought he would, throwing all the red meat at the S. Carolina voters. March 1st will be a damn interesting day.
How were your predictions?
There’s an even more hard-boiled pragmatic reason: he’s broke.
I’d go with JEB(:
I think this[sup]1[/sup] is more appropriate.
[sup]1[/sup]Jeb
So is it clear at this point that Trump takes all 50 delegates? WaPo shows him with 44 and the Green Papers with 47, but it seems like all the numbers are in. Can anyone help with the math?
Just now rewatching Rubio’s speech from tonight and I’m still not buying he is a threat to the Dem nominee. The media is anointing him as the establishment candidate but god grief, he is so so so bad on television.
He still sounds like a robot, looks far too young and he has the absolute WORST case of dry mouth I’ve ever seen on a public speaker. I really think Hillary would make mincemeat out of him in a head to head race.
Sure, in the same way Nixon made mincemeat out of Kennedy. Rubio is going to look better, be more likeable, be more future oriented, and have a better message. Clinton’s command of detail is not enough to overcome her dishonesty, tiredness, coldness, and lack of message.
The AP district-level vote count shows Trump winning all seven districts - he took the one close one (the one along the southern part of the state) by 2% - so he should win all 50 delegates.
Donald Trump is going to be the Republican nominee for POTUS, holy shit I swear we live in a fucking cartoon world.
Yeah, right. Because making gay marriage illegal again is very very “future oriented” and sure to make him more likeable.
Not to mention deporting law abiding young people who have lived in this country since they were toddlers and have little or no connection to the places they were born is certainly a “better message”.
Gotta get rid of all those dirty Messicans.
Am I the only one who thinks something is rotten in the media?
I was vaguely curious what the actual numbers were in the South Calinky voting. Despite several clicks I’ve not found them yet (don’t worry: I’ll either find them or lose interest); but I did stumble on one statistic:
[QUOTE=N.Y. Times]
In South Carolina, late-deciding voters made up 45 percent of the Republican electorate, and they uniformly scorned Mr. Trump.
[/QUOTE]
Well that’s interesting! 100% of “late-deciding” SoCal voters scorned (which means more than didn’t vote for?) Mr. Trump?
(At least I think “uniformly” means “100%.” I didn’t actually check Merriam-Webster’s; I’m afraid it’s not up-to-date with Post-modern English.)
It’s better than open borders, which is the Democratic policy now, they just haven’t made it explicit yet.
That isn’t true whether you will admit it or not. But your support of the GOP’s call for antigay discrimination is noted.
In case you are actually interested in the numbers rather than pointing out the inaccurate word choice in a NYT article about Bush dropping out - 538 had relayed the following from Fox’s reporting of exit polls:
“Overwhelmingly” would have been a better choice.
But yes media wants to create narratives and spin accordingly. Whatever is or is not accurate the narrative of an unstoppable Trump blow out from here won’t keep people clicking. And the only path that is other than that includes the presumption that Trump has a solid floor and a firm ceiling, that those who have not already decided for him, won’t, and likely a contested convention in which Trump enters with a plurality of the delegates but not enough to win and others pool forces against him.
addie, you are regressing again. No, “open borders” is not a Democratic policy, not of the current President nor of any of the candidates; it is a GOP promoted delusion of Democratic policy. OTOH the policies cited by Kolak are precisely what Rubio has endorsed in his own words. Bernie, if anything, has a track record of wanting to be sure that American workers are protected from the threat of illegal immigrants undercutting their wages, and Hillary voted for the border fence, even if she now says that the fence should be less a physical barrier than a virtual one based on the use of other technologies … she is clear that securing the borders is a must, and that immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship is also a must.
So, they start with amnesty and then work their way to open borders? Connect the dot, people!
When you basically believe that deportation should be off the table unless they are criminal, which is actually Clinton’s policy, then it’s effectively open borders.
It should also be noted that the top law enforcement official in the country believes that everyone has a right to work here regardless of their legal status.
Of course, Democrats know how toxic their position is with non-Latino voters, so Charles Schumer made sure to give her an opportunity to walk it back, which was entertaining and not very convincing:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2015/01/lynch-clarifies-answer-on-immigration-201761
Just admit that the Democrats now oppose deportation of non-criminals entirely.