# The Race for the GOP Nomination - Post-Thanksgiving Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 28, 2015, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819 "2015-11-28T12:40:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 26
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2016, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/501 "2016-01-23T16:49:28Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > bTW, I’m surprised that Trump’s age hasn’t been an issue. The guy is about as old as Reagan was when he was running in 1980. People - at least, people whose jobs and lives don’t put a daily toll on their bodies - are living longer and staying healthy longer than they were 35 years ago. Trump’s 68, and 68 just isn’t as old as it used to be. > [@](#): > > Then again, given all the other stuff to talk about with Trump I guess it’s not surprising that his age hasn’t been an issue. But I do wonder if the early signs of dementia are being hidden by his bombast. Seriously, what would make you think that? > [@BobLibDem](#): > > At this point, I think Trump has a more secure grip on his nomination than Hillary does on hers. I would have to disagree. Hillary can spot Bernie Iowa and New Hampshire, and she’s still solidly in the lead in terms of her prospects for winning. He’s got to win both just to have a chance; a split and he’s dead. With Trump, it’s still not clear whether he’ll win Iowa, and what the effect would be on his NH support if he doesn’t. I’d still want odds in a bet on Trump; I’d be willing to give odds in a bet on Hillary. > [@The\_Stainless\_Steel\_Rat](#): > > I suggest a new strategy, Repubs: let the Wookie win. If he wins in his Wookie season, he’d be Wookie of the Year for sure! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Lantern](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/d26b3c/32.png) [@Lantern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lantern)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2016, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/502 "2016-01-23T17:16:53Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > bTW, I’m surprised that Trump’s age hasn’t been an issue. The guy is about as old as Reagan was when he was running in 1980. > > Then again, given all the other stuff to talk about with Trump I guess it’s not surprising that his age hasn’t been an issue. But I do wonder if the early signs of dementia are being hidden by his bombast. Yeah I have been wondering about that too. I was watching some old videos of Trump like [this one](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI)on Oprah in 1988. His argument about America being beaten is uncannily familiar but he is so much more fluent and articulate than he is today. The 1988 Trump would be a much better candidate than the 2016 one. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2016, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/503 "2016-01-23T18:53:02Z")
Trump Clinton and Sanders are all pretty much contemporaries. Clinton is 8 months younger and Sanders 4 and a half years older. I do not think age will be much of an issue. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2016, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/504 "2016-01-25T16:00:18Z")
Santorum, who’s younger but barely registering in the polls, admits he might be packing it in soon: [Rick Santorum admits his campaign may be coming to a close](http://www.aol.com/article/2016/01/25/rick-santorum-admits-his-campaign-may-be-coming-to-a-close/21302360/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D1474754702) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2016, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/505 "2016-01-25T16:34:19Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > **Santorum,** who’s younger but barely registering in the polls, admits he might be **packing it in** soon: [News, Politics, Sports, Mail & Latest Headlines - AOL.com](http://www.aol.com/article/2016/01/25/rick-santorum-admits-his-campaign-may-be-coming-to-a-close/21302360/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D1474754702) No . . . no . . . must resist . . . ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/506 "2016-01-26T01:10:55Z")
I can’t imagine \*\*EH \*\*did that by accident. It’s just too too perfect. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/507 "2016-01-26T02:18:30Z")
Is that some sort of sniggering insult to Packers fans? Rather risky, as several of them can read. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/508 "2016-01-26T02:19:21Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > I can’t imagine \*\*EH \*\*did that by accident. It’s just too too perfect. Heheheheh. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/509 "2016-01-26T02:22:16Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Is that some sort of sniggering insult to Packers fans? Rather risky, as several of them can read. Just in case you honestly don’t get that truly masterful joke, read this [Campaign for the neologism "santorum" - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism) and get back to us. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/510 "2016-01-26T16:25:37Z")
Kasich is endorsed by the Boston Globe, Christie by the Boston Herald: > **[Boston Globe backs Kasich, Herald endorses Christie | CNN Politics](https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/25/politics/john-kasich-chris-christie-boston-globe-herald-endorsement/)** > > Boston's two largest newspapers on Monday split their endorsements between a pair of Republicans running in the establishment lane of the 2016 contest: Ohio Gov. John Kasich and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/511 "2016-01-26T17:05:03Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Kasich is endorsed by the Boston Globe, Christie by the Boston Herald: > > [http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/25/politics/john-kasich-chris-christie-boston-globe-herald-endorsement/](http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/25/politics/john-kasich-chris-christie-boston-globe-herald-endorsement/) That and 5 bucks will get you coffee at Starbucks. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/512 "2016-01-26T17:06:45Z")
I would prefer to maintain my unblemished record of never giving Starbucks a fucking dime. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/513 "2016-01-26T17:51:59Z")
Jim Geraghty of National Review finds that the GOP polling might be worthless, since it projects turnout three times the record set in 2008. > **[GOP Presidential Primary Turnout Is Going to Be… How High? | National Review](https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pollsters-are-counting-too-many-likely-voters/)** > > Yesterday, I pointed out the “likely caucus-goer” screens on the recent Iowa polls seemed at least a little loose – if you project out the caucus participation rate from the sample to the entire po… While I’m obviously hesitant to shout “skewed polls!”, wouldn’t that kind of GOP turnout also translate to the general election? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/514 "2016-01-26T18:02:23Z")
If the Republicans who are totally about Trump are disappointed when Kasich romps to victory, crushing all resistance…they will blame “the Establishment”. Cruz fanatics slimed by The Donald likely will do the same thing. Or not, speculating on their “reasoning” seems a dicey proposition. (Post lengthened to be needlessly annoying.) ---
**Author:** ![Jas09](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d07c76/32.png) [@Jas09](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jas09)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/515 "2016-01-26T18:15:33Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Jim Geraghty of National Review finds that the GOP polling might be worthless, since it projects turnout three times the record set in 2008. > > [Pollsters Are Counting Too Many 'Likely Voters' | National Review](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/430321/pollsters-are-counting-too-many-likely-voters) > > While I’m obviously hesitant to shout “skewed polls!”, wouldn’t that kind of GOP turnout also translate to the general election? I think your seeing the common mistake of "journalists trying to do math’. Is it not hard to realize that the kind of people that answer political polls have a higher “likely to caucus” value than the population as a whole? From what I can Ruffini (who Geraghty cites) took the US adult population, divided it by the number of samples in poll (1002) and multiplied it by the number of registered voters that reported as Republican or leaning Republican (405). Clearly that is nonsense. As a sanity check, here is a poll from 2008 around this time also from CNN: “The poll surveyed 1,192 adults. Of 974 registered voters, 500 described themselves as Democrats and 412 identified themselves as Republicans.” One might note that 500/1192 = 41.9% while 405/1002 = 40.4% IMO, nothing to see here. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/516 "2016-01-26T18:56:14Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Jim Geraghty of National Review finds that the GOP polling might be worthless, since it projects turnout three times the record set in 2008. > > [Pollsters Are Counting Too Many 'Likely Voters' | National Review](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/430321/pollsters-are-counting-too-many-likely-voters) > > While I’m obviously hesitant to shout “skewed polls!”, wouldn’t that kind of GOP turnout also translate to the general election? Thank goodness I learned long ago not to drink liquids while reading your posts. But come on, THREE TIMES the turnout in the general election? Seems quite a bit excessive to me. Republicans are notoriously reliable voters, I just can’t see triple their number voting no matter how high the excitement. In fact, I think what’s left of the moderate Republicans will either stay home, vote for Hillary, or waste a vote on a third party. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2016, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/517 "2016-01-26T20:12:10Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Jim Geraghty of National Review finds that the GOP polling might be worthless, since it projects turnout three times the record set in 2008. > > [Pollsters Are Counting Too Many 'Likely Voters' | National Review](http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/430321/pollsters-are-counting-too-many-likely-voters) > > While I’m obviously hesitant to shout “skewed polls!”, wouldn’t that kind of GOP turnout also translate to the general election? Jim Geraghty of National Review clearly has the brains of a turnip. First of all, the point of the likely-voter screen _isn’t to estimate the number of likely voters._ (If you’ve been making a living as a political pundit for years, and haven’t figured that out, _I want your fucking job_. What a fine life it must be, to be a member of a well-paying profession where ignorance is no hindrance to success. But I digress.) Its purpose is to weed out a bunch of _unlikely_ voters, thereby making the remaining sample more representative of those who will actually show up next Monday night. Second, if Geraghty thought that having three times as many ‘likely voters’ in the sample as there ought to be was skewing the poll results, the obvious way to check this would be to look at the results of similar polls in 2012. Did they get the number of likely voters right, or were they also off by some large multiple? If the latter, was the poll in the right ballpark in terms of candidate vote share, or not? This really isn’t hard. Unless you want to spout off about something without doing the ten minutes of Googling it might take to see if what you’re saying makes any sense at all. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2016, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/518 "2016-01-31T04:30:15Z")
_New York Times_ has endorsed Kasich. I’m sure that has no impact in Iowa, but would it have any impact in New Hampshire? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2016, 10:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/519 "2016-01-31T10:10:06Z")
Probably a bit less of an impact than whatever comes out of Iowa. And the Iowa Oracle has weighed in: [Selzer & Co.](http://media.bloomberg.com/bb/avfile/r1OvZ1NeDjnY) has Trump 28, Cruz 23, Rubio 15, Carson 10, Paul 5, and everyone else 3 or less. This poll was taken January 26-29, so that only included one day of post-debate polling. Sample of 602 likely GOP caucus voters, MOE +/- 4%. Upsides and downsides: 71% of Trump’s supporters say their minds are made up, v. 61% for Cruz and 47% for Rubio. But Trump was the second choice of only 7%, v. 17% for Cruz and 20% for Rubio. Trump’s and Rubio’s support have both been increasing over the past several weeks: in mid-December, Selzer had Trump’s support at 21% and Rubio’s at 10%. But the number of people considering Rubio for their second choice has grown, while the same number for Trump has shrunk: in December, he’d been the first choice of 21% and the second choice of 14%; now it’s 28 and 7, which suggests that he’s firming up his support among voters who’d been considering him, but not widening his potential base. So Trump’s support in Iowa really is what it is at this point; the only question about it is the perpetual ‘will his supporters turn out’ question. While Rubio’s support could still go a ways in either direction: he’s the second choice of a lot of people, but his support is soft even among those who have him as their first choice. And Cruz is somewhere in between. And of course Cruz is the only one of the top 3 whose support has been decreasing, down from 31% in December. Carson seems to have arrested his slide. He won’t win, but he’ll probably still get 9-10% of the vote. Other than Rubio, none of the ‘Establishment lane’ candidates appears to have any prospects of getting a bounce out of Iowa to help them in NH. Rand might, though. And of course, Monday night will be the end of the line for Huckabee and Santorum, whose hopes are on an Iowa miracle that won’t happen. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2016, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819/520 "2016-01-31T23:29:16Z")
Will it also be the end of the line for O’Malley? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-race-for-the-gop-nomination-post-thanksgiving-thread/738819.md?page=27)