Started By
Message
re: Lets Talk Politics
Posted on 2/3/16 at 12:09 pm to cokebottleag
Posted on 2/3/16 at 12:09 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
One big takeaway from Iowa is that Cruz won by getting almost only the 'very conservative' vote, per exit polls. Rubio and Trump split the 'somewhat conservative' and 'moderate' groups, with Trump doing ok in the 'very conservative' segment as well.
This, my friend, is bullshite. You say that Cruz got "almost only the 'very conservative' vote, while Trump did "ok in the 'very conservative' segment"
Trump won 35% of the 'very conservative' votes, and that's "ok", but Cruz winning 31% of the 'somewhat conservative' votes is peanuts? That's unsupportable.
And Cruz isn't Santorum or Huckabee, who were social cons but fiscal moderates (maybe even liberal in the case of Huck). Cruz is an out and out fiscal conservative. And a constitutionalist.
You say Cruz can't win w/o huge turnout (which previously had been the way Trump was going to win) with very conservative voters or evangelicals. You simply assume that isn't going to happen, despite the fact that you just saw Cruz stand conventional wisdom on it's head and spin it like a top by winning Iowa despite opposing ethanol mandates.
Cruz has spent a lot of money in Iowa, but not as much as Jeb! or even Rubio, and Cruz still has a lot of money.
Trump is not going to have any better organization in subsequent states than he did in Iowa. And he's not going to spend more money, either. He doing this on the cheap.
Cruz isn't skipping NH. In fact he already held a town hall meeting in Windham, NH yesterday. We'll see what happens in NH.
South Carolina didn't go to Gingrich because he had multiple marriages. It went to Gingrich because of strong debates and being a staunch conservative... exactly the description of Cruz. Gingrich also campaigned against the "elites" in the media and Washington. Who else does that sound like?
I don't see SC being Rubio's last stand. I think he's going to have enough GOPe money to continue at least the SEC primary, and maybe even to Florida. Jeb! is not going to win, but he's got so much money he may take Rubio out purely for spite.
I agree that Trump easily takes Nevada.
By the time of the SEC primary, Carson will be gone. The vast majority of his support will go to Cruz. Rand is already gone, and Cruz will get the bulk of his support. Remember, Cruz is the leading 2nd choice for voters currently supporting other candidates. Trump is the opposite.
The people who say Cruz has no path to the nomination are also the people who said that Trump would fade, Hillary was inevitable, Jeb! was inevitable, and you can't run agianst ethanol mandates.
1
Posted on 2/3/16 at 12:28 pm to Mirthomatic
Yeah, we get it. You love Cruz. 
But throwing out stats about who got what vote is asinine when prior surveys failed miserably to predict the outcome. At this point, is not safe to assume anything.
------------
Ok....but then you follow that with this:
Common' man!
But throwing out stats about who got what vote is asinine when prior surveys failed miserably to predict the outcome. At this point, is not safe to assume anything.
------------
quote:
By the time of the SEC primary, Carson will be gone. The vast majority of his support will go to Cruz.
Ok....but then you follow that with this:
quote:
The people who say Cruz has no path to the nomination are also the people who said that Trump would fade, Hillary was inevitable, Jeb! was inevitable, and you can't run agianst ethanol mandates.
Common' man!
Posted on 2/3/16 at 12:44 pm to greenbastard
quote:
But throwing out stats about who got what vote is asinine when prior surveys failed miserably to predict the outcome. At this point, is not safe to assume anything.
How is it "asinine" to use stats when responding to a point that is based on (more vague) stats? Answer: not at all. Go back and re-read the point cokebottle was making.
quote:
Common' man!
You're going to have to elaborate on this.
Posted on 2/3/16 at 12:50 pm to cokebottleag
quote:
One big takeaway from Iowa is that Cruz won by getting almost only the 'very conservative' vote, per exit polls. Rubio and Trump split the 'somewhat conservative' and 'moderate' groups, with Trump doing ok in the 'very conservative' segment as well.
Cruz dominated the very conservative 44-21, but he was also 19 & 9 for somewhat conservative and moderate. 3rd place in both, but neither Trump or Rubio had that kind of lead in either. I believe there will be a big turnout of conservatives because this is the first time in a long time someone like Cruz has run. Guys like Huckaboo & Broke arse Rick aren't in his league.
quote:
almost all of his funding there
Did he? They just released 4th quarter donations.
quote:
Cruz is skipping NH and going directly to SC, where he will spend the majority of the rest of his time (and FL). Rubio is moving to NH, where the pundits are saying he will surge.
Cruz has like 16-17 events in NH starting yesterday leading up to the primary. Unless you meant figuratively. Because Cruz aint winning the moderates up there. I personally don't like NH having such a big influence this early. I mean Kasich is running 2nd in some polls.
quote:
SC is going to be Rubio's last stand; if he can't win SC, he is probably done. Likewise for Cruz.
I can agree about Rubio, disagree about Cruz. He's built for Super Tuesday / SEC primary. Tejas has a lot of delegates.
quote:
Nevada is going to Trump.
Trump doesn't do great as you move west. His bread and butter is NE.
Posted on 2/3/16 at 12:52 pm to Mirthomatic
And just to be clear on those stats, 31% of Cruz's supporters claimed to be "somewhat conservative". 35% of Trumps voters claimed to be "very conservative".
In fact, doing the math, 31% of Cruz's 51,666 votes equals 16,016 votes.
35% of Trump's 45,427 votes equals 15,899 votes.
So Cruz actually did BETTER among "somewhat conservatives" than Trump did with "very conservatives", from a raw vote standpoint.
In fact, doing the math, 31% of Cruz's 51,666 votes equals 16,016 votes.
35% of Trump's 45,427 votes equals 15,899 votes.
So Cruz actually did BETTER among "somewhat conservatives" than Trump did with "very conservatives", from a raw vote standpoint.
Posted on 2/3/16 at 12:54 pm to Mirthomatic
Posted on 2/3/16 at 1:00 pm to Farmer1906
Thanks for the link. I'm pulling from this story:
[quote]LINK ]
Which looks at how a particular candidate's support broke down among veryconservative/somewhat/moderate
[quote]LINK ]
Which looks at how a particular candidate's support broke down among veryconservative/somewhat/moderate
Posted on 2/3/16 at 1:15 pm to Mirthomatic
quote:
How is it "asinine" to use stats when responding to a point that is based on (more vague) stats? Answer: not at all. Go back and re-read the point cokebottle was making.
I was more of talking to both of you.
quote:
You're going to have to elaborate on this.
You say Carson will be gone and all of his votes go to Cruz, but then you follow that by alluding that predictions are worthless, thus throwing your prior prediction right out of the window.
Posted on 2/3/16 at 1:26 pm to greenbastard
quote:
I was more of talking to both of you.
I see, but up til now, those were just surveys with sample sizes of 1000-2000, if they were good. Now we have a sample size of 180,000. Granted, it's all in one state, but I think it's not totally devoid of usefulness.
quote:
You say Carson will be gone and all of his votes go to Cruz, but then you follow that by alluding that predictions are worthless, thus throwing your prior prediction right out of the window.
I didn't say all predictions are worthless. I said that the people who made the (proven false) predictions I listed were probably the same ones saying Cruz has no path to the nomination.
Posted on 2/3/16 at 7:42 pm to greenbastard
I don't see all of Carson's votes going to Cruz. Why wouldn't they go to Rubio?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 2:54 am to Mirthomatic
I question somewhat the validity of a state like Iowa as a good barometer of a general election. After all, McCain won New Hampshire in the primaries, but that was not indicative of the eventual results.
The larger electoral states that one must carry are the real bread and butter. Granted, I think Texas is all but a given, but what about California and Florida? I do not believe Florida is a forgone conclusion. And I believe you can pretty much write off the Northeast -- Sanders or Hillary will carry those. I don't see Cruz or Rubio challenging. Trump... maybe.
I personally think Cruz would lose handily in both the Northeast and the West Coast. Coming back from such a deficit would be difficult at best, impossible at worst.
Cruz is an outsider within his own party, and in places like Ohio and Illinois, I don't think his brand would carry much weight. So, even if he carries the center red states, it's not going to be nearly enough. Even with Texas.
This particular issue has plagued the Republican Party for decades, but more so recently. I don't see it changing for someone like Cruz.
The larger electoral states that one must carry are the real bread and butter. Granted, I think Texas is all but a given, but what about California and Florida? I do not believe Florida is a forgone conclusion. And I believe you can pretty much write off the Northeast -- Sanders or Hillary will carry those. I don't see Cruz or Rubio challenging. Trump... maybe.
I personally think Cruz would lose handily in both the Northeast and the West Coast. Coming back from such a deficit would be difficult at best, impossible at worst.
Cruz is an outsider within his own party, and in places like Ohio and Illinois, I don't think his brand would carry much weight. So, even if he carries the center red states, it's not going to be nearly enough. Even with Texas.
This particular issue has plagued the Republican Party for decades, but more so recently. I don't see it changing for someone like Cruz.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 3:02 am to Farmer1906
I tell you what, it's astonishing how abysmal Jeb Bush has done, given his financial resources. If I was a heavy donor to the Bush camp, I'd be livid. To only get 2.8% of the vote, despite the heavy financing can only be an illustration of colossal mismanagement.
I know some of the people that managed Romney's campaign are managing Bush's, and the results seem to be on par (if not worse) than the last time.
Why the same people keep getting hired to lose can only be an exercise in failing upward. I think I would've avoided those previous camps like the plague, because clearly they have dropped the ball once again. Why he thought they would somehow miraculously find their feet under his watch display a complete and utter disconnect with reality.
I know some of the people that managed Romney's campaign are managing Bush's, and the results seem to be on par (if not worse) than the last time.
Why the same people keep getting hired to lose can only be an exercise in failing upward. I think I would've avoided those previous camps like the plague, because clearly they have dropped the ball once again. Why he thought they would somehow miraculously find their feet under his watch display a complete and utter disconnect with reality.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 6:00 am to CowTownReb
For the first time ever, there are more solidly GOP states than there are Dem states:
LINK
While I agree that a Cruz path to victory is no walk in the park, I would submit that the eventual Dem nominee is likely to be extremely weak, perhaps fatally so. Clinton might very well be facing indictment. Or you have Sanders the Socialist.
Add in that Cruz is tapping into the anti-establishment fervor that seems to be the prime motivator for many voters, and I think he's got a great shot.
LINK
While I agree that a Cruz path to victory is no walk in the park, I would submit that the eventual Dem nominee is likely to be extremely weak, perhaps fatally so. Clinton might very well be facing indictment. Or you have Sanders the Socialist.
Add in that Cruz is tapping into the anti-establishment fervor that seems to be the prime motivator for many voters, and I think he's got a great shot.
Posted on 2/4/16 at 6:02 am to CowTownReb
Posted on 2/4/16 at 7:38 am to CowTownReb
The sheer lunacy of the idiots downstairs on the poliboard (from all angles of the political spectrum) is truly a spectacle to behold 
Posted on 2/4/16 at 10:12 am to TbirdSpur2010
Storing this reversed GIF here for when the Trumpkin melt accelerates
Posted on 2/4/16 at 11:00 am to Iosh
This cannot be a good sign for Carson.
LINK
Edit: just saw the date. Guess this isn't news.
LINK
quote:
If the New Hampshire office of the pro-Ben Carson super PAC 2016 Committee felt a little empty Monday, that’s because everybody quit—and joined Ted Cruz’s campaign.
Edit: just saw the date. Guess this isn't news.
This post was edited on 2/4/16 at 11:04 am
Posted on 2/4/16 at 11:06 am to Mirthomatic
I would rather have pol pot as president than Ted Cruz
Posted on 2/4/16 at 11:18 am to leoj
quote:
I would rather have pol pot as president than Ted Cruz
Why? Do you hate the constitution?
Posted on 2/4/16 at 11:26 am to Farmer1906
I dislike ideological purists who ride a high horse that is an illusion. He comes off as a guy that if I worked with I would want to punch in the face. The world isn't black and white, and he comes off as very fake to me, his comments on his stance on immigration being a great example.
Page 21 of 50
Latest Texas A&M News
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News