The Iowa caucuses brought some surprises: Trump lost to Cruz, Rubio took third and Sanders almost tied Clinton. While Trump was the predicted winner and leading in the polls, his defeat seems easy enough to explain. While Trump is a master reality show star and showman, Cruz is an experienced politician who knows how to operate effectively within the political system. While getting votes is dependent on political popularity, it is also a matter of ensuring that people vote and Cruz seems have done a better job at this task. As such, while Trump was probably more popular, he was not more popular among those who voted. Trump is, interestingly enough, now threatening to sue Cruz for cheating in Iowa. Assuming that Cruz did not cheat and assuming that he won through superior political organization, then Trump will need to match Cruz in this regard or face the very real risk of losing the nomination. That said, it has been claimed that Cruz’s appeal to the evangelicals lead him to a victory over Trump–something that Cruz cannot count on across the country.
What is perhaps most interesting is that the pundits are claiming Rubio also had a victory on the grounds that he moved into a very close third. Rubio is the clear establishment candidate at this point and he seems well-positioned to pick up the supporters of the doomed establishment candidates, such as Jeb Bush. With the backing of the Republican party machinery, Rubio could come out ahead of Trump and Cruz. That said, the anti-establishment sentiment should not be dismissed: if Cruz can maintain the appearance of being a political outsider while using the skill set he has developed as a career politician, he stands an excellent chance of having the best of both worlds.
While Sanders is a long-time senator, he is regarded as an authentic outsider. This is in strong contrast with Hillary Clinton. She has a well-established reputation as a supreme insider and is certainly not known for her authenticity. The challenge for Sanders is maintaining enthusiasm in the face of the Clinton political machine. Fortunately for Bernie, we have seen that the Clinton machine can be defeated and Hillary is no doubt worried that 2016 might look like a repeat of 2008. Only with an old white socialist rather than a young black moderate in the starring role.
We might see Rubio going up against Sanders in the general election. If so, I would predict Rubio by a slight margin. Clinton would probably beat Rubio. Cruz and Trump, I think, would lose to either Clinton or Sanders. But, my predictions are probably wrong-much is up in the air, which makes matters interesting.
Commenting on the 2016 election is like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic (=a waste of time and energy).
Off topic question for Mike.
What do you advise for Achilles tendonitis?
I just came across this http://www.phibetaiota.net/2016/01/wayne-madsen-marco-rubio-homosexual-update-with-photos/#more-116745 which suggests that Marco Rubio is/was a faggot. I don’t know the truth one way or the other, but he apparently does admit to going to ‘foam parties’ in Florida in his earlier years. These parties are said to be almost exclusively gay events.
The question is not whether he is gay or not, but with lying about it, which allows them to be blackmailed.
As you say that Rubio is the clear establishment candidate, which raises the question of why that is so. Electability? Not so much as Trump. Perhaps it is because he is capable of being controlled, a puppet?If that is so then is it right that people elect candidates for their personal qualities etc when in fact they are owned by others? Is that not actually fraud?
Oh dear, the Donster is being very impolite by pointing out a few truths about the donor class to the TV audience….