CalvinBall wrote:Pretty sure kasich is far behind in polls in Ohio

538 has Kasich/Trump tied at a 39% chance to win.

Rubio on the other hand is only 33% to win Florida.

Hillary: "This country belongs to all of us, not just those at the top."

Hmm...I've heard this before.

CalvinBall wrote:Pretty sure kasich is far behind in polls in Ohio

538 has Kasich & Trump with an equal probability of winning: 39%.

Kasich's strategy has become evident-

In order to have a contested convention you need to have won 8 states
He's been putting money in VT, AK and the like in the hopes of winning smaller states where the others are ignoring in order to get to that threshold

I'll say this, Sanders has made Clinton a better candidate.

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:

Soren wrote:Has anyone posted this yet?

http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/tr ... itarianism

This is getting overlooked

It's a crazy good article but scary

It's really good. Trump says things his supporters want to hear. But the article goes deeper and explains his appeal better than anything I've read or heard.

Folks compare him to Hitler and Mussolini. I think Huey Long and George Wallace are more apt comparisons. But regardless, the authoritarian theory makes great sense.

Another Rubio victory speech.

She's turning more liberal by the day.

Cruz wina oklhaoma. Poor Marco

Rubio sure is going to have a busy first day in office. So much for all of those galas.

CalvinBall wrote:Pretty sure kasich is far behind in polls in Ohio

If electability is a concern for Republicans - and they're not afraid that Trump will actually be or attempt to be a fascist (again, I do not fear this, maybe I am naive) - I think a decent case can be made that he is the most electable in the R field.

First take the "will vote Republican no matter what" states. Gotta figure those are the ones that haven't gone blue since the 90s or earlier: SC, GA, AL, MS, LA, AR, MO, TN, KY, WV, TX, OK, KS, NE, SD, ND, WY, MT, ID, UT, AZ, AK. That's 180 electoral votes. I should probably count IN despite the weird 2008 outlier notwithstanding, but that is so weird I can't consider them an R-no-matter-what state.

Now, on the one hand, if you start from that base, just adding OH and FL actually don't put you over (that's 227 if you don't count IN, 238 if you do). You have to have NC too, and Trump uniquely appeals to and activates the kind of populist voter that makes up the base of the party throughout the South, including there. NC gives you 242 if you don't count IN, but if NC goes red so does IN, so let's call it 253.

Kasich will probably bring you OH, Rubio will probably bring you FL - but both are sort of uniquely poorly placed, I would argue, to bring the other (i.e, Kasich winning FL - against Hillary, I don't see it - and Rubio winning OH - again, against Hillary, I don't see it). Trump probably is better positioned to win both than any other candidate - he appeals to the Appalachian style populist that makes up a large portion of the OH electorate, probably wins a few Dem voters away frankly, and in FL he is just popular, probably owing to his business concerns there - in the "other Florida," as my friend sometimes calls it, the panhandle, etc., it plays like a southern state, where Trump has been winning big.

As I said, any nominee needs more - but MUST have both OH and FL (and IN and NC). Now you are 17 EVs short, and Trump is probably your best bet to win those votes by winning one or more of the following lean-blue states which ANY R candidate needs to get, even assuming wins in IN, NC, OH, and FL: PA, VA, NH, WI, IA, CO, NV.

Trump arguably puts PA in play for similar reasons that OH goes in - a long shot, but maybe a better one than either the lukewarm Rubio or the downright austere Cruz has. PA alone is the decider in that scenario. If not PA, you'll need two of the remaining 6.

Man it is really tough for a Republican to win is what I am learning here.

Rubio walking a narrow tight rope on hitting 20% in every state where he needs 20% to get delegates - GA/AL/TN/TX/VT

Could be a very good night if he hits on them all, would be pretty disastrous to miss on more than one or two (if one is Vermont)

CalvinBall wrote:Cruz wina oklhaoma. Poor Marco

Damn.

Rubio is gonna have to get out.

The 7 Democrats in Oklahoma selected Bernie Sanders.

I'll be damned.

CalvinBall wrote:Pretty sure kasich is far behind in polls in Ohio

maybe 5, 6% with 4% margin of error. You may be confusing national polling with the state.

jerseyhoya wrote:Rubio walking a narrow tight rope on hitting 20% in every state where he needs 20% to get delegates - GA/AL/TN/TX/VT

Could be a very good night if he hits on them all, would be pretty disastrous to miss on more than one or two (if one is Vermont)

If he hits thresholds and can win MN, it's a pretty good night for him. Miss some (including Texas which he's under now) and he's in big trouble.

smitty wrote:

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:

Soren wrote:Has anyone posted this yet?

http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/tr ... itarianism

This is getting overlooked

It's a crazy good article but scary

It's really good. Trump says things his supporters want to hear. But the article goes deeper and explains his appeal better than anything I've read or heard.

Folks compare him to Hitler and Mussolini. I think Huey Long and George Wallace are more apt comparisons. But regardless, the authoritarian theory makes great sense.

It's really appealing. And it's gotten a good working over by the academicians, who've ... basically worked it over. It's tantalizing but weakens under attempts to pin it down. Kinda like Schroedinger's cat

drumpf losing, by not winning enough, is a loser, for tonight. Hoping Rubio keeps his nose above the 20% water in TX, mostly out of drumpfs share

jerseyhoya wrote:Rubio walking a narrow tight rope on hitting 20% in every state where he needs 20% to get delegates - GA/AL/TN/TX/VT

Could be a very good night if he hits on them all, would be pretty disastrous to miss on more than one or two (if one is Vermont)

My guess is Rubio gets there in GA, OK, AR (15% threshold), TN, VA, MN, VT

But misses in AL, MA, TX

That enough to keep Rubio going?

drsmooth wrote:drumpf losing, by not winning enough, is a loser, for tonight. Hoping Rubio keeps his nose above the 20% water in TX, mostly out of drumpfs share

It's hard to say for me if this is a good night for Trump or not. Losing OK is bad; if he loses VT or MN or both, worse. AR too. Trump could windup "winning" only 5 of 11 available states - but the problem is in that scenario Cruz wins three (TX, OK, AR - where he is currently 3rd), Rubio wins two (MN, AK), and Kasich wins 1 (VT). Everybody has a reason to stay in - so everybody, but Trump, loses.

And Trump could still win VT and AR (he leads right now in both) and MN and AK (where counting has not begun).

What a mess.