I thought this was sound analysis of whether Iowa's results really portend good things for Rubio.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... trong.html

fate

Hmm.

Indeed.
I'm still with the 85% .... That was if he failed in Iowa... And it wasn't a big fail.
However we haven't seen NH or SC yet. Why Ben Carson's fresh clothes may make all the difference!!

feemans3

I thought this was sound analysis of whether Iowa's results really portend good things for Rubio

The Rubie running now is nothing like the Rubio before the campaigning started.
He's touting many of Trumps positions and has become extreme on immigration, abortion and other social issues.
If Trump and Cruz are considered un-electable ...how is the reformed Rubio electable?

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... sm/459339/

rickyp wrote:fate

Hmm.

Indeed.
I'm still with the 85% .... That was if he failed in Iowa... And it wasn't a big fail.
However we haven't seen NH or SC yet. Why Ben Carson's fresh clothes may make all the difference!!

feemans3

I thought this was sound analysis of whether Iowa's results really portend good things for Rubio

The Rubie running now is nothing like the Rubio before the campaigning started.
He's touting many of Trumps positions and has become extreme on immigration, abortion and other social issues.
If Trump and Cruz are considered un-electable ...how is the reformed Rubio electable?

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... sm/459339/

The Atlantic is such a balanced journal . . .

Fate

The Atlantic is such a balanced journal . . .

Fair and balanced.

I saw an interview of some expert on New Hampshire. He said he said he thinks Rubio will not do well there because he is "light", a "pre-programmed robot". He gets a question and launches into a pre-written speech. The first time you think he is a smart, articulate guy; the second time you see him he repeats the same programmed stuff; and the third time it's "is that all you got". Devastating criticism and it appears accurate to me in that every time I see Rubio he speaks in an unnatural, rehearsed way with rushed speech with few pauses (he's not thinking he's remembering). Most people who speak well in public alter how fast they speak, how loudly they speak, change the emotional content, and how high or low their voice is. Rubio does not change any of those things very much. It's very off-putting to me to hear someone speak like that. Trump is a much, much better public speaker.

Mr. Debate Team Guy of course speaks very well...except for the content.

Christie calls him the "boy in the bubble" who won't answer questions from the press. Ouch.

freeman3 wrote:I saw an interview of some expert on New Hampshire. He said he said he thinks Rubio will not do well there because he is "light", a "pre-programmed robot". He gets a question and launches into a pre-written speech. The first time you think he is a smart, articulate guy; the second time you see him he repeats the same programmed stuff; and the third time it's "is that all you got". Devastating criticism and it appears accurate to me in that every time I see Rubio he speaks in an unnatural, rehearsed way with rushed speech with few pauses (he's not thinking he's remembering). Most people who speak well in public alter how fast they speak, how loudly they speak, change the emotional content, and how high or low their voice is. Rubio does not change any of those things very much. It's very off-putting to me to hear someone speak like that. Trump is a much, much better public speaker.

Mr. Debate Team Guy of course speaks very well...except for the content.

I don't agree at all.

He may not do as well in New Hampshire, but he hasn't lived there like Mr. Christie. He also has had many, many millions in negative ads run against him by Jeb's Super-Pac. I see them all the time.

If you compare after-caucus speeches, Rubio's was excellent--no teleprompter. Cruz's went on forever and said nothing.

If the top 3 in NH are different than Iowa, someone else might be a contender.

However, here's my bold prediction: if Trump loses NH, he'll drop out. He's already whining about how people don't appreciate him using his own money. He's a businessman. He will cut his losses if it comes to that.

freeman3 wrote:I saw an interview of some expert on New Hampshire. He said he said he thinks Rubio will not do well there because he is "light", a "pre-programmed robot". He gets a question and launches into a pre-written speech. The first time you think he is a smart, articulate guy; the second time you see him he repeats the same programmed stuff; and the third time it's "is that all you got". Devastating criticism and it appears accurate to me in that every time I see Rubio he speaks in an unnatural, rehearsed way with rushed speech with few pauses (he's not thinking he's remembering). Most people who speak well in public alter how fast they speak, how loudly they speak, change the emotional content, and how high or low their voice is. Rubio does not change any of those things very much. It's very off-putting to me to hear someone speak like that. Trump is a much, much better public speaker.

Mr. Debate Team Guy of course speaks very well...except for the content.

Yes, I think you are right about Rubio. You've put in words what I've been feeling.

Also, he will get increased scrutiny now, including his lack of experience. He's only been a legislator his entire career, right?

Fate

However, here's my bold prediction: if Trump loses NH, he'll drop out.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Which would mean he's dropped a 24 point lead in New Hampshire in the last 5 or 6 days of campaigning... Pretty unlikely. Coming in 2nd in Iowa doesn't mean that much. if he comes in first in NH....
Weren't you the guy saying Iowa was a lousy indicator just a few posts ago?
The "establishment" candidates are all trying for third place in Iowa. Right now that's Rubio but three (Kasich, Bush, and Christie) are in shouting distance. They'll continue to target Rubio. He's a candidate with few convictions and little substance. You need one of those to be convincing long term..

He might still come out of NH in third place, but my prediction is that SC and Super Tuesday will still see a crowded field because he won't have convinced the citizens of NH that he's THE alternative to the two "outsiders"

rickyp wrote:Fate

However, here's my bold prediction: if Trump loses NH, he'll drop out.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Which would mean he's dropped a 24 point lead in New Hampshire in the last 5 or 6 days of campaigning... Pretty unlikely. Coming in 2nd in Iowa doesn't mean that much. if he comes in first in NH....
Weren't you the guy saying Iowa was a lousy indicator just a few posts ago?

Apparently, there is no "off-switch" for your jackassery.

Yes, Iowa is a lousy indicator. The primary electorates in both parties is extreme.

Try to pay attention: I did NOT predict Trump WOULD lose. I simply said "If he does . . ." There is a chasm of difference.

The "establishment" candidates are all trying for third place in Iowa. Right now that's Rubio but three (Kasich, Bush, and Christie) are in shouting distance. They'll continue to target Rubio. He's a candidate with few convictions and little substance. You need one of those to be convincing long term..

You mean New Hampshire, not Iowa.

Kasich is a liberal Republican. He might do okay in New Hampshire, but he's no threat to the nomination. Bush is done. If Christie passes Kasich, he could make a move and get into the conversation.

I think it's funny that the folks here are down on Rubio. Rush Limbaugh called him a "legitimate full-throated conservative and a disciple of Ronald Reagan."

He might still come out of NH in third place, but my prediction is that SC and Super Tuesday will still see a crowded field because he won't have convinced the citizens of NH that he's THE alternative to the two "outsiders"

"Crowded?" Nah. It will be down to 4 or 5. Anyone who has not made a splash in Iowa or New Hampshire will have a tough time continuing. Maybe Carson can get away with it, but no one else who hasn't had a top 3 will move on.

Ray Jay wrote:Also, he will get increased scrutiny now, including his lack of experience. He's only been a legislator his entire career, right?

He was Speaker of the Florida legislature.

His experience is better than Obama's fwiw.

Fate

"Crowded?" Nah. It will be down to 4 or 5

.

I think 4 or 5 IS crowded...
I think Super Tuesday will include 5 of : Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Bush, Kasich and Christie.
(Bush because he has so much money.)
Paul is out as of this morning.

It appears Rand Paul is suspending his campaign (per CNN).

It appears Trump is unraveling. (from his Twitter account):

Ted Cruz didn't win Iowa, he stole it. That is why all of the polls were so wrong and why he got far more votes than anticipated. Bad!

rickyp wrote:Fate

"Crowded?" Nah. It will be down to 4 or 5

.

I think 4 or 5 IS crowded...
I think Super Tuesday will include 5 of : Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Bush, Kasich and Christie.
(Bush because he has so much money.)
Paul is out as of this morning.

Again, I'd take your money. There is no way 3 governors/ex-governors are going to continue fighting for the "establishment" lane.

After New Hampshire, assuming Trump wins: Trump, Cruz, Rubio and the best of Bush/Kasich/Christie, which seems likely to be Kasich. Bush has spent too much and produced too little. He has spent tens of millions going after Rubio. Meanwhile, Rubio got more than 7 times as many votes in Iowa.

Jeb is pathetic.

Christie is someone who would scare me--he's smart and pragmatic. No traction yet, though.