First, he isn’t Huckabee or Santorum. They were true insurgents, desperately underfunded candidates who staked everything on Iowa and then lacked a plan to follow through. Cruz has the money and the organization that they lacked, and notwithstanding his “Duck Dynasty” endorsement and Senate enemies, he has a network of elite support that can carry him through a long campaign.
Second, the calendar promises him momentum. South Carolina is a good state for him, and then the large so-called S.E.C. primary looms on March 1, rich in evangelical votes. The S.E.C. states aren’t winner take all, so Cruz can’t build an insurmountable delegate lead even if he runs the table. But on the morning of March 2, the media may start covering him as if he’s the front-runner.
On Jan. 3, 2008 – the day of the Iowa caucuses – Hillary Clinton led Barack Obama by 7 points in the RealClearPolitics average of New Hampshire polls. And then Obama won Iowa.
Despite just four days separating Iowa and New Hampshire, Obama quickly surged in the polls, opening up an 8.3-point lead in the final RCP average.
But something happened on the way to an Obama sweep of the first two states: Clinton stormed from behind in the race’s final 24 hours, leading pollsters – including the industry’s professional organization, the American Association for Public Opinion Research – to conduct thorough reviews of industry practices.
Their most basic conclusion: Polls that stop days before the primary miss important shifts in voter preference that occur right up until Election Day.
Marco Rubio is co-sponsoring ultra-liberal Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill’s awful misandrist bill, which would force all American colleges to strip away accused “rapists'” due process rights, preventing them from testifying, and deciding guilt based on a mere “preponderance of the evidence.”
If Rubio becomes president, this bill would likely become the law of the land.
Okay. So what does that mean, republic is at stake? This is ball game.
Just two years ago!
Ethanol supporters had started pushing hard last year with a multi-million dollar campaign run by Eric Branstad, the son of popular Gov. Terry Branstad. The campaign, America’s Renewable Future, made Cruz its top target, contending that the Texas senator was beholden to oil interests. Branstad even broke his longtime neutrality to tell reporters that a Cruz victory would be bad for Iowa and biofuels.
Ultimately, the message seems to have failed: A Des Moines Register poll released on Saturday showed that three-quarters of Iowa Republicans said the governor’s call would not affect how they vote.
Ah, but 25 percent said they would heed the governor, which made a difference in a close caucus. Cruz nonetheless stuck to his guns and came out the better for it.
Most carriage owners have two or three horses. They have two horses in the city and one on the farm. The horses rotate to the farm for their city-mandated fiveweek-minimum vacation, so many horses average four months vacation per year.
This bill would limit most carriage owners to a single horse. A few carriage owners would win the horse-license lottery and get to have two horses. Carriage owners would no longer have spare horses in the city to give their horses days off.
Instead of four months vacation, the majority of carriage horses would get only the minimum five weeks because their owners wouldn’t be able to afford to take off more than five weeks themselves without a horse to work the carriage. Worse, under the new bill, it would be the city, not the horse owner, who would decide when horses go on vacation.
It’s only a matter of time until horses are overworked or go lame. The bill would incentivize discarding a lame horse in order to be allowed to purchase and license a new horse.
Republicans had been starting to resign themselves to nominating a non-conservative of low character. Having been beaten, Trump no longer looks unbeatable. Nor does it require low turnout to defeat him, as had been widely assumed.
Republicans who have been fearful to attack Trump should drop their reticence. Republicans who have flirted with backing him because they dislike Cruz should find a new, more honorable strategy. And all Republicans should shamelessly steal those portions of Trump’s message that are both right and resonant. They should stand for an immigration policy centered on the interests of the existing American population — which means that “comprehensive reform” that increases low-skilled immigration should be off the table. Then, too, Republicans should make a pitch to voters whose main economic concerns do not include capital-gains taxes.
Conventional wisdom (including mine) has been that Hillary benefits immensely from being a woman, and that her gender can help her in swing states. But now, I wonder…
Conservative ideas are stereotypically male, while liberal ideas are stereotypically female. For the last eight years, we’ve endured a “female” presidency, with troop withdrawals, endless scolding about race, gender, sexual orientation, and “refugees”, and repeated exhortations to eat our metaphorical spinach. Hillary’s gender will subtly reinforce in voters’ minds that a vote for Hillary is a vote for eight more years of overbearing mothering.
Ted Cruz, meanwhile, represents the opposite in every way. He’s as anti-establishment as it’s possible to be in Washington, with ideas that are utter anathema to Obama, Hillary, and their ilk. For anyone looking for a change, Cruz is the obvious answer.
And I suspect there are more than a few voters eager for change. Obama is visiting a terrorist mosque today. Who knows how many other times he’ll poke the American people in the eye this year, hurting Hillary’s chances each time…
GOP turnout at the Iowa caucuses was 50% (!) higher than the record turnout in 2012, while Democrat turnout was 25 percent lower than in 2008, the previous contested Democrat caucus.
Add to that a national 11-point enthusiasm gap, the largest ever in favor of Republicans, and 2016 could be quite interesting.