• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Trump Solidifies Lead Over GOP Rivals in First States to Vote (NBC/WSJ poll)

Status
Not open for further replies.

chadskin

Member
2016-Republican-Presidential-Caucus-Primary.png


Iowa:
The latest results in Iowa for the GOP show Trump, 32%, has taken the lead over his nearest rival, Cruz, 25%, by 7 points among likely Republican caucus-goers statewide including those who are undecided yet leaning toward a candidate. Trump’s support has increased by 8 points while Cruz’s has decreased by 3. Florida Senator Marco Rubio, 18%, remains in third place but has improved his standing by 5 points. Cruz, 28%, edged Trump, 24%, by 4 points in the previous NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist Poll of the state earlier this month.
This survey of 3,040 adults was conducted January 24th through January 26th, 2016 by The Marist Poll sponsored and funded in partnership with NBC News and The Wall Street Journal.

New Hampshire:
In New Hampshire, Trump, 31%, has a 19 point lead over his closest competitor, Cruz, 12%, among likely Republican primary voters including those who are undecided yet leaning toward a candidate or voted absentee. Rubio and Ohio Governor John Kasich follow, each with 11%. Trump’s lead is comparable to the 16 point advantage he had over Rubio, who was his closest competitor, earlier this month. Of note, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who was in third place with 12%, now receives 7% of likely Republican primary voters in New Hampshire and places sixth behind former Florida Governor Jeb Bush with 8%.
This survey of 2,528 adults was conducted January 17th through January 23rd, 2016 by The Marist Poll sponsored and funded in partnership with NBC News and The Wall Street Journal.

South Carolina:
In South Carolina, Trump, 36%, also has a double-digit lead over, Cruz, 20%, among likely Republican primary voters including those who are undecided yet leaning toward a candidate. Rubio is in third with 14% and is the only other candidate with double-digit support.
This survey of 2,508 adults was conducted January 17th through January 23rd, 2016 by The Marist Poll sponsored and funded in partnership with NBC News and The Wall Street Journal.
http://maristpoll.marist.edu/128-tr...e-in-ia-sanders-up-in-nh-clinton-leads-in-sc/
 

numble

Member
So will the nominees spend more time attacking Trump or Cruz at the debate? They need to use their time wisely.
 

Funky Papa

FUNK-Y-PPA-4
Going to be an interesting convention where the crowd loves Donald but the establishment is livid.

I'm really wondering about the future of Fox News.

On one hand, they make their money from the GOP's base.

On the other, they are the sworn in propaganda arm of the establishment.

Somebody is going to make some incredibly though decisions, but specially if Trump affects the GOP in the same way the Tea Party did.
 

fantomena

Member
In a few months:

Trump: " It was just a prank! Gotta see how stupid, brainwashed and fascistic the republican voterbase is somehow"
 

linsivvi

Member
So will the nominees spend more time attacking Trump or Cruz at the debate? They need to use their time wisely.

They will probably attack Cruz since they hate him anyway and they are smelling blood. They know attacking Trump has a high chance of backfiring.
 

Tom_Cody

Member
...with only 1/3 of the party supporting him and huge unfavorables all around.

Trump's biggest enabler by far has been the over-crowded field. He was able to emerge from the pack early and then rally people around his #winning image.

I still can't believe this is happening.
 

rjc571

Banned
In a few months:

Trump: " It was just a prank! Gotta see how stupid, brainwashed and fascistic the republican voterbase is somehow"

Even if he said this in a Lonesome Rhodes-esque "oops didn't realize the camera was still rolling" context, his approval rating among republicans would go up even higher somehow.
 
It cannot be stated enough how badly the GOP fucked up to let this guy get the nomination.


I hope not. Otherwise we're in trouble.

The GOP was not prepared for Trump to run for president. Since day one of his campaign he has been leading. The years of pandering to Racist and Bigots are now reading their head.
 
The field's gonna look very different after it thins a little. The question is, how many of those voters will Trump / Cruz pull, and how many will go to the 'safer' establishment choice (be it Rubio, ¡El Jeb! or Kasich).
 

numble

Member
The field's gonna look very different after it thins a little. The question is, how many of those voters will Trump / Cruz pull, and how many will go to the 'safer' establishment choice (be it Rubio, ¡El Jeb! or Kasich).

Besides the ones with nothing going on, like Huckabee, Paul and Fiorana, who has an incentive to pull out before Super Tuesday?
 

Ecotic

Member
If Trump wins Iowa it might as well be a first round knockout. Unless New Hampshire wants to surprise us all again.
 
Not really.

Both Jeb and Rubio are trailing Trump then Cruz in their homestate of Florida.

the story is very telling when a former Governor and a sitting Senator are doing badly in their home State's polls

Florida is also winner take all, there is no runner-up prizes for the losers like Jebra
 
I better see at least three of these guys drop out after IA/NH.

It still amazes me that more candidates have not stopped out.

Also continue to be confused by how much two states that never matter in the general election have so much power in choosing who gets the nominations. Shouldn't the battleground states like PA, OH, and FL have the first primaries?
 
If Trump wins Iowa it might as well be a first round knockout. Unless New Hampshire wants to surprise us all again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/03/past-iowa-caucus-winners_n_1182148.html

What do Bill Clinton, George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan have in common?

These former presidents all lost in the Iowa caucuses, but won their party's nomination and, of course, the subsequent general elections.

What about Mike Huckabee, Dick Gephardt and Tom Harkin? They came in first in Iowa but failed to become their party's standard-bearer.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Just think:
In four days, we could have a very good idea of how the nominations will go.

Trump prevailing could seal it for him.
Hillary prevailing could seal it for her.

A corollary: Monday could be the best night for Hillary since October.
 
The part you and pundits that advocate this line of thinking don't understand is why Iowa is important this cycle: it's the only state he's not winning by double digits. Losing Iowa is the only way to halt his momentum going into Super Tuesday in March. Trump doesn't need Iowa necessarily to win the nomination, but winning Iowa means there's nothing left tgat could stop him. Him winning Iowa is the same as him winning the nomination.
 
The part you and pundits that advocate this line of thinking don't understand is why Iowa is important this cycle: it's the only state he's not winning by double digits. Losing Iowa is the only way total his momentum going into Super Tuesday in March. Trump doesn't need Iowa necessarily to win the nomination, but winning Iowa means there's nothing left tgat could stop him. Him winning Iowa is the same as him winning the nomination.

and that is a big feat for a guy who is not really religious to win the religious nut job vote
 

HylianTom

Banned
Why couldn't this turn into a 1996-esque thing, where it was still close enough for anyone to win after Super Tuesday?
Part of me was hoping for that. '96 is my second-favorite GOP primary ever. I have a red plaid flannel shirt that, to this day, I still refer to as my "Lamar shirt."
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
The part you and pundits that advocate this line of thinking don't understand is why Iowa is important this cycle: it's the only state he's not winning by double digits. Losing Iowa is the only way total his momentum going into Super Tuesday in March. Trump doesn't need Iowa necessarily to win the nomination, but winning Iowa means there's nothing left tgat could stop him. Him winning Iowa is the same as him winning the nomination.

Basically. If either Trump or Clinton win Iowa, they will be their party's nominee. Trump because Iowa is one of his worst states and if he can win there it means he can win pretty much everywhere; Clinton because Sanders needs the upset to generate headlines to combat his low profile.
 
Why couldn't this turn into a 1996-esque thing, where it was still close enough for anyone to win after Super Tuesday?
Because there's a clear frontrunner should he win Iowa. If he loses Iowa to Cruz that could change the dynamic, but he currently has commanding leads in all early states after Iowa which would only grow should he win there.
 
Trump has done a masterful job at winning (trolling) the current republican vote. Doesn't matter if you dislike him or not, you have to give him that. Anybody with half a brain, though, should be able to see that it is clearly lip service to the nutjobs.
 
Basically. If either Trump or Clinton win Iowa, they will be their party's nominee. Trump because Iowa is one of his worst states and if he can win there it means he can win pretty much everywhere; Clinton because Sanders needs the upset to generate headlines to combat his low profile.

This isn't never true for Trump if the field narrows to 3 candidates.
 

Anoregon

The flight plan I just filed with the agency list me, my men, Dr. Pavel here. But only one of you!
It's pretty outrageous how I'm actually happy (relatively speaking) to see Trump in the lead for the Repub primary just due to how utterly fucking abhorrent Cruz is.

I really have to renew my passport, though. I have friends in Canada and the UK I will definitely be wanting to make extended visits to if either of those fucking clowns actually manage to become president.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom