Iowa and New Hampshire are so FUCKING important…
Just past the middle of December. Iowa Caucus: February 1st; New Hampshire Primary: February 9th. 46 days until it all begins…
I keep hearing from certain pundits that Donald Trump’s commanding lead in ALL national polls (24 – 30 points depending on source!) doesn’t matter. That the primary process is not national; that the GOP race comes down to individual, separate, state by state contests…
I challenge that assumption.
This race is very different; in this race, Donald Trump has proven to have these abilities:
- An ability to grab headlines, and win news cycles.
- An ability to draw huge crowds.
- An ability to draw huge television ratings.
- An ability to nullify the effectiveness of negative press, and use it to his advantage.
- An ability to destroy, to completely level ANY candidate at a time and place of his choosing.
- An ability to discourage other candidates from attacking him.
- An ability to nullify the value of campaign and super-pac AD spending.
PLUS:
- Donald Trump’s supporters have shown a resistance to negative press and traditional mainstream-media mind manipulation.
- Donald Trump has pledged to spend a billion dollars if necessary, EASILY dwarfing every other campaign in resources.
Added all together: even a LOSS in New Hampshire and Iowa won’t affect the inevitable outcome: DONALD TRUMP WILL BE THE NOMINEE.
Here’s where all the nationwide polls currently stand:
Huffington Post is not a pro-Trump outfit, they have a handy tool that averages all polling data sources.
According to Huffington Post’s aggregate national polling data: around mid-august Donald Trump began averaging 30%, and has remained there, clearly DOMINATING until mid-november DIVERGENCE, when Ben Carson collapsed, and Donald Trump soared even HIGHER. The GOP Establishment has begun scrambling for a Ben Carson replacement in Iowa.
In this mainstream-media false narrative, (live polls included,) the race between Ben Carson and Donald Trump got close, with Carson rising as high as the mid 20s, before Donald Trump SMASHED Ben Carson’s face in.
No one wants to say out-loud the obvious: Ben Carson was DESTROYED by Donald Trump on 11/12/2015, BUT HE WAS.
One more, because FUCK Ben Carson.
Did this really happen?
Was Ben Carson ever really close to Donald Trump in the national polls?
NO.
Here is all the national data with live polls removed from the averaging:
As you can clearly see, Donald Trump’s support is significantly higher;
as you can clearly see, Ben Carson’s support never crossed 20%.
Why the mysterious discrepancy?
Simply, when a LIVE person contacts an individual, and begins asking questions: some people have a tendency to give the live pollster a “politically correct” answer. When a machine contacts an individual, they tend to answer more honestly. This is why we vote by SECRET ballot.
The media KNOWS this, and KNOWS they were pushing flawed, skewed polls. The establishment were hoping to ride Ben Carson right through IOWA. If Ben Carson could have upset Donald Trump in IOWA; the establishment could’ve then selected a “real” candidate to defeat the two outsiders in New Hampshire.
Unfortunately for the establishment and their plans: Donald Trump wasn’t playing along. Donald Trump chose to dispose of nice-guy Ben Carson before the Thanksgiving Holiday; Ben’s head impaled cleanly on a pike outside Trump Tower, next to Jeb Bush, John Kasich, Rand Paul, Lindsey Graham, Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal, Carly Fiorina.
As you can see, however, now the live polls and the machine polls are both exactly the same with Donald Trump above 38%! (The live polls have Ted Cruz at 14%, machine polls have Ted Cruz at 12%.)
Why are Trump’s live-poll results the same as machine-poll results, now?
Two possibilities:
- The American people are braver now, when a live pollster calls.
- The mainstream-media is preparing to show Donald Trump “miraculously” losing momentum and collapsing in the polls, by releasing NEW polls in January showing a “magickal,” significant drop for Donald Trump.
What’s this all about?
Peer pressure; herd conformity. Many have been influenced in the past by what skewed polls have told us; humans are social creatures; the polls can influence many.
The biased mainstream-media has been able to influence past presidential elections by lying about polling data. It’s not working this time, and they don’t know what to do.
So, question: what if this time the winner in Iowa and New Hampshire just doesn’t fucking matter?
Huh?
Hear me out. OK. Traditionally candidates participating in the state races that follow Iowa and New Hampshire have historically received “bounces” based on past performances… Who’s to say that will happen here?
What if in this election Trump Supporters in South Carolina, Florida, Texas, New York, Nevada, and California could give a good shit what Iowa and New Hampshire decide, (after being pummeled with 100s of millions in attack ads?)
What if Donald Trump’s massive lead among his CORE is unshaken even after suffering a defeat in BOTH states?
In other words, Iowa and New Hampshire have traditionally been psychological weapons, and have traditionally been valuable in candidates ability to raise money. Their value in the nomination process, in terms of actual delegates, is nominal.
Donald Trump has spent virtually ZERO in advertising.
“Jeb Bush has spent a massive $35 million on paid advertising so far this campaign, with $17 million spent in New Hampshire and $9 million devoted to Iowa.”
“Marco Rubio is second to Bush among all candidates for paid advertising. His campaign and two allied super pacs have spent over $15 million on advertising.”
“Gov. John Kasich, unbelievably, has spent over $8 million on paid advertising.”
“New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has spent about $8 million on ads.”
“South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, has spent almost $3 million on paid advertising, mostly in New Hampshire.”
“Ted Cruz, has spent $1.2 million… about the same as Rand Paul and Carly Fiorina.”
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/17/bush-rubio-dominate-2016-ad-spending/
Rope a Dope?
Boxing fans understand the term: rope-a-dope. Made famous after Ali destroyed George Foreman in the “Rumble In The Jungle.” Basically, Ali “played possum” and allowed Foreman to punch himself out, then, at the appropriate time, when Foreman had spent all his resources on Ali in the first 7 rounds: Ali let him have it! Knocking out foreman in the last seconds of round 8.
Right now the mainstream-media and all the campaigns are acting as if Iowa and New Hampshire are significant. TRUTH: only the states voting after March 15th are truly significant, these are when the majority of “WINNER TAKE ALL” states start dropping. The entire GOP nomination system is designed to allow a candidate to slowly build momentum until March 15th, but then things start happening fast.
Before we begin, I want to state unequivocally it’s my belief Donald Trump is going to win ALL 50 states. But, I wanted to write a “what if” scenario just to show how FOOLISH the establishment is being in this race.
Iowa
1980: Iowa gave America George Bush; rejected Ronald Reagan.
1988: Iowa gave us Bob Dole 2nd Pat Robertson; rejected George Bush 3rd.
1996 Iowa got it right, chose Bob Dole YAY!
2000 Iowa got it right chose George W Bush.
2008 Iowa gave us Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, Fred Thompson; rejected John Mccain 4th.
2012 Iowa gave us Rick Santorum with Mitt Romney in a tie.
What is Iowa good for?
- It shows who evangelicals break for.
- It shows who has ground game, who can “get out the vote.”
If Donald Trump wins Iowa, it’s over. It shows he can get out the vote, AND has strength with evangelicals even though he’s not a typical bible thumper.
In recent years, Iowa has digressed into a game of “who’s the better Christian?”
Really?
I don’t want to belittle that, BUT, would you select a military general this way?
Would you select the next CEO of a major corporation this way?
Give me a fucking break. Iowa needs to grow the fuck up.
I’d like to think Iowa would see value in a man like George Patton, or a billionaire CEO like Trump, but, it appears that Iowans are still electing a pastor instead of a President. A great President is a leader, a manager, a strategic thinker, an innovator. Ted Cruz with ZERO leadership or management experience is in second place because he learned to pray in CANADA. Go figure?
ANYWAY… I think Iowa is filled with idiots, too-much Monsanto corn? Hope they prove me wrong. I’m not worried about offending them, I honestly believe most of them are too fucking stupid to read.
If I was Ted Cruz’s campaign manager, I’d be telling him to spend 90% of his resources on Iowa. If Ted Cruz doesn’t win Iowa, it’s over for him.
New Hampshire.
New Hampshire has been a much better predictor of the GOP nominee.
If I was Marco Rubio’s campaign manager, I’d be telling him to focus 90% of his resources on New Hampshire. Without a win in New Hampshire he’s done.
But, again I question New Hampshire’s value in this race. With all these candidates willing to spend HUNDREDS of millions in advertising, in a state with a sparse population, and awarding very few delegates, what’s the prize?
Is New Hampshire really worth the money?
Traditionally, yes.
Traditionally the winner of the New Hampshire primary can expect: massive momentum; massive media coverage; his/her campaign coffers to be immediately replenished as donations pour in…
BUT?
Is this a traditional race?
Will the winner of these two races own the spotlight?
Will donations pour in after a victory?
Establishment Dream Outcome.
Again, for purposes of discussion, I give the following best case scenario for the Establishment…
Ted Cruz wins Iowa. Donald Trump second place.
Marco Rubio wins New Hampshire, Chris Christie second place, Donald Trump third place. (Humor me. Ignore that Donald Trump has a 17 point lead, LOL!)
OK. Now what?
February 1st; 9:55 PM
Imagine it’s the eve of the Iowa Caucus, Ted Cruz has won; Donald Trump is in second place. Who does the media want to talk too?
GET IT?
Ted Cruz best-case scenario: he spends 90% of his resources, wins Iowa, YET just like today, no one wants to listen to oily Ted Cruz. But, Trump is going to be on CNN at 10:30, that’s where America will be. Trump will say something outlandish, and the press will be talking about it all week…
Sure some will bash Donald Trump for failing to win Iowa, but Trump will still be Trump, owning the news, the pundits, drawing HUGE crowds…
February 9th; 9:55 PM
Imagine it’s the eve of the New Hampshire primary, Marco Rubio has won, Chris Christie a close second, Donald Trump a close third: who does the media want to talk too now?
GET IT?
Marco Rubio and Chris Christie best-case scenario: they spend 90% of their resources, YET just like IOWA, no one wants to listen to Anchor Baby Marco Rubio or Governor Krispy Kreme.
But Trump is going to be on FOX at 10:30, that’s where America will be. Trump will say something over-the-top, and the press will be talking about it all week.
South Carolina
That takes us to February 20th: South Carolina. A winner take all state. This is the state Trump must win, and he will , convincingly.
Remember the rope-a-dope? Round 8 in Ali vs. Foreman?
I’m not saying Donald Trump should do this, but he could. He could pull out of New Hampshire and Iowa, (let the other candidates have them,) and then on February 10th begin spending all $1 billion of his resources viciously attacking his surviving opponents, and building his brand in all major races. Combined with his core support, his media domination, and none of the other candidates having the resources, the other candidates would be defenseless.
Even if Trump was to lose Iowa AND New Hampshire, he’ll run the table from South Carolina because all the other candidates have spent all their resources. They did not own the spotlight. Donations did not pour in. And none of them will have made a dent in Donald Trump’s nationwide popularity.
When you see in Nationwide polls Donald Trump’s support at nearly 40%, KNOW, the only way to beat him is to ERODE that support. They haven’t been able to do it yet, even losing Iowa and New Hampshire wont do it.
So why might he lose in New Hampshire and Iowa? Because, strategically, in this race they have very little value for him. Spending a shit-load of money in these states might seem the logical thing to do, but remember it’s HIS money he’s playing with, why not get the most bang for his buck? Why advertise in New Hampshire and Iowa when the most important states for Trump to win are: Texas, Florida, and South Carolina.
THIS TIME: Iowa and New Hampshire are NOT so FUCKING important.
SHORTLINK:
© 2015 Author Richard Skeet
Patriots! Get involved! Share!
Like, Comment, Follow!
Share this with a #Trump denier!
#Trump2016
#MakeAmericaGreatAgain
#YUGE
#TRUMPGASM
TRUMPGASM 
[…] Author: authorrichardskeet […]
LikeLiked by 1 person