GOP Field Narrows To Five
It's been a few weeks since I surveyed the Republican presidential field, but recent developments seem to indicate it's time to take another look. Mostly this is because the mainstream media all seem to be ignoring an actual story (even a horserace story!), to instead focus on an artificial narrative imposed by Fox Business Network (the host of tomorrow night's GOP debate). While much attention has been paid to Fox's reshuffling of who will appear on which debate stage, virtually nobody's talking about the complete collapse of Carly Fiorina's polling. She can't even now be considered a plausible Republican nominee, when not that long ago she was solidly in third place in the polls. This is a pretty major development, and it has resulted in the field of Republicans with any sort of believable shot at winning the nomination shrinking from six to only five.
Carly's collapse was predicted by few, and now that it's happening it is also being noticed by few. She became a media darling after solid performances in the first two debates, which pushed her Republican voter support up to 11.8 percent (behind Trump and Carson). Since then, however, she failed to make any waves in the third debate and now teeters on the brink of being disinvited to future main stages, standing overall in a three-way tie for sixth place, at only 3.0 percent in the polls. But again, while her quick rise got a lot of coverage, her "what goes up, must come down" fall hasn't attracted much media attention.
As before, I'm going to split the horserace up into four groups, depending on what sort of chance they have of actually winning the Republican nomination, based on their nationwide polling averages (all data from Real Clear Politics, I should mention). I should also mention that my previous column used data from October 19th, so when you see "since last time" below, that's what I'm talking about. And, as before, I'm going to present these groups in ascending order of possibility.
No Chance
The Fox Business Network set some rather strange guidelines for inclusion into both of their upcoming debates (for both the main event and the "kids' table" undercard debate). I mean, I do applaud them for beginning the winnowing process, but at the same time I wonder why they set both of their inclusion division lines right in the middle of two groups of candidates, instead of in the gaps between the groups (which would make more sense). There are five candidates with virtually no chance of becoming the Republican nominee at this point, but for some reason only three of them were cut from the kids' table debate. Jim Gilmore didn't even get to go to the last undercard debate, so it's no surprise he won't be appearing this time either. George Pataki and Lindsey Graham also didn't make the Fox Business Network cut. Maybe the three of them can get together to watch the debate, and issue angry tweets all the while, or something.
Now, it certainly makes sense to cut Gilmore, Pataki, and Graham. Their campaigns are all, obviously, toast. But it also makes perfect sense to cut Rick Santorum and Bobby Jindal, both of whom are polling at a mere 0.8 percent right now. Does anyone in their right mind really think Jindal or Santorum are suddenly going to catch fire and rocket upwards in the polls? Me neither.
Slim Chance
This category was also bizarrely split up, this time between the main debate and the kids' table debate. The bar for inclusion on the main stage was seemingly designed to be an arbitrary split among a group of candidates whose polling is almost completely identical. The current polling difference between all five of these candidates is only a total of 0.8 percent, after all. That's a pretty tight range. So why split them up? All five of these candidates should have been relegated to the undercard (after booting Jindal and Santorum out completely, to make some room).
Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee both got downgraded to the undercard. They're polling at 2.2 and 2.4 percent, respectively. So the undercard will have two candidates (Santorum and Jindal) who are at 0.8 percent alongside two candidates at 2.2 and 2.4 percent. Makes no sense to me.
The other three candidates -- all teetering on the brink of demotion to the kids' table -- are all tied for an overall sixth place in the Republican race, at 3.0 percent. They include the previously-mentioned Carly Fiorina as well as John Kasich and Rand Paul. They'll all have at least one final shot in the main debate, so look for all three of these candidates to be absolutely desperate to make some news. That could be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on how they handle it.
Kasich, Paul, Huckabee, and Christie have all been roughly consistent in the polls for the past few months. They slowly jockey for position with each other, rising to as high as 4.0 percent at times. Christie, this time around, stayed flat. Paul and Huckabee drifted downwards, Kasich drifted upwards.
The big news, though, was Fiorina's dramatic fall. She can't even argue it was one bad poll, as the past five polls have all pegged her at exactly three percent support. Her only chance, at this point, is to have a spectacular debate performance which pulls her numbers back up above five percent. It's a slim chance, but it's probably the best of this bunch, the rest of whom have shown no recent significant movement whatsoever (up or down).
Decent Chance
These are the guys in the middle of the Republican pack, far enough forward that they could benefit from a good debate or even from the collapse of a competitor in front of them. There was quite a bit of movement in this category, from the last time I took a look. The range the category covers has widened, as two of the three candidates went up and one went further down. The overall standings didn't change at all, but the gaps between them got bigger.
Marco Rubio is the clear winner here, as his poll average went up a solid three points, from 8.8 percent to 11.8 percent. Rubio is now polling steadily above 10 percent, a feat few Republicans have managed throughout this campaign. He got a big bounce out of the third debate, after besting Jeb Bush on stage. He is now positioned as the top candidate to reap the aftermath, should the two no-experience frontrunners ever actually collapse. As such, he's now drawing a lot more heat from the other candidates, so he'll probably have a pretty big target on him in the upcoming debate.
Ted Cruz is still in fourth place, and he also received a bounce from the last debate, although much smaller than Rubio's. Cruz rose from 8.4 percent to 9.6 percent, and has seen some double-digit polling (though not as consistently as Rubio). Cruz, however, continues a slow rise in the polling that has lasted for the past few months. He has always positioned himself to reap the biggest benefit if Trump or Carson ever do fall, by attempting to appeal to the voters who are currently supporting Trump and Carson. Their fall hasn't happened yet, but he's still got a great shot of corralling their voters (greater even than Rubio, most likely) -- should such a collapse ever actually happen, of course. Cruz has been targeting Rubio of late, so this will be an interesting dynamic to watch in the debate.
While Rubio and Cruz got a debate bounce, Jeb Bush continued to falter. Bush fell from 7.0 percent to 6.0 percent in the past few weeks, and his trajectory looks downright grim. In fact, he's now flirting with following Carly into the ranks of the below-four-percenters. Two of his latest polls showed Bush at just four percent support, a new low for Jeb. If he does continue his polling slide, it's likely his donors will flee when he can't even manage to hit the five percent mark. For now, Bush still remains viable -- he definitely still deserves to be on the main stage -- but only for now. If he falls much further, he'll likely never recover.
Great Chance
Finally, we have the two frontrunners. It's been amusing to watch the media (left, right, and center) take on the phenomena of Donald Trump and Ben Carson. First, Trump was dismissed out of hand and Carson wasn't even mentioned. Then, Trump was ridiculed and the conventional inside-the-Beltway belief was: "He'll fall hard, and he'll fall fast." This morphed into: "He's going to fall, it's inevitable." Then: "It's a summer fling, it'll evaporate when voters start paying attention." Finally, it dawned on even those inside the Beltway that these predictions were based on nothing more than hopes, and there was no evidence that Trump's numbers were going to collapse any time soon. There are still die-hards confidently predicting: "It simply can't last," but most are slowly beginning to wrap their minds around the possibility that Donald Trump might just become the Republican nominee for the highest office in the land. Ben Carson has received similar treatment, but his storyline has lagged Trump's (as his poll numbers, while rising, also lagged Trump's).
Sooner or later, the data must be believed, though. There are only two candidates who have caught fire with the Republican base, and they are Trump and Carson. No other candidate has gotten anywhere near where these two have been comfortably polling, for the past month or two. Could one or the other of them stumble badly and see their numbers collapse? Anything's possible. So far, however, neither shows any signs of doing so. Call them the Teflon candidates, because nothing seems to stick to them.
This time around, the race between the two frontrunners closed to a neck-and-neck statistical tie. Trump fell back a little bit, and Carson surged forward, to meet in the middle. Part of this was due to the last debate, where Trump wasn't as bombastic as usual and Carson held his own. Since the last time we took a look at the race, Trump went down 1.4 points, from 26.2 percent to 24.8 percent. Carson rose 3.2 points, from 21.2 percent to 24.2 percent. That's a separation between the two of only 0.6 percent, but what's more significant is that Carson has been beating Trump in some individual polls (while Trump beats Carson in others, to be fair). Carson's average even briefly rose above Trump's for a few days, and now they are virtually tied. Trump's shown a greater willingness to directly attack Carson, so the next debate should be interesting to watch as the two of them struggle for the lead.
Conclusion
The four divisions within the Republican presidential nomination ranks continue to be clear, whether the debate hosts notice it or not. Trump and Carson are way out in front of the pack -- both men have more than double the third-place contender's poll numbers. Rubio, Cruz, and Bush occupy the heart of the pack, all polling between six and 12 percent. These are the five who should appear next to each other in the headline debates. There used to be six candidates in these two groups, but the media seem to have missed the utter collapse of Carly's numbers.
The third division should be the undercard debate. Fiorina, Paul, Kasich, Huckabee, and Christie are all roughly in the same position -- below four percent -- and have roughly the same chances of breaking out and having an actual chance of winning. And, finally, the has-been division (who struggle to even reach a single percent in the polls) should be shoved off television entirely on debate nights. Santorum and Jindal have precisely the same chance (zero) of winning the nomination next year as Pataki, Graham, and Gilmore. They've had their shot, now it's time to show them the door.
-- Chris Weigant
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Since the “debate” will be held on a Fox channel and the GOP clowns love to bleat the phrase “political correctness” endlessly to pander to wingnuts who can’t bear that they’re “not allowed” to use the N-word, I hoping for some substantive discussions on that subject.
Here are a couple of "raise your hand" rounds that I’m hoping to see:
1. Raise your hand if you support the police union PC campaign to completely destroy Quentin Tarantino for using his freedom to speak the truth about criminal cops .
2. Raise your hand if you support the christianist PC campaign to defeat The Starbucks War On Christmas by lying to minimum wage employees so that they’ll have to write Mary Krismuss on those red cups.
. Raise your hand if you support the police union PC campaign to completely destroy Quentin Tarantino for using his freedom to speak the truth about criminal cops .
Chik Fil A?? Mozilla Board Member?? Pizzaria owner in Idaho??
Any of those "Freedom Of Speech" issues ring a bell??
Let's face it, Sunshine.. In your Leftist Democrat Utopia only those with appropriate approved ideology is entitled to "free speech"...
Anyone else can go suck salt...
Tarentino is a hater.. Nothing more.. And his movies REALLY suck.. As much as we like Travolta and Jackson, my lovely wife and I could stomach only about 10 mins of PULP FICTION before we were actively retching...
There is no need to boycott his movies based on his Cop Hating spewage...
His movies suck.. Plain and simple..
Michale
Here is an example of Left Wingery "freedom of speech"..
Left Wing Student: "In your position as master it is your job to create a place of comfort and home for the students who live in Silliman. You have not done that. By sending out that email, that goes against your position as master. Do you understand that?!"
Resident Professor: "No, I don’t agree with that."
Left Wing Student: "Then why the fuck did you accept the position?! Who the fuck hired you?! You should step down! If that is what you think about being a master you should step down! It is not about creating an intellectual space! It is not! Do you understand that? It’s about creating a home here. You are not doing that! You should not sleep at night! You are disgusting!"
There's your Democrat Party idea of "free speech"....
There's your Democrat Party idea of "tolerance"....
Michale
The third division should be the undercard debate. Fiorina, Paul, Kasich, Huckabee, and Christie are all roughly in the same position -- below four percent -- and have roughly the same chances of breaking out and having an actual chance of winning. And, finally, the has-been division (who struggle to even reach a single percent in the polls) should be shoved off television entirely on debate nights. Santorum and Jindal have precisely the same chance (zero) of winning the nomination next year as Pataki, Graham, and Gilmore. They've had their shot, now it's time to show them the door.
Well, OK... If the litmus test is that there is NO ACTUAL CHANCE of winning, then by that same litmus test, Sanders and O'Malley should be forced out of the race for the Democrat Candidate, right??
I mean, if it applies to the Right, it should apply in the same way to the Left...
No??
Michale
o speak the truth about criminal cops .
There was no "truth" about criminal cops because there was no criminal cops.
THAT is exactly my point. Tarentino's anti-cop hate-the-cops tirage was nothing more than a bullshit sandwich..
And ya ate it up... :D
"I eat pieces of shit like you for breakfast!!"
"You eat pieces of shit for breakfast??"
-Happy Gilmore
:D
Michale
Ahhhhhh The wonders of Democrat Party and their idea of "free speech"...
"I want more women to run for office, but equally important is encouraging more men to sometimes just shut the hell up."
-Senator Claire McCaskill D-MO
Yea, tell it like it is, Mac!!
If you aren't ideologically pure?? "Just shut the hell up!"...
If you don't say what we want to hear?? "Just shut the hell up!!"..
Yea... Democrats and "free speech"...
Gotta love it... :^/
Michale
What should be abundantly clear from all the examples, all the FACTS, I have put forth is this..
For the Democrat Party, "free speech" is simply a euphemism for silencing dissent and acknowledging only that speech that is politically and ideologically acceptable...
In short, it's an AGREE WITH US OR WE WILL HOUND YOU TO THE ENDS OF THE EARTH AND ATTACK YOU MERCILESSLY UNTIL YOU CAPITULATE OR ARE DESTROYED!!! way of thinking...
Lovely....
Michale
The Missouri University Police Department (MUPD) sent an email to students Tuesday morning urging them to call them and report any hurtful speech they encounter on the campus.
In an email that was flagged by several Missouri-based journalists, the MUPD asked “individuals who witness incidents of hateful and/or hurtful speech or actions” to call the department’s general phone line “to continue to ensure that the University of Missouri campus remains safe.” They suggest that students provide a detailed description of the offender, their location or license plate number, and even to take a picture if possible.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/university-of-missouri-police-ask-students-to-report-hurtful-speech/
The future leaders of government...
The future captains of industry...
"What a bunch of pussies..."
-Tommy Lee Jones, UNDER SEIGE
:D
Michale
For the Democrat Party, "free speech" is simply a euphemism for silencing dissent and acknowledging only that speech that is politically and ideologically acceptable...
Thank gods that doesn't apply here in Weigantia...
At least, not for the vast majority of us... :D
Michale
JEB really needs to make a splash tonight or it’s over for him. He should get with the program and debut a new Mexican rassler persona. Tights, hoodie (zippered, of course), and one of those Insane Clown Posse face masks. Fight Trump’s fire with fire. Trump is more likely to hit Pants On Fire Carson with the folding chair anyway. The Donald can’t let a pathological bullshitter upstage him during The Show. Rant Paul would be perfect to play the referee. He isn’t paying any attention to what’s happening.
The future leaders of government...
The future captains of industry...
"What a bunch of pussies..."
-Tommy Lee Jones, UNDER SEIGE
"University Police Emergency Line. What is your emergency??"
"Somebody hurt my feelings!! I have her name, her lic # and location!! Send a SWAT team!!! Hurry!!! Before she gets away!!"
"Ma'am, our SWAT team is currently engaged taking out a terrorist cell that is planning on detonating a dirty bomb.."
"I don't CARE!!! My FEELINGS have been hurt, you Neanderthal!!!! THAT is your priority!!!!"
Ya'all realize that those Left Wingers at MU just made their school the laughing stock of the entire country, right?? :D
Considering how bad their football team is, they are probably used to it...
That is the Left Wingery's contribution to American society...
Political Correctness that is totally whacked...
“Help me get this reporter out of here. I need some muscle over here.”
-Melissa Click, Professor, Mass Media, University of Missouri
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/11/can-we-take-political-correctness-seriously-now.html
Michale
JEB really needs to make a splash tonight or it’s over for him.
What ya don't realize is that it's been over for Jeb for months now..
:D
Michale
Michale [4] -
O'Malley has no chance, and I wouldn't mind him not being on a debate stage. Sanders, however, still does have a chance (he's polling higher among Dems than either Trump or Carson among GOPers).
John From Censornati [10] -
OK, I'd watch that!
:-)
Michale [12] -
You live in Florida. Has Jeb always been this bad at campaigning, or is it a recent development? What was he like campaigning for governor? Just curious, as I haven't heard anyone talk about his past campaigns, one way or the other.
-CW
Sanders, however, still does have a chance (he's polling higher among Dems than either Trump or Carson among GOPers).
The *ONLY* way that Sanders has a chance is if Hillary is indicted or has a coronary..
Either of which is a very real and distinct possibility so I grant you that Sanders has a possibility...
You live in Florida. Has Jeb always been this bad at campaigning, or is it a recent development? What was he like campaigning for governor? Just curious, as I haven't heard anyone talk about his past campaigns, one way or the other.
I rarely pay much attention to local and state politics, so I don't think I would be qualified to answer..
Michale
Does anyone in their right mind really think Jindal or Santorum are suddenly going to catch fire and rocket upwards in the polls? Me neither.
I just thought I would quote that juxtaposition.
I rarely pay much attention to local and state politics, so I don't think I would be qualified to answer..
On the other hand, when has THAT ever stopped me, eh? :D
My take on Jeb is that he is a Bush and the American people are tired of the name. Almost as much as they are tired of the Clinton name... I mean, let's face the reality here. Hillary is 20 times the Scandal Magnet that Bill is...
Anyways, Jeb had a lot to overcome and he has been found wanting...
At any other time or in another reality, Bush might have been a glorious candidate..
"In another reality, I could have called you 'friend'."
-Mark Lenard, STAR TREK, Balance Of Terror
Michale
CW-
I agree with your field of five, but not who belongs in the Great Chance, Decent Chance and Slim Chance Great Chance categories.
My own ranking of the horse race:
Great Chance: Nobody. In my judgment, no Republication candidate has a better than even chance of winning nomination at this time.
Decent Chance: Rubio, Cruz, Trump
Slim Chance: Bush, Carson
I don't put much faith in polls at this stage. Here's one reason why. The standard question asked by polling outfits goes like this "If the election were held today..." In other words, they encouraging the respondent to take a short view of a long term process. Tactical voting considerations are completely ignored.
In the early to mid game of a campaign cycle, I put more faith in prediction markets than polls because markets encourage investors to consider the end result...and keep them focused with a monetized stake in the outcome.
I also put a lot of faith in fundamentals like having won and held office, money, especially the ability to raise it from other people and endorsements.
I rate Rubio the favorite among the five and still climbing. He is leading in the prediction markets, and steadily climbing in the polls. He does reasonably well in fundamentals.
Cruz does well the fundamentals, but he is weak in both polls and markets, but at least level in both. I figure he some untapped potential to launch.
Trump does well in the polls(Remember Herman Cain?), but he can't seem to crack the 30% ceiling. Trump is currently a distant second in the markets, but I rate him weak in other factors.
Bush looks good in the fundamentals, but has under performed in virtually every other respect. He's very near the cliff.
Carson looks strong in the polls, but is weak in the markets and the fundamentals. He has the Barry Goldwater problem: "in your heart you know he's right, in guts, you know he's nuts."