Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:08 AM Feb 2016

The Iowa caucuses, both D and R, were canaries in the Establishment coal mine

Sanders, Cruz and Trump are running as anti-Establishment candidates, albeit from their respective sides of the political spectrum. None of them should have, would have, done as well as they did in prior elections. If the Establishment had its way it would have been Hillary by at least 20 percentage points and Bush or, as a fallback position, Rubio.

Of the two parties the GOPers were the real winners. First, their anti-Establishment candidates may be within 5-percentage points of each other but the real story is the Establishment guy only garnered 23 percentage points to the antis combined 53 percentage points. That greater than 2:1 anti-Establishment margin will continue to hold once the field narrows into a nominee.

Oh, and by the way, the Rs were able to muster a record turn-out meaning they're motivated.

Meanwhile, across the aisle the guy who shouldn't have been within 20 percentage points only lost by 6 coin tosses. Turn-out was good and by "good" I mean "typical." If the usual number of people are willing to caucus and half the caucus goers are willing to go anti-Establishment where are the margin of Ds that correspond to the additional turn-out of Rs?

Sitting home demoralized, I would imagine.

They want their own anti-Establishment candidate but they're being told it's too unrealistic. Such a candidate could never get anything past the GOP Congress which is just another way of saying Congress has been conceded to the GOP and the Establishment plans on working with them. Oh yeah, and remember when we rallied you to cheer for single-payer? Well, you're all idiots now -- probably racists, too.

Last night wasn't a win for the future nominee, it was the opening of a schism so finely split down the center that the only way to settle it was 6 out of 6 coin tosses. Meanwhile, the enemy is mustering record numbers to coalesce around ideals over personalities; a far stronger motivating force.

The electorate is angry and the only argument the Establishment candidates can make is they're the safe, predictable choice against their respective opposition even if they have to burn down their own previous platforms to do it.

Standard political playbook triangulations are not going to carry this election. If anything that will only exacerbate the anti-Establishment mood. But the Establishment will not change course because it is invested in one thing and one thing only: It's own power. It's only attraction is for those who think they will find safety within its walls.

This will not end well even if it ends in victory.

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Iowa caucuses, both D and R, were canaries in the Establishment coal mine (Original Post) Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 OP
Great post! Arazi Feb 2016 #1
Rubio is an establishment.figure. he did uncomfortably well cali Feb 2016 #2
Absolutely true but the real race now is Cruz v Trump and despite who loses Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #3
It depends on how many are supporting Cruz because they seem him as an alternative to Trump el_bryanto Feb 2016 #4
it cannot be overstated enough how big a threat Rubio is Cosmocat Feb 2016 #6
What's interesting (in a bad way) is.the Republican turnout Arazi Feb 2016 #5
This is 99 all over Cosmocat Feb 2016 #7
Geez, please noooooooo Arazi Feb 2016 #8
It is a complete rerun ... Cosmocat Feb 2016 #9

Arazi

(6,829 posts)
1. Great post!
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:12 AM
Feb 2016


Of the two parties the GOPers were the real winners. First, their anti-Establishment candidates may be within 5-percentage points of each other but the real story is the Establishment guy only garnered 23 percentage points to the antis combined 53 percentage points. That greater than 2:1 anti-Establishment margin will continue to hold once the field narrows into a nominee. 


So much this

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
3. Absolutely true but the real race now is Cruz v Trump and despite who loses
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:19 AM
Feb 2016

I don't see those voters realigning to Rubio.

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
4. It depends on how many are supporting Cruz because they seem him as an alternative to Trump
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 09:22 AM
Feb 2016

I don't see much difference between the two politically; but Trump does let Cruz look more reasonable - if Trump crushes Cruz than some of Cruz's followers may align with Rubio.

If Cruz beats Trump, than I think you are right, it will be Cruz for sure.

Bryant

Cosmocat

(14,563 posts)
6. it cannot be overstated enough how big a threat Rubio is
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:14 AM
Feb 2016

his third place speech was like a coronation, and was treated as such ...

The Hillary/Bernie mess won't make a bit of difference if he wins the nomination, he will talk to the White House if he gets the nomination.

Arazi

(6,829 posts)
5. What's interesting (in a bad way) is.the Republican turnout
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:10 AM
Feb 2016

It was far greater than the Dems. They're very motivated

Cosmocat

(14,563 posts)
7. This is 99 all over
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 11:17 AM
Feb 2016

We will be coming off 8 years of this country doing pretty darn well under a democratic president, but because republicans threw a nearly decade long hissy fit, this country is more than willing to give the white house to them just to STTFU.

If they get Rubio the nomination, it is over, it won't matter if it is Bernie or Hillary.

It won't be close.

If it is Cruz or Trump, they are horrible enough that it might work out ...

Cosmocat

(14,563 posts)
9. It is a complete rerun ...
Tue Feb 2, 2016, 12:02 PM
Feb 2016

I lived through the 90s, never understood the vitriol about a president who was reasonably personable and doing a pretty damn good job, and I still have a memories of election night when it was clear it was breaking to Jr, and knew we were fucked.

It has been a near complete replay with BHO, only somehow the jackasses in congress were worse this time.

They are cynical enough to know what they did in the 90s worked, and had no problem hampering the progress we did make the last 7 years to get to this point ...

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»The Iowa caucuses, both D...