Tuesday Open Thread [2.9.16]

NATIONAL—Rasmussen— Trump 31, Rubio 21, Cruz 20, Kasich 6, Carson 5, Bush 4, Christie 3, Fiorina 3
NATIONAL—Rasmussen–Clinton 50, Sanders 32
NATIONAL—NBC News/SurveyMonkey–Trump 35, Cruz 20, Rubio 17, Carson 7
NATIONAL—NBC News/SurveyMonkey–Clinton 51, Sanders 39
NEW HAMPSHIRE—Emerson–Trump 31, Bush 16, Kasich 13, Rubio 12, Cruz 11, Christie 6, Fiorina 7, Carson 3
NEW HAMPSHIRE—Emerson–Sanders 54, Clinton 42
NEW HAMPSHIRE—ARG (Tracking)–Trump 30, Rubio 16, Kasich 16, Cruz 10, Bush 9, Christie 6, Fiorina 3, Carson 1
NEW HAMPSHIRE—ARG (Tracking)–Sanders 53, Clinton 41
NEW HAMPSHIRE—Gravis–Trump 28, Kasich 17, Rubio 15, Bush 14, Cruz 11, Christie 6, Fiorina 5, Carson 3
NEW HAMPSHIRE—CNN/WMUR–Sanders 61, Clinton 35
NEW HAMPSHIRE—CNN/WMUR–Trump 31, Rubio 17, Kasich 10, Cruz 14, Bush 7, Christie 4, Fiorina 5, Carson 3
ARKANSAS—Talk Business/Hendrix College–Cruz 27, Trump 23, Rubio 23, Carson 11, Kasich 4, Fiorina 4, Bush 1, Christie 1
ARKSANAS—Talk Business/Hendrix College–Clinton 57, Sanders 25
MICHIGAN—FOX 2 Detroit/Mitchell–Trump 41, Rubio 20, Cruz 16, Carson 9, Bush 2, Christie 2
MICHIGAN—FOX 2 Detroit/Mitchell–Clinton 57, Sanders 28
MICHIGAN—IMP/Target Insyght–Trump 35, Cruz 21, Rubio 21, Kasich 6, Carson 5, Bush 3, Christie 3, Fiorina 3
MICHIGAN—IMP/Target Insyght–Clinton 62, Sanders 30
NORTH CAROLINA—High Point–Trump 26, Cruz 22, Rubio 20, Carson 9, Bush 3, Christie 2, Kasich 2, Fiorina 1
NORTH CAROLINA—High Point–Clinton 55, Sanders 29

Nate Cohn on whether Trump will underperform in New Hampshire like he did in Iowa: “Donald Trump will win in New Hampshire if the polls are anywhere near right. He’s had a double-digit lead in every poll this year.”

“The number to watch is 31. That’s Mr. Trump’s share of the vote in the last New Hampshire polls. If he finishes well beneath that mark, it will raise some pretty serious questions about just how legitimate his support is nationwide — whether it’s because late deciders keep moving against him or because his mediocre field operation is failing to mobilize infrequent voters.”

Sam Wang says New Hampshire is unlikely to narrow the GOP field: “I am not sure that any of the above-listed non-Trump candidates will exit the race after today. Cruz is in to stay. Kasich has risen slowly since the new year, and a strong finish today would keep him in the race. In fact, I give Kasich an even-odds chance of ending up in second place. Already that’s four candidates – a threshold I have identified as problematic for the Republican Party.”

“Alternatively, Jeb Bush could pick up a few points, and decide to stick around along with his super-PAC money. Christie’s support is pretty low, but he had a little too much fun in Saturday’s debate to get out now. All in all, it seems likely that after New Hampshire, the field will remain divided for a while longer.”

First Read agrees: “No matter who finishes second/third/fourth/fifth in New Hampshire, don’t expect anyone to drop out after New Hampshire, especially after smelling blood versus Rubio. That’s maybe the biggest consequence of Rubio’s debate performance. And it complicates his path to victory in South Carolina, because that same traffic-jam dynamic will continue in the Palmetto State if everyone stays in the race.”

Jonathan Chait on why liberals should support a Trump nomination: “There are three reasons, in descending order of obviousness, for a liberal to earnestly and patriotically support a Trump Republican nomination. The first, of course, is that he would almost certainly lose… Second, a Trump nomination might upend his party… About half of Republicans favor higher taxes on the rich, a position that has zero representation among their party’s leaders. And those Republicans are the most likely to support Trump.”

“The third reason to prefer a Trump nomination: If he does win, a Trump presidency would probably wind up doing less harm to the country than a Marco Rubio or a Cruz presidency. It might even, possibly, do some good.”

He is wrong on that last point. Yes, Trump is not an obvious dyed in the wool conservative who will end Social Security and Medicare and return us to the 1880’s with respect to safety regulations, and in that respect Cruz and Rubio are worse. But Trump is a fascist and a bigot, and he doesn’t hide it. In fact, they are his reasons for being. And for that reason it is too dangerous to imagine a world where Trump is President.

Marcobot got stuck on repeat again yesterday. I wonder when Cyberdyne Systems will issue the recall.

Billionaire former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced that he is thinking about getting into the Presidential race as an Independent. Previously, he had said he would consider it if Trump and Sanders were the nominees, but if Hillary Clinton were the nominee, he could live with that and won’t run. Hillary is likely to be the nominee, but with March deadlines coming up for ballot access in several states for Independents, it looks like Bloomberg is putting the train in motion just in case. A Bloomberg candidacy would doom the Democrats’ chances of winning the White House.

Jeet Heer says New Hampshire is Jeb!’s do or die moment:

Bush has been floundering for so many months, it’s easy to lose sight of how odd this situation is—and of the profound truth it speaks about the state of the Republican Party. It’s easy to forget that Bush entered the race as the expected front-runner who quickly raised an intimidating war chest in a “shock and awe” attempt to ward off challengers. Moreover, members of the Bush family had been powerful figures in the GOP for decades—and, as befits a conservative party, Republicans have tended to be loyal to a few stalwart figures and families. […]

Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary will likely decide the fate of not just Jeb Bush, but perhaps the entire Bush dynasty. It may also render a final verdict on the style of Republican fusion politics that the family has long represented. Currently clustered among the second-tier candidates, Jeb could conceivably rally his supporters, vault past his former protégé Marco Rubio to make a decent showing in second place, and regain his status as the establishment candidate. That would put him in a position to head to the next primary in South Carolina—where his brother George W. is slated to campaign for him—and compete with the national front-runners Donald Trump and Senator Ted Cruz in a potential three-way race.

Of course, the fact that Bush’s best-case scenario involves a series of far-fetched hypotheticals is a good indication of how dire his situation has become. If he fares poorly in New Hampshire, and especially if Rubio has a good night, even family loyalists who have stuck with the Bushes for decades will have to move on. “There is an increasing sense that Jeb Bush is running out of time to demonstrate strength,” reports Alex Isenstadt at Politico.

Strength and Jeb Bush are two words you don’t see put together too often.

Ed Kilgore says New Hampshire has a long history of Primary Night Surprises.

The Granite State has a long tradition of thumbing its nose at the preferences of Iowa, its first-in-the-nation twin. The last time the New Hampshire Democrats voted for the same candidate in a competitive primary was in 2000 with Al Gore; you have to go back to 1992 to find a similarly harmonious early-state outcome for Republicans. But high-impact results in New Hampshire go all the way back to 1952, when voters there were first allowed to directly vote for candidates rather than just delegates. President Harry Truman’s ambitions for a second full term expired when he lost to crowd-pleasing Tennessee senator Estes Kefauver. (Truman’s successor Dwight D. Eisenhower, meanwhile, began his climb to the White House by beating “Mr. Republican” Robert Taft.)

In 1964 Republicans surprised probably even themselves by giving a write-in candidacy on behalf of ambassador to South Vietnam (and former Massachusetts senator) Henry Cabot Lodge a victory over Nelson Rockefeller and Barry Goldwater. In 1968, Democrats showed that meeting expectations could matter as much as order of finish, as President Lyndon Johnson was all but pushed out of a reelection race by a shockingly narrow victory over Gene McCarthy. The same thing happened to 1972 Democratic front-runner Ed Muskie, who underperformed in a win over eventual nominee George McGovern (one of two consecutive long-shot Democrats to be lifted into contention by New Hampshire, the other being Jimmy Carter in 1976). The reverse phenomenon occurred in 1992, when Bill Clinton became the “comeback kid” with a better-than-expected second-place finish immediately following the Gennifer Flowers scandal.

That said, Hillary will not win in New Hampshire tonight. If she does, the primary is over. What is important is the margin. If the margin is 15-30 points as the polls suggest, Bernie gets the win and momentum. If the margin is in single digits, Hillary gets the “win” and momentum.

Eugene Robinson on Marcobot’s debate glitch:

It’s time for establishment Republicans to face the truth about Marco Rubio: Once you get past the facade, there appears to be no there there.

The void behind his prettified rhetoric was stunningly revealed in Saturday night’s debate. Rubio sounded like a malfunctioning cyborg as he kept repeating one of his prepared lines. […]

I dwell on this weirdly robotic performance because it was so revealing. Rubio became the darling of the Republican establishment because of his youth, his looks, his inspiring life story, his adherence to GOP orthodoxy and, perhaps above all, his compelling way with words. No one else in the generally dour and angry field has his ability to paint a hopeful future. A general election contest that pits either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders against Rubio, many leading Republicans believe, would be like asking voters to choose between yesterday and tomorrow.

At a rally last night, Donald Trump created yet another new low in modern campaigning.

Ezra Klein on why the Marcobot gaffe matters:

Gaffes matter when they confirm underlying doubts about a candidate. That’s why Rick Perry’s “oops” moment echoed so far and wide — it validated suspicions that Perry wasn’t quite up to the rigors of the campaign. If the same thing had happened to Romney, it would’ve been a one-day story, because Romney was a PowerPoint presentation reincarnated as a human being — no one believed he couldn’t remember a bullet-pointed list of three items.

Rubio’s stumble on Saturday was an “oops” moment; it confirmed underlying doubts about his candidacy — doubts that the rival campaigns have been whispering in Republican ears for months now, with surprising success. If you’re a Republican donor today, you’re not looking to push Christie and Bush and Kasich out of the race so you can ensure Rubio gets to stand on a stage debating Hillary Clinton. Instead, you’re less sure than ever whether you want Rubio on stage with Clinton at all.

We already miss the great President Barack Obama. David Brooks: “As this primary season has gone along, a strange sensation has come over me: I miss Barack Obama. Now, obviously I disagree with a lot of Obama’s policy decisions. I’ve been disappointed by aspects of his presidency. I hope the next presidency is a philosophic departure.”

“But over the course of this campaign it feels as if there’s been a decline in behavioral standards across the board. Many of the traits of character and leadership that Obama possesses, and that maybe we have taken too much for granted, have suddenly gone missing or are in short supply.”

“The first and most important of these is basic integrity.”

I hope for more of Obamaism, not less, as Brooks does, but his point, that President Obama is a man of great integrity and will be missed, is not lost on me.