Will Trump be the GOP nominee?

[ElectionsGuy]

80% chance yes. The one scenario I can actually see happening is Cruz winning Iowa, Trump winning New Hampshire, a bunch of establishment and nobodies drop out afterward, and then it mainly becomes a race between Cruz and Trump, of which Cruz might be favored. But if Cruz loses Iowa, forget it.

[youngohioan216]

 If Trump wins the first few primaries and proves he's for real, could we see many liberals cross over and vote Republican because:

-They would be fine with either Hillary or Bernie, and don't want Trump to get the nomination so the vote for a non-Trump Republican

OR

-They vote for Trump because they think it would set up any easy win for the Democrat

[TDAS04]

It's looking more and more likely.

[ShadowRocket]

I think a Cruz victory in IA is probably the only thing that could really prevent it at this point.

[Talleyrand]

No. Rubio is the likeliest nominee, followed by Cruz. I'd go so far as to say one of the three establishment stragglers (Kasich, Christie, Bush) have better chances than Trump.

I will accept my accolades once this is all over.

[The Other Castro]

No. Rubio is the likeliest nominee, followed by Cruz. I'd go so far as to say one of the three establishment stragglers (Kasich, Christie, Bush) have better chances than Trump.

I will accept my accolades once this is all over.

Talleyrand is Nate Silver confirmed.

[IceSpear]

No. Rubio is the likeliest nominee, followed by Cruz. I'd go so far as to say one of the three establishment stragglers (Kasich, Christie, Bush) have better chances than Trump.

I will accept my accolades once this is all over.

What's your reasoning?

[Asian Nazi]

No. Rubio is the likeliest nominee, followed by Cruz. I'd go so far as to say one of the three establishment stragglers (Kasich, Christie, Bush) have better chances than Trump.

I will accept my accolades once this is all over.

We have a time traveler from six months ago, I see.

[wolfsblood07]

No. Rubio is the likeliest nominee, followed by Cruz. I'd go so far as to say one of the three establishment stragglers (Kasich, Christie, Bush) have better chances than Trump.

I will accept my accolades once this is all over.

In all honesty I think that make sense, and have been predicting it for months. But I am perplexed that the establishment has not to this point rallied around a candidate.  In fact, they seem to be moving in the direction of Trump, oddly enough.  To the point where I am now totally baffled.

[Ljube]

No. Rubio is the likeliest nominee, followed by Cruz. I'd go so far as to say one of the three establishment stragglers (Kasich, Christie, Bush) have better chances than Trump.

I will accept my accolades once this is all over.

In all honesty I think that make sense, and have been predicting it for months. But I am perplexed that the establishment has not to this point rallied around a candidate.  In fact, they seem to be moving in the direction of Trump, oddly enough.  To the point where I am now totally baffled.

Nothing baffling about that. TRUMP is the only candidate who can expand the map. All other Pub candidates are low energy LOSERS. The Establishment has realized that and are lining up behind the only Pub hope this cycle - TRUMP.

[Reginald]

I can't get rid of some conspiracy-esque suspicions that I suppose I'm doubling down on by voting No. That being said, it's concerning that some on the left here really think it'll be a cakewalk for Clinton if he's actually nominated. Hopefully the Party itself isn't as complacent. It's gonna have to be a pretty delicate task to run against him.

[Talleyrand]

Talleyrand is Nate Silver confirmed.

What's your reasoning?

We have a time traveler from six months ago, I see.

There are several reasons why I still find his nomination improbable, or even close to implausible.

1. People are going to be getting a lot more aggressive in debates. In the last debate, Trump was quite battered by Cruz until he was thrown a lifeline with the whole "NY values". I expect Cruz to really lay it into him in future encounters, and if/when people like Rubio and Christie start directing their fire to him, it will be very difficult for him to fight back. In addition, assuming he lasts as the field winnows down, his relative lack of policy knowledge is going to show and he will tire easily.

2. His "ground game" is junk and he has few competent people on the ground or even working for his campaign. This means that he'll probably severely underperform his polling, especially in caucus states where such organization is vital to the success of a campaign.

3. No large-scale attack on him has been organized yet. When you get serious money attacking him, he will falter and the media cycle will end up being Trump trying to deny or turn around all his non-conservative statements or controversial actions over the past decades (such as the eminent domain thing). That will seriously hurt him.

4. He's raised the expectations quite highly, and when he fails to deliver, he will be labeled a loser.

5. His support among regular Republican primary voters and caucus goers is fairly weak, and with his high unfavorables, he doesn't have much room to grow. A lot of his supporters won't show or aren't eligible to vote in these contests.

6. The electability factor will kill him, as a majority of Republicans have stated this is their most important criterion in choosing a candidate.

[Ljube]

Talleyrand is Nate Silver confirmed.

What's your reasoning?

We have a time traveler from six months ago, I see.

There are several reasons why I still find his nomination improbable, or even close to implausible.

1. People are going to be getting a lot more aggressive in debates. In the last debate, Trump was quite battered by Cruz until he was thrown a lifeline with the whole "NY values". I expect Cruz to really lay it into him in future encounters, and if/when people like Rubio and Christie start directing their fire to him, it will be very difficult for him to fight back. In addition, assuming he lasts as the field winnows down, his relative lack of policy knowledge is going to show and he will tire easily.

2. His "ground game" is junk and he has few competent people on the ground or even working for his campaign. This means that he'll probably severely underperform his polling, especially in caucus states where such organization is vital to the success of a campaign.

3. No large-scale attack on him has been organized yet. When you get serious money attacking him, he will falter and the media cycle will end up being Trump trying to deny or turn around all his non-conservative statements or controversial actions over the past decades (such as the eminent domain thing). That will seriously hurt him.

4. He's raised the expectations quite highly, and when he fails to deliver, he will be labeled a loser.

5. His support among regular Republican primary voters and caucus goers is fairly weak, and with his high unfavorables, he doesn't have much room to grow. A lot of his supporters won't show or aren't eligible to vote in these contests.

6. The electability factor will kill him, as a majority of Republicans have stated this is their most important criterion in choosing a candidate.

I'm not going to comment any of your points save point 6.

TRUMP is the most electable of all Republican candidates and the Republican primary voters know this. All polls have consistently shown this.

[Asian Nazi]

There are several reasons why I still find his nomination improbable, or even close to implausible.

1. People are going to be getting a lot more aggressive in debates. In the last debate, Trump was quite battered by Cruz until he was thrown a lifeline with the whole "NY values". I expect Cruz to really lay it into him in future encounters, and if/when people like Rubio and Christie start directing their fire to him, it will be very difficult for him to fight back. In addition, assuming he lasts as the field winnows down, his relative lack of policy knowledge is going to show and he will tire easily.

TRUMP is a great debater.  He's won every debate so far.  Why would he start doing poorly now?  Hackery.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The supposed ineptitude of his ground game is severely overrated by media HACKS.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Studies have shown that TRUMP supporters don't care about his supposedly unconservative positions.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

"People think he will do well, therefore he will do bad."  lol 

TRUMP is not going to fail to meet expectations.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

TRUMP is the only candidate expanding beyond the traditional GOP base.  This is a strength, not a weakness.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

TRUMP is the most electable candidate. 

[Maxwell]

I think Talley is still viewing it from Atlas lenses. It implies Republican voters care about detailed policy proposals and knowledge. It implies Republican voters don't agree with Trump on the issues, it implies that Republican voters don't think Trump is electable. All of this is false - Republicans like Trump percisely because he gives no details because if you're giving details you sound like an "all talk no action politician". republicans like Trump because, from what he says, he agrees with them on the issues, or even just agrees with their tone on the issues. And Republican voters, in survey after survey, think Trump is the most electable Republican.

That and Trump completely and entirely controls the narrative of the election and nobody seems strong enough to even try to grab it out of his hands. Everything done is done in the context of Trump's world. As long as that is the case Trump won't lose.

[LLR]

Three answers, ranked in order of trolliness:

1) No, Jim Gilmore has much higher odds than Trump.

2) No, because in the next week Trump gets more endorsements. At the debate Cruz and Carson call him  "too establishment" and he realizes it... He is the establishment. What has happened!?

3) Yeah, probably.

[The Mikado]

A Democratic Senate and President Trump would be interesting. I just started a topic about that in the congressional section.

I think Trump would actually prefer that. He'd love to get Ryan and (probably) Schumer in a room together in the world-class resort he'd replace Camp David with and force them to hammer out a deal. It'd play to his vanity and (admittedly real) strengths as a shark at the negotiating table. Ryan and Schumer would also not be able to present a unified Congressional front against him, unlike Ryan/McConnell, who could close ranks against him.

EDIT: As to the question at hand, and as a response to Talleyrand both...Donald Trump is a natural-born showman. He is not going to fail to meet expectations. He's going to put on the show of a lifetime, or his name isn't Donald J. Trump.