Cruz will be the nominee. Prove me wrong.

[Lyin' Steve]

In order for Ted Cruz to be the nominee, three things have to happen:
1)  Trump fails to win a majority of delegates
2)  There is no white knight GOP savior during the convention
3)  Cruz is able to beat Trump in a 1-on-1 convention fight

1) seems 80-90% likely at this point.  Ted is likely to win many of the remaining states outside the northeast.  Of the states left, only NY, Conn, Del, MD, WV and NJ seem like surefire Trump wins.  Cruz could fight in California, Kasich could fight in Pennsylvania, and they can both fight in Washington, Indiana, etc.  Kasich could even challenge Trump in Connecticut and Delaware if he starts doing better (or Trump starts looking weak).  Most of the midwestern and western states otherwise seem like Cruz states.  Combine this with the ongoing Cruz/GOP efforts to steal Trump's already-won delegates and he's in trouble.

2) also seems very likely.  Who will be the savior?  Ryan and Romney would both rather have Cruz be the nominee than themselves, and every other GOP candidate ran this year and failed.  Face it, there's enough resignation to Cruz, and the party will prop him up enough to stop Trump, that it won't be able to turn around and kick him out at the convention.

3)  This seems easiest of all.  Cruz is wilier than Trump and will have Paul Ryan and the entire party behind him.  Trump delegates will cross over to Cruz, and it will be hard for Trump to find a platform during the hubbub of the convention to grab the attention he needs and have any sway.

So, that's how it will play out.  Trump will win some big states, but not enough, Cruz will grind him away, the first ballot will be a wash and the Rubio/Kasich delegates, plus some Trump delegates, will go over to Cruz and give him a majority on the second or third ballot of the convention.  It will be over in the blink of an eye.

[P123]

Honestly 50-50 on this. If Cruz wins Wisconsin big (by 10+ points) the chances of this are likely.

If it gets to the convention, Cruz will win it.

[yankeesfan]

I agree with you.  To add to #2, Trump and Cruz will both petition to keep Rule 40 which prohibits any candidate who does not win the majority of delegates in 8 states from receiving the nomination.  It's my understanding that that will eliminate the potential for a white knight or Kasich from getting the nomination.

[PaperKooper]

This looks more likely every day. 

[Xing]

I wouldn't say 80-90% by this point, since CA, IN, and PA will be very important. If Cruz locks Trump out of any delegates in WI, he might be getting somewhere, though.

[Matty]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

[P123]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

off topic, but who wins Montana? Cruz or Trump?

[Pandaguineapig]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

off topic, but who wins Montana? Cruz or Trump?

Cruz

[RaphaelDLG]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

BAHAHAHAHA

[P123]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

off topic, but who wins Montana? Cruz or Trump?

Cruz

You sure? Seems like a strong TRUMP state. Although I could be completely wrong, thats why I was asking Marty.

[Mr. Morden]

If after California and other early June states have voted, Trump is short of 1237 pledged delegates, but not by much, he could still end up with a delegate majority on the first ballot by picking up some of the unpledged delegates.  He doesn't have to win *all* of them.  In fact, he probably doesn't have to win a majority of them.  It depends on the exact numbers.

So, that's the question.  How many unpledged delegates will he need to pick up in order to win on the first ballot, and how many of them will be pre-disposed to supporting him?  Even if he's not their first choice, how many of them will be swayed by his "I got a plurality, so you have to nominate me or it's undemocratic" argument?  Many of them won't be swayed by that, some of them will.  I don't know what the number will be.

[Ljube]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

off topic, but who wins Montana? Cruz or Trump?

Cruz

Trump. It's an open primary and Trump will only be up to 200 delegates short on that day, so Montana win could be crucial and will motivate his people to turn out and vote.

[Ljube]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

off topic, but who wins Montana? Cruz or Trump?

Cruz

You sure? Seems like a strong TRUMP state. Although I could be completely wrong, thats why I was asking Marty.

Marty is an anti-Trump hack who resorted to lying about the poll results in Iowa. I wouldn't trust him on anything.

[Mehmentum]

I would say #1 is at about 50-50 at this point.  The race is right at the edge right now, imo.

#3 depends entirely on the 1st ballot.  If Trump can persuade enough unpledged delegates to back him on the 1st ballot, he's got it.  After the first ballot, there's no chance for Trump.  The bottom will fall out as the delegates that were bound to him are released.  This is one of the big reasons why Cruz's delegate games at the state conventions could be so important.

#2 also depends on how good Cruz's ninja delegate skills are.  Once delegates become unbound, how many of the delegates at the convention will be establishmentarians?  How many are Cruz supporters?  How many are Trump supporters?

If Cruz can plant a majority or a strong plurality of the convention with his supporters, then the nomination is his at that point.  If Cruz doesn't have quite enough support, then things become truly unpredictable.  Cruz would have a chance still. A Romney nomination would be unlikely, but maybe Ryan could be the compromise candidate?  Who knows what else could happen.

[MK]

Whats the point?  Cruz will get crushed in tge general anyway under any of those senerios.    Trump will essentially campaign against the gop thus helping Hillary prob run some sort of 3rd party campaign .     Cruz will be served up as a sacrificial lamb. Funny thing is hes so stupid not to see it coming.

BTW Trump supporters are more likely to vote for Hillary than Cruzs small far right base.  The Gop is walking into a trap if Ted Cruz wins by some sort of convention trick.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

Get out of my party, you filthy disgusting bigot. You are lower than a dog to me.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Trump has it covered.

[yankeesfan]

Biggest problem is that many "douchebag" states still have to vote, and by that I mean states filled with people who put cheesewiz on their sandwich, talk with a rough and tough accent, wifebeater-sporting, etc. I am of course referring to PA, upstate and even NYC, and worst of all NJ, a very nasty state. Trump does well with vulgar and crude voters.

I've lived in 2 of those states and went to school in the other.  Couldn't agree more with your characterization.

[Vosem]

Whats the point?  Cruz will get crushed in tge general anyway under any of those senerios.    Trump will essentially campaign against the gop thus helping Hillary prob run some sort of 3rd party campaign .     Cruz will be served up as a sacrificial lamb. Funny thing is hes so stupid not to see it coming.

BTW Trump supporters are more likely to vote for Hillary than Cruzs small far right base.  The Gop is walking into a trap if Ted Cruz wins by some sort of convention trick.

Well, the point is that, while he is still unlikely to win, Cruz does seem likely to do several percentage points better than _trump, which would probably be enough to keep the Senate, keep Scalia's SCOTUS seat vacant, and try to do this all right 4 years from now. You gotta work with the cards you're dealt. We can't go back in time, put a muzzle on Chris Christie (like a dog!), and give Rubio the nomination. Doesn't work that way.

In terms of the original post, I agree with your 80-90% that _trump won't get 1237 through the voting, but he does have one final card left to play, which is that some of the territorial/Pennsylvanian uncommitted delegates will be sympathetic to him, and we don't know how many. That'll give him a final delegate boost. I don't know if it'll be enough to take him over 1237 on the first ballot (I personally doubt it), but I would say the odds right now are more 60-70% range than 80-90%.

Also, whoever talked about Montana: judging by Idahoan results _trump does probably have an outside shot here (though Cruz is still favored, even in the three-way). He'd be doomed in a two-way race, so hopefully Cruz's effort to get Kasich off the ballot there will both be successful and not get too much bad blood between them.

[i4indyguy]

No... I refuse to prove you wrong. Because you are most likely right.

[RFayette]

Whats the point?  Cruz will get crushed in tge general anyway under any of those senerios.    Trump will essentially campaign against the gop thus helping Hillary prob run some sort of 3rd party campaign .     Cruz will be served up as a sacrificial lamb. Funny thing is hes so stupid not to see it coming.

BTW Trump supporters are more likely to vote for Hillary than Cruzs small far right base.  The Gop is walking into a trap if Ted Cruz wins by some sort of convention trick.

Well, the point is that, while he is still unlikely to win, Cruz does seem likely to do several percentage points better than _trump, which would probably be enough to keep the Senate, keep Scalia's SCOTUS seat vacant, and try to do this all right 4 years from now. You gotta work with the cards you're dealt. We can't go back in time, put a muzzle on Chris Christie (like a dog!), and give Rubio the nomination. Doesn't work that way.

In terms of the original post, I agree with your 80-90% that _trump won't get 1237 through the voting, but he does have one final card left to play, which is that some of the territorial/Pennsylvanian uncommitted delegates will be sympathetic to him, and we don't know how many. That'll give him a final delegate boost. I don't know if it'll be enough to take him over 1237 on the first ballot (I personally doubt it), but I would say the odds right now are more 60-70% range than 80-90%.

Also, whoever talked about Montana: judging by Idahoan results _trump does probably have an outside shot here (though Cruz is still favored, even in the three-way). He'd be doomed in a two-way race, so hopefully Cruz's effort to get Kasich off the ballot there will both be successful and not get too much bad blood between them.

Agreed.  I like Trump and support his ideas, but part of me wants him to lose the nomination.  Give it to Cruz, he'll likely do better in the general, and then someone with views similar to Trump (but makes fewer gaffes and is more moderate) can run and beat Hillary in 2020.  My fear is that Trump could deliver the House to the Dems, whereas Cruz can probably keep both houses GOP.

[Indy Texas]

Whats the point?  Cruz will get crushed in tge general anyway under any of those senerios.    Trump will essentially campaign against the gop thus helping Hillary prob run some sort of 3rd party campaign .     Cruz will be served up as a sacrificial lamb. Funny thing is hes so stupid not to see it coming.

BTW Trump supporters are more likely to vote for Hillary than Cruzs small far right base.  The Gop is walking into a trap if Ted Cruz wins by some sort of convention trick.

Well, the point is that, while he is still unlikely to win, Cruz does seem likely to do several percentage points better than _trump, which would probably be enough to keep the Senate, keep Scalia's SCOTUS seat vacant, and try to do this all right 4 years from now. You gotta work with the cards you're dealt. We can't go back in time, put a muzzle on Chris Christie (like a dog!), and give Rubio the nomination. Doesn't work that way.

In terms of the original post, I agree with your 80-90% that _trump won't get 1237 through the voting, but he does have one final card left to play, which is that some of the territorial/Pennsylvanian uncommitted delegates will be sympathetic to him, and we don't know how many. That'll give him a final delegate boost. I don't know if it'll be enough to take him over 1237 on the first ballot (I personally doubt it), but I would say the odds right now are more 60-70% range than 80-90%.

Also, whoever talked about Montana: judging by Idahoan results _trump does probably have an outside shot here (though Cruz is still favored, even in the three-way). He'd be doomed in a two-way race, so hopefully Cruz's effort to get Kasich off the ballot there will both be successful and not get too much bad blood between them.

What makes you think Rubio would have done better? He's an 18 year old running for president of the College Republicans in 1987, trapped in the body of a 45 year old man in 2016.

His platform is the same one voters rejected in 2012, but he doesn't go so far as to use the word "self-deport."

[Ljube]

There is no proof that either Cruz or Rubio would do better than Trump in the general election.

Cruz is an ideological candidate of the GOP conservative wing. If we look at the past results, we can only expect him to do extraordinarily bad in the general and to impact the downballot races somewhat. No guarantee the GOP will keep the Senate with Cruz, though the House should be safe.

Rubio is a lightweight, but he would probably be better than Cruz, again judging by past election results. The GOP might keep the Senate with him.

Trump is a wildcard. he loses a lot of votes in solid Republican states and in solid Democratic states. Some of the traditional swing states are out of reach for him. But he plays very well in a number of key swing states and in some traditionally Democratic states. He may expand the map for the GOP.

The thing is, with the map being the way it is, I can't imagine a GOP win with any of the candidates save Trump, for he alone can expand the map to states which normally would be considered safe or likely D (PA and MI).

[Ljube]

The thing is, with the map being the way it is, I can't imagine a GOP win with any of the candidates save Trump, for he alone cane expand the map to states which normally would be considered safe or likely D (PA and MI).

Kasich would have won this election.

Based on what?

[Ljube]

Based on what?

Common sense. Any decent Republican would have won this election against Clinton. (not an idiot who believes in the solid 270 blue wall)

Of course. I don't believe in the blue wall either. And yes, Kasich is a statist, so he could win Virginia. He would also win Ohio. Can't see him losing Ohio.

Kasich doesn't motivate the voters to turn out. Neither does Hillary. The election would be similar to 2000.

Florida would be the key battleground state and Iowa/Colorado too. Tell me how Kasich wins Florida and one of the Iowa/Colorado.