Quick post-debate analysis
People seem to think that Rubio had a good debate. It certainly wasn’t horrible like his New Hampshire performance, but I think it’s too little too late.
The first forty minutes of the debate spent talking about immigration benefits Trump no matter what was said. Everyone knows Trump is the strongest candidate on immigration. It’s why the media hates him so much.
CNN completely dissed Kasich and Carson who barely had any chance to speak and the cameras most of the time only showed Rubio, Trump and Cruz on the stage.
The feeling you get from watching the debate is that Trump is the leader and everyone else knows it, and like the immigration issue, this helps Trump regardless of what is actually said.
My conclusion is that Trump just needed to not have a bad debate in order to retain his momentum and sweep Super Tuesday (except for Texas), and Trump did that. Nothing bad happened. Trump threw out some personal insults, but that is what he has done every debate. We are now used to it. It’s not a negative for Trump anymore, it just hurts the guys he insults.
Also, either the audience was a lot friendlier to Trump this debate, or Trump didn’t say anything unexpected that would cause establishment Republicans to boo him. Not sure which is the case.
* * *
The new Bloomberg poll shows that Trump will sweep Super Tuesday (except probably for Texas) because the anti-Trump vote is split between Rubio and Cruz. If everyone dropped out except for Rubio, the same poll shows it would be a lot closer with Trump having only a four point lead. But of course, the other candidates are NOT going to drop out. At least not until after Super Tuesday, at which time it will be too late.
Trump is actually weakest in the South. Trump is strongest in blue states where Republican voters are predominantly non-evangelical prole whites (because the college-educated whites in blue states are almost all Democrats and they don’t vote in the Republican primary).