Politics

The ebb and flow of campaigns is something political insiders and professionals try to master, but it is usually mysterious. Timing is everything. It is clear that Ted Cruz and especially Marco Rubio have generated some momentum by attacking Donald Trump more personally and viscerally, but far from clear that it will change the course of the contest. What if Rubio had started two weeks earlier with personal attacks: Trump as “con man'; Trump should sue “whoever did that to his face”; Trump as an elderly man who had to check during the debate that “his pants weren’t wet”?

Leader: Donald Trump used to be a Democrat.
Congregation: Trump voters don’t care.

Leader: Donald Trump is the spoiled child of a rich man.
Congregation: Trump voters don’t care.

Leader: Donald Trump has failed in business many, many times.
Congregation: Trump voters don’t care.

One of the last remaining pro-Rubio arguments is that he will prevail once there is a head-to-head match-up between him and Trump. The latest YouGov survey offers the strongest evidence yet that this is simply more wishful thinking by the candidate and his supporters. In a hypothetical Trump-Rubio race, 57% of Republicans choose Trump and 43% pick Rubio. Among self-identified conservatives, the numbers are similar: 55% for Trump to 45% for Rubio. Cruz also loses in a two-man race, and by roughly the same margin (58-42%).

The story of how the GOP haltingly tried and failed to stop Trump is an interesting read. In light of Christie’s Trump endorsement on Friday, this section deserves a few comments:

The New York Times reports on Hillary Clinton’s role in the Libyan war. This passage sums up much of what’s wrong with how Clinton and her supporters think about how the U.S. should respond to foreign conflicts: