The immutable laws of primaries

The immutable laws of primaries

by digby

First Read this morning decides that Rubio is the frontrunner on the establishment track but they fret that he can't really win because he's not ahead in Iowa or new Hampshire. Why?
Remember, in this modern political era, every GOP nominee has won EITHER Iowa or New Hampshire. Right now, he's standing in third place in public polling in both states - behind both Trump and Carson.
Think about that for a minute. They build a whole analysis around it. It goes on for paragraphs. They look at his chances in Iowa or New Hampshire from every angle. They wonder if his problem is that he has no geographical ties to either state. But at no point do they question this fatuous insistence that because every GOP nominee in the modern era has gone on to win the election won one or the other it must mean that it's an immutable law of nature.

And obviously, it isn't. It's entirely possible for someone to win the presidency without winning one of those states. Indeed, one explanation as to why this has happened in the past is that the eventual winner has always had some regional tie to one of them. Unless they are also suggesting that it's an immutable fact that any Republican must have such a regional tie, that would be the explanation.

Anyway, it's idiotic. If Carson or Trump were to win each of those states they are saying it's inevitable that one of them will go on to win the nomination. Do they believe that? I doubt it.

This is the sort of Russertian beltway analysis that will drive you nuts if you take it too seriously. Obviously we have no idea if Rubio can win the nomination at this point. He's hardly breaking double digits and Cruz is right on his heels. Speculating about it under those circumstances is a parlor game at best anyway. But assuming that a candidate cannot win if they don't win Iowa or new Hampshire is ridiculous, no matter who it is.

Remember, it wasn't long ago that these same people insisted that no Senator could win the presidency because none had done it since 1960. Guess what?

.