Fox News Channel moderators Megyn Kelly, Chris Wallace and Bret Baier provided an awkward, chatty opening unfitting for a national discussion.  However, once the rhetoric began to fly, it was clear that Fox was targeting Trump’s candidacy and using their inquiries to expose his weaknesses as a Republican candidate.  That, I can understand.  But as a Fox product, why not have the moderators ask a few questions over the course of the evening that might allow the GOP to gain some support from the undecideds.  In my opinion, the phrasing of the questions by the Fox commentators did not bolster the Republican messaging, but instead made each of them appear weaker.

Right off the bat, Trump’s reluctance to waive the possibility of a 3rd party run set the tone for the debate.  With the independent elephant in the room immediately in play, I would have liked to have seen follow-up questions directed to some of the other candidates about “party versus person” in an effort to further isolate Trump since that was the clearly Fox’s intention. Always playing a hunch, it is interesting to note that during the debate, The Donald was overtly supportive of Jeb Bush – which might be a wise hedge bet.

Not all of the candidates were asked the same questions, but each got a crack at a domestic issue and a foreign policy matter.  Using a +2 to -2 rating for each response given, here is how we scored the candidates.

All of the candidates were confronted with similar opening questions which addressed their perceived weaknesses.  Notably, the candidates did not all receive an equal number of questions: Rand Paul and Chris Christie were severely shortchanged.  Huckabee, Cruz and Christie made the most of their opportunities, while the good doctor Carson looked uneasy and did not shine among the top tier candidates.

We had Marco Rubio as the winner for the evening session, but evangelicals, Huckabee and Cruz were close behind and each of the 2nd place finishers were offered one fewer question.  Trump was surprisingly well-behaved but offered little content.  Jeb Bush did not seem excited about his messaging but he plodded along.  Kasich benefitted from the Ohio home cooking, but did not score many points with the Bench Jockeys.

We are now just over 15 months away from election night 2016.  Much can happen between now and the Iowa Caucus (2/1/16), New Hampshire Primary (2/9/16) and Super Tuesday (3/1/16).  We aim to stay on top of the 2016 election, and accordingly, our odds have been adjusted. Click here http://thebenchjockeys.com/updated-odds-for-2016-presidential-nominations/ for our updates which consider our perceptions from both the early show and the main event.

The Bench Jockeys scored and graded all of the individual responses on a +2 to a -2 scale.  (We will use the same format and assessment tool for this evening’s main course.)  Carly Fiorina was the clear winner this afternoon with a total tally of +7.  On the other side of the spectrum, Rick Perry rambled and seemed disorganized; we deemed him the lowest performer with a total score of -4.  Rick Santorum’s love of country and passion were touching (+6) but he has is long way to go.  Gilmore (+2) and Pataki (+2) did not hurt themselves, but did nothing to help them push forward either.  Bobby Jindal (+5) had the best one liner, stating, “give Bernie Sanders credit, at least he is honest enough to call himself a socialist, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are no better.”  Although advocating a widely unpopular position, soft-spoken, Lindsey Graham’s honesty about committing troops to Iraq and Syria to confront ISIS was worth noting; however, the balance of his responsive content was bland (-1).

Bottom line:  Fiorina emerges from the Loser’s Bracket as the most polished, feisty and pointed of the bottom 7.  Depending on the sound bites offered, I would expect her support to surge, but given the early viewing time, she might not convert this impressive effort into votes.

In the meantime, get your popcorn and antacids ready for tonight….

Proposition betting: Odds of seeing someone in a head-lock – 5:2.  Donald Trump exceeding his allotted time on every question – 1:5.  Jeb Bush or Scott Walker closing the gap on Trump by this time next week – 3:2.  Daily double: Odds of either John Kasich or Ben Carson being perceived as the winner this evening – 8:1.

Blinded by personal ambition while forsaking the end-game goal of the Grand Old Party, what most of the aspirants fail to recognize is that it will not be the populace who decides who will be the nominee, it will be the party.  Amos Tuck will rise from the dead before the GOP allows The Donald the honor of facing off against Hillary, Bernie or Uncle Joe.  Assuming RNC chair, Reince Priebus has learned anything from 2008 and 2012, the Republican Party will not let the intra-party backbiting continue, the field will be purposefully winnowed and the leadership will need to broker a deal with Trump so he does not give the GOP the Ross Perot 1992 skidoo.

And for those of you who love the underdog, the seven remaining Division 1-FCS candidates will also have their opportunity to shine in a lesser-viewed cage match undercard earlier on Thursday at 5PM.  This second tier candidate debate essentially becomes the de facto loser bracket in a double elimination contest.  Notably, each of the “less-than-magnificent 7″ enter this bracket saddled with one loss.  However, miracles do happen… like when 33-27 Fresno State beat Georgia in 2008 to win the College World Series or when Buster Douglas, a 42-1 long shot, KOed Iron Mike in 1990.  It happens, but PAC contributions will begin to wane without a tremendous showing on Thursday.

The Bench Jockeys will be lapping up both of the debates, hoping that there will be an automatic microphone kill switch utilized by the moderators when speaking time expires and updating our odds on Friday based upon what we see.  Click here http://thebenchjockeys.com/updated-odds-for-2016-presidential-nominations/ to see where things stand prior to Thursday’s scuffle.

However the big story on the Republican side of the aisle was the scuttle-butt from Dr. Carson’s assertions that doing time can  change a man’s sexual orientation.  Are they teaching that now in med school?  I think they might be bringing the leeches back too.

Although quick to apologize, the content of Carson’s mea culpa was not the prescription he needed.  Consequently, we are dropping him down quite a few pegs to the third tier of possible nominees.  Reluctant to announce in the first place, the good doctor may now be rethinking the whole thing, especially as every word he utters will now be parsed by the media.

The beneficiary to Carson’s slip-up may actually be Rubio since the Carson and Rubio camps are not too far apart on many issues.  As a result, we only slightly decreased Marco’s odds in spite of the CPAC straw poll numbers.  Check out this link for the most current odds at  http://thebenchjockeys.com/?p=1556

March 1, 2015 – Quinnipiac University conducted a telephone survey in Iowa during the week of February 16th seeking opinions about the projected field of Democratic candidates for 2016.  The survey involved 619 likely Democratic Caucus participants. The predictable results were released on February 26th.

Democratic Party Iowans overwhelmingly backed Hillary Clinton (61%), with Elizabeth Warren earning runner-up honors at 19%.  Biden placed third with 7%, Sanders was fourth at 5% and Jim Webb finished in fifth at 2%.  Hillary maintains a stronghold on her path to the Democratic Party’s nomination and the odds that The Bench Jockeys have offered (1:7) seem in line with these results.  [For those of you who read The Bench Jockeys and do not gamble, a 1:7 line means that you would have to bet $7 to win just $1.]

Right now, Hillary is just that sure of a lock. What was remarkable is that not one of the 619 Iowans who participated, voted for former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley.  Not one.  With only six potential candidates, Quinnipiac extended its inquiry to include a question about who the voters would support if their first choice opted not to run.  Even with Hillary out of the picture, O’Malley only secured 3% of the votes.  18 of 619 votes.  Biden (30%) and Warren (23%) were the leading pretenders.  Look for Marty to take a page out of the Bill Clinton playbook and have his Celtic rock band – O’Malley’s March – booked on a few late night talk shows this summer if he cannot gain traction in this incomplete field.

I find it ironic that CPAC– a conference which has become the Right’s annual homage to Ronald Reagan and everything he stood for – does not embrace one of the central tenets that ol’ Number 40 championed:  the 11^th Commandment – Thou shall not speak ill of any fellow Republican. 

Whether a Tea bagger, an establishment Republican, a Main Streeter, or a RINO, there is one thing that all Republicans seek….  – a victory in November 2016.  With a crowded Republican field, the Dems are counting on the Reps to cannibalize their own:  exposing as many inconsistent statements, unusual alliances, and skeletons as possible.  The Republican candidates fail to see that the doubts that they cast upon one another weaken the entire corps.  And for a group that is touted as a bevy of Bible thumpers, the 2016 aspirants have already forsaken the charge of Matthew 7:1 “Judge not, that you be not judged.”

And so, let us turn to the CPAC straw poll results….

Not surprisingly, the winner was Rand Paul.  CPAC’s favorite son has won the CPAC poll for the last three years.  What WAS surprising is that second place went to Scott Walker only 4% points behind Paul.  Show belonged to Ted Cruz.  Dr. Ben Carson and Jeb Bush round out the top 5.  The basement was occupied by Lindsey Graham and George Pataki – however neither attended CPAC.  The lowest-rated CPAC speaker was Former UN Ambassador, John Bolton; however he has a lot of company in the sub 3% contingent including pre-bridgegate hopeful, Chris Christie.

Notably, Carly Fiorina, who sits on the board of the American Conservative Union (which hosts CPAC) emerged as a possible contender with a scathing speech directed at Hillary Clinton.  If the Reps were wise, they would broker a backroom deal that imposes a moratorium on barbs against Fiorina (who has no elected experience) in order to utilize Carly’s ability to stand stiletto-to-stiletto with Hillary as a way to tear at Clinton for the next 20 months while allowing Fiorina to remain in the media spotlight.

3007 voters participated; percentages are listed below:

25.7        Sen. Rand Paul
21.4        Gov. Scott Walker
11.5        Sen. Ted Cruz
11.4        Dr. Ben Carson
8.3          Former Gov. Jeb Bush
4.3          Former Sen. Rick Santorum
3.7          Sen. Marco Rubio
3.5          Donald Trump
3.0          Carly Fiorina
2.8          Gov. Chris Christie
1.1          Former Gov. Rick Perry
0.9          Gov. Bobby Jindal
0.8          Former Gov. Sarah Palin
0.3          Former Gov. Mike Huckabee
0.3          Former Ambassador John Bolton
0.1          Sen. Lindsey Graham
0.1          Former Gov. George Pataki
1.0          Undecided
0.7          Other

The problem for the Reps was that no plurality exists – not even from a group that is on the right edge of the Republican spectrum.  And that has been the fly in the ointment since 2008.  If this group cannot solidly back a candidate given a fairly narrow political conservative agenda, how will the Republicans identify a champion who can get them to 270 electoral votes in 2016?  If the Grand Old Party aspires to a seat in the Oval Office, the playbook cannot be adapted from The Lord of the Flies.  Instead, the path forward must come down to the party’s ability to control the will to power of many of the potential candidates, synthesize the messaging and reconnect with the growing number of Reps-turned-independents/Libertarians.  They forgot that in 2008 and 2012. 

Maybe the third time will be a charm for them in 2016, but after analyzing the results of the CPAC straw poll and listening to the party rhetoric for two days, if the Republicans want to win in 2016, candid conversations need to occur which involve the potential entrants and some will need to be cheerleaders, not combatants.

Comments and thoughts welcome. 

In a field as diverse as…. well,… as diverse as a Republican field can be, the Bench Jockeys have released odds for the 2016 nomination.  We will keep this tracker up to date as entrants declare and drop out and as political fortunes rise and fall in the GOP.

This year we have the added pleasure of offering the odds (albeit a bookmaker’s dream) for those vying for the nomination on the Democrat ticket.  Hint:  Hillary Clinton is a presently at 1:7 which will only drift away from a “sure thing” if something surfaces from the investigations involving Benghazi or the foreign government money accepted by the Clinton Foundation. 

We have established the odds for every candidate who has either formed an “exploration committee” or may be jumping (or being pushed) into the Democrat and Republican races for the White House. 

And now,… ladies and gentlemen,… the nation’s first comprehensive oddsmaker lines for the 2016 nomination.

Democrats

* Registered Ind. may run as a Dem.    

♤ Odds updated 3/7/15

Republicans

 ♢ Odds updated 3/7/15

Follow us on Twitter @benchjockeys.

We welcome your comments and feedback and let the posturing begin.