Donald Trump appears to have picked himself up from Monday night’s stunning defeat at the hands of Ted Cruz in the Iowa Caucuses.
While the media has had a field day with the underwhelming performance of Trump, who still managed to finish second, there is ample reason for hope if you’re a supporter.
For starters, it is now clear that Donald Trump is a serious contender. He, Cruz, and Marco Rubio led the pack with overwhelming support. Furthermore, Rubio was the only establishment candidate in the mix.
Cruz and Trump are considered equally controversial and “outsiders” by their own party.
If more of the establishment players start dropping out, it is possible that Rubio could be a serious threat to both men, but Cruz’ faith could be a problem for him in future Caucuses, which could clearly benefit Trump.
That said, there are some other eerily familiar reasons as to why Donald Trump should be feeling pretty good about Iowa.
Rewind the political clock to the 1980 campaign for the GOP nomination.
As Tommy Christopher of Mediaite points out, there are striking similarities between the campaign of Donald Trump and that of Ronald Reagan.
Reagan, like Trump, was a Democrat for most of his life; he was a television star (and in motion pictures); he was married more than once, to Jane Wyman and Nancy Davis (Reagan).
Wyman, like Trump’s other wives, spoke well of her ex. In Trump’s case, there have been past differences, but those now appear to be worked out.
In Iowa, Reagan actually lost to former CIA director George H.W. Bush in spite of being heavily favored going into the contest, Gallup notes.
Reagan would later rebound with a big win in New Hampshire, where Trump’s lead is considered more solid than it ever was in Iowa.
Also, as the Gateway Pundit points out, Reagan skipped the Iowa debate just before the Caucus and narrowly lost in the same way that Donald Trump did.
He went on to win 44 state primaries after that, securing the nomination and then winning the Presidency from Jimmy Carter in November.
Furthermore, going back to Christopher’s analysis, Ronald Reagan received 14,000 fewer votes than what Trump did on Monday night.
Before losing to Bush by a 2.1 percent margin, Reagan was ahead of him in the national polls by 32 percentage points.
Such a dramatic swing should have been crippling to Reagan’s campaign, but if anything, it invigorated it.
Also, there is this obvious similarity, which was likely designed by Donald Trump himself.
It’s all adding up to this conclusion: yes, Ted Cruz winning in Iowa was a surprise, but it was hardly one that legitimizes the death knells now being sounded for the Donald Trump campaign.
If anything, the striking similarities — and a win in New Hampshire — will only serve to the feed Trump’s momentum.
However, a loss in New Hampshire would likely have the opposite effect.
That means Feb. 9 will be the biggest day yet for Donald Trump supporters, and perhaps his entire pre-presidential campaign. It’s only the second primary, but with such a large lead, it is not one that he could afford to lose.
Plus, it would throw a pretty big monkey wrench into all of the aforementioned parallels since Reagan followed his Iowa loss with a 49.86 percent to 22.94 percent shellacking of Bush and the rest of 1980’s crowded, seven-candidate Republican field.
But what do you think about the parallels, readers?
Are these things that the Trump campaign can take pride in, or are they merely coincidental? Is Donald Trump really in as much trouble as his detractors would like to think? Sound off in the comments section below.