, , , ,

Perhaps one of the dumber aspects of this primary season is people’s willingness to describe losses as victories. When Rubio placed third in Iowa, he not only called it a victory, the media jumped on board to describe it as some sort of incredible feat. In New Hampshire, Ted Cruz finished third with a little less than 12%, yet the Huffington Post did mental gymnastics to explain how he actually won.

And now in South Carolina Ted Cruz claimed his third-place finish was a victory, and John Kasich, who finished in an abysmal fifth, had the audacity to try and frame it as a win in the’governors bracket.’ Marco Rubio, who finished second and defeated Ted Cruz, is getting a second chance from the media, despite still having not won a single state. His second-place finish is a victory because everyone thought he’d finish third. Please.

Trump isn’t inevitable, and there is a long haul ahead, but those pulling for Rubio have what might be the most cynical strategy I’ve ever heard—merely relying on the votes from those who drop out. “They don’t like me enough to choose me first, but they’ll choose me second because they hate Trump! Score!” It could work, sure, but what the hell kind of victory would that be? If the GOP really wants to take down Trump, hoping Bush and Kasich voters will swing to Rubio is a last-ditch strategy.

And here’s the sad truth of it all:

As someone voting Democrat, watching the Republicans fall all over themselves to try and make Trump’s victories non-victories by saying he didn’t win by as big a margin this time as in New Hampshire makes me giddy.