With more than 90 percent of the New Hampshire returns having come in, here are a few thoughts:
1. Donald Trump, John Kasich, and Ted Cruz were all winners in New Hampshire, with the degree to which they were the night's winners probably matching their exact order of finish. Marco Rubio was clearly the night's big loser.
2. This is certainly a highly unusual (entirely unprecedented?) year, when the establishment can't settle on a candidate, so the eventual establish pick could well rise late in a big way, but maybe not.
3. Since 1980, nobody has won the Republican nomination without winning either Iowa or New Hampshire (Cruz and Trump), no eventual GOP nominee has finished worse than fourth in either state (only Cruz and Trump meet this test), and every eventual GOP nominee has finished either first or second in New Hampshire (only Trump meets this test, but Cruz has come close, assuming he holds on to third place in the Granite State).
4. In non-incumbent GOP elections, here's where the eventual Republican nominee has placed in Iowa and New Hampshire, along with his combined point total (if you add up the placement points in those two states):
2012: 2nd in Iowa + 1st in N.H. = 3 points
'08: 4 + 1 = 5
'00: 1 + 2 = 3
'96: 1 + 2 = 3
'88: 3 + 1 = 4
'80: 2 + 1 = 3
Contrast those tallies with this year's field, assuming Cruz, Bush, and Rubio finish 3-4-5 in final New Hampshire tallies:
Trump: 2nd in Iowa + 1st in N.H. = 3 points
Cruz: 1 + 3 = 4
Rubio: 3 + 5 = 8
Kasich: 8 + 2 = 10
Bush: 6 + 4 = 10
(All others above 10)
In other words, while there's a long way to go, it seems safe to say that—at this point—only Trump's and Cruz's results look at all like those of a future Republican nominee.