Just a few observations and speculations on the SEC primary.

It appears that the recent debate hurt Trump, but only a little. But it helped Rubio, but only a little. It did nothing one way or the other for Cruz or Kasich.

So I will guess that Trump will prevail next Tuesday, but not in every state, and with somewhat less than his accustomed huge margins.

Cruz will carry Texas and likely Oklahoma and/or Arkansas (where he is making his big last-minute push) and maybe somewhere else and declare, once again, that he is the only alternative to Trump — which is, I repeat, his path to victory. His case will be weakened by the fact that his people have always claimed that Super Tuesday would be his day to become inevitable through a Southern sweep. Cruz’s modest claim now is that Tuesday will be a day for winnowing, and Rubio, but not he, will be winnowed.

Rubio will say: No, no, I really finished second — and point perhaps to his better showing overall in the popular vote and maybe his greater number of delegates. Rubio’s case might be weakened by the fact that he went 0–12 when it comes to actually carrying states (so 0–16 overall). On the other hand, it wouldn’t shock me if Rubio won Georgia, where both he and Cruz aren’t that distant from Trump at this point. Rubio, we Georgians notice, has been concentrating his efforts on our state. It probably is true that the durability of Rubio’s only-alternative brand depends on at least one win. Our friend Henry Olsen spins otherwise by saying that everyone knows that Rubio’s most promising states vote on March 8 and 15, but I tend to think 0–16 is still 0–16.

Detached observers may well say: Cruz and Rubio about tied for second, and there’s no way to spin the result otherwise to skeptics. It might be an exaggeration to say that either had a great day.

At this point, Trump will look less and more inevitable. His vulnerability will be more clear, but it will be less clear how Republicans will be able to effectively exploit it in time. It might well be — it should be — the case that Trump can be mocked into oblivion, but probably not only by Rubio and maybe not in time.

Surely the effort against Trump has to become more focused before the winner-take-all primaries. Cruz has been gracious enough to say clearly that Rubio would be a much better president than Trump. But that doesn’t mean Cruz thinks it’s his job to step aside, because, after all, he really does believe that our situation is critical and that he is the only one who can adequately address it. He also thinks he would be stronger one-on-one than Rubio against Trump. Whatever the studies show, what I see with my own eyes suggests that a huge (well, significant) number of Cruz supporters would turn to Trump (as the other insurgent) next. Still, most experts think that Rubio’s appeal is broader than Cruz’s, perhaps by far, although it may be more superficial or less devotedly grounded in principle. Certainly “Not Trump!” as the source of passion and purpose is emerging more at Rubio than at Cruz rallies.

Kasich’s strategy becomes barely plausible if Tuesday is approximately a three-way tie. If it’s not, he probably should quit. Well, if Trump sweeps everywhere, Kasich might as well remain in the race, in the mode of Johnston offering token resistance to Sherman as he swept through the Carolinas.

I have sympathy, of course, for the call of liberals, such as Danielle Allen, and libertarians, such as our friend Ilya Somin, for all Americans to unite behind Rubio as the only way to stop Trump. Allen has been emphatic in asking Democrats to quickly switch parties and vote Rubio in the remaining primaries and caucuses. That’s because she doesn’t have confidence that Hillary Clinton can do the job of stopping Trump if he’s nominated. That’s where Allen and I disagree. I’m pretty certain Hillary (with relentless and hugely effective opposition research — and with the unwavering cooperation of the mainstream media) would pulverize Donald without sweating all that much. If Allen agreed with me, I suppose, she would actually be doing what she could to get the Republicans to nominate Trump. And exactly who’s going to organize the bipartisan effort to stop Trump before he wraps up the nomination?

One thing is clear: There is no organized or institutional Republican party worth mentioning. All the scheming we read about going on behind closed doors, involving third parties, McConnell, the turn to Romney (!) and so forth is ridiculous. Not all the money in the Koch brothers’ accounts can defeat Trump without one of the existing candidates flourishing on his own. Money once again turns out to be an overrated factor in politics. Same with commercials. Maybe even (given Cruz’s inability to expand his narrow base so far) big data and the corresponding targeted ground game. Trump has shown once again (with the Christie endorsement, what a coup! what did he do to get that?) that dominating the free media has been hugely underrated.

I actually continue to think, however, that Trump is very likely not going to get the Republican nomination. The way that will happen, I guess, will be messy and unpredictable. It will owe little to nothing to the feckless Republican leadership and a lot to the remaining candidates, working some together and more as independent operators.