Iowa, a slice of the heartland, has spoken, but not in a single, predictable voice. Iowa’s exalted place as America’s first presidential nomination contest is more an accident of history than a badge of merit. But, every four years we gather, at the bottom of the mountain and await our tablets, carved upon by our corn-fed deities. Sometimes those tablets can be safely dashed, but they can also be vitally sacred. What have we just seen?

Ted Cruz won the Iowa caucuses, defeating Donald Trump 28-24%. Marco Rubio’s last week surge in Iowa was real and it netted him a strong third at 23%. Ben Carson, once a frontrunner in the state, finished a distant fourth with 9%. His descent is almost complete. For the Republicans, what does it mean?

Ted Cruz earns the headline, and deservedly so. Cruz stood down the entrenched ethanol interests in Iowa and promised that if elected president he would uproot them. The popular governor of Iowa, whose family has suckled at that bio-fuel lobbying teat, came out strongly against Cruz for this reason alone. And yet, to his credit, Cruz managed a win. He spent time and money in the Hawkeye State and he had to win it for a chance at the nomination. With this victory, he earns an opportunity to stay in the race.

At the same time, Cruz’s victory may be short-lived. Iowa’s Republican electorate was nearly two-thirds evangelical. Though Trump and Rubio both competed for those voters, there is a good chance the evangelicals provided Cruz’s majority, just as they did for both Rick Santorum in 2012 and Mike Huckabee in 2008. They were unable to expand their political footprints enough to garner the Republican nomination. Cruz’s demeanor and his rhetoric, thus far, threaten to consign him to the same fate. While Cruz gets out of Iowa with a boost, that boost may not be durable. His constitutionalist, tea-party persona may put him in a broader position than either Santorum or Huckabee. Or, it may not.

Donald Trump came into the caucuses with a polling lead. He left with a second-place finish. In some ways, for Trump to swagger into the Midwest with his urban accent and urbane morality, and win nearly one-fourth of the vote is remarkable. It is a testament to the angst in the GOP and to Trump’s ability to whip that angst into an electoral frenzy.

It is very possible that Donald Trump might begin his slide back to reality television, but not necessarily. Mitt Romney did not win Iowa in 2012 and neither did John McCain in 2008, yet both went on to win the GOP’s imprimatur. Trump presents another problem, however. He underperformed some of his late polling numbers. Is that because his supporters are less likely to vote? If so, is that unique to the complex and demanding caucus process or will we see that translate into the more traditional primary states as well? One other nagging question remains for Trump. Given that he constantly talks of winning, both for himself and America, will losing tarnish the Trump brand? Will his supporters, who are so attracted to his braggadocio and success be disappointed, in an unusual way, by this defeat? Trump’s movement seems built on emotion and anger. Will those be dissipated by the winds of loss? New Hampshire may not reveal the answers to these questions, but it will provide one more data point.

Marco Rubio emerges from Iowa as the evening’s biggest surprise. Rubio outperformed his poll numbers by nearly double-digits and he vied for evangelicals in a way few would have predicted. Rubio, for many, has appeared the most natural rival to Trump and Cruz. Unlike any other Republican candidate save for Scott Walker, who dropped out well before any votes were cast, Rubio can make reasonable appeals to conservatives (his voting record says he is quite conservative), anti-establishment/tea-party types (he rode an insurgent wave to victory over Charlie Crist in his Senate race in Florida, and Crist embodied the GOP insiders at that point), and mainstream moderates (mostly with tone and electability). Though his critics have called him an “establishment” candidate, they have too often mistaken his tenor as his ideology. HIs polling numbers had never quite caught up to his hype, at least until tonight, when voters in Iowa seemingly narrowed the gap between Rubio’s potential and his performance.

Rubio leaves Iowa stronger and with the chance, arguably unlike Trump and Cruz, to expand his support. Rubio will be able to make direct and indirect appeals to Bush, Huckabee, Carson, Fiorina, and, eventually, Kasich voters. But, will voters forgive his past immigration positions, where he argued for a path toward legalization for illegal immigrants, during an election where immigration matters? Will he be able to re-convince “establishment” Republicans that he is more viable than Trump?

My instinct tells me that Cruz may have peaked in Iowa unless he can turn this into a two-man contest with Trump. Trump will be able to endure as long as he likes, but losing does not mesh with his narrative of dominance. Rubio, I think, may have closed the door on Jeb Bush in Iowa, and has a chance to do the same to John Kasich and Chris Christie next week in New Hampshire, where our next overlords reside.

Stay tuned…