Did Rubio gain anything by supporting the “defund” effort?

posted at 4:01 pm on October 17, 2013 by Allahpundit

Of course he did, you might say — he gained the satisfaction of standing up against a gigantic federal boondoggle that’s going to make life harder for a lot of unsuspecting Americans. Fair enough, but after the amnesty debacle, there’s no way to trust Rubio’s motives 100 percent anymore, is there? My sense of his position on “defund” is the same as my sense of him championing a federal ban on abortions after 20 weeks. I’m almost positive that he would have behaved exactly the same way even if he didn’t feel pressure to atone for his immigration vote with conservatives, but … I just can’t be sure anymore. If he was willing to accept the crappy Gang of Eight plan, what other crappy things would he be willing to accept but is forced to reject — for now — because doing so would utterly destroy what’s left of his tea-party cred? Choosing immigration reform as his first big legislative initiative before 2016 had lots of political upsides for him, but also a big downside: It planted the seed of doubt among the grassroots righties who cheered loudest for him when he first got elected to the Senate.

Superficially, then, he gained by supporting “defund” because it reassured conservatives that, whatever his motive, Rubio will still back causes championed by tea partiers even if most of the public opposes them. Matt Lewis, a big Rubio fan and supporter of immigration reform, offers the flip side of that logic from a centrist perspective, though: If Rubio’s going to try to impress the establishment by backing the Gang of Eight bill, why on earth would he then turn around and back “defund” brinksmanship that the establishment regards as moronic and even suicidal? Now both wings of the party are mad at him. Where’s the logic in that?

For the first time in a long time, he had lost control of his own message. And so, like a man skidding on ice, he overcorrected.

I’m not suggesting Rubio actually changed any of his positions. Instead, he ratcheted up the rhetoric, as if to remind everyone: “I’m a tea party conservative, too!” And he signed on to well-meaning, if unachievable, objectives. One of the ideas he embraced was the idea that we could defund ObamaCare…

I can’t help wondering what would have happened if Rubio had stood up to his conservative colleagues, as Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) did? In the short term, he would have taken even more heat from the people who won’t support him any way. In the long run, however, he might have arisen as a sane, serious conservative who was willing to demonstrate leadership and stand up for it no matter the cost. Instead, Rubio looked like a follower — someone who was goaded into supporting a stand by the more powerful conservative leaders in the Senate. And these optics pose a serious problem for a man who ostensibly wants to be president. Presidents shouldn’t be susceptible to peer pressure. If he can’t stand up to Cruz, how can he stand up to Putin?…

Ironically, the flawed defund strategy also highlights a flaw in Rubio’s strategy. A couple months ago, I wrote that the 2016 Republican primary would be like an NCAA tournament. The way into the final round was to win your “division.” Cruz and Paul, I argued, would have to compete to see who “owns’ the tea party division, and that Christie and Rubio would compete to win the more establishment conservative bracket. Cruz and Paul had nothing to lose by supporting the defund effort. It merely reinforced their brand. But Rubio didn’t seem to grasp that he could never be the tea party guy — that his brand was being a serious, thoughtful, conservative.

I disagree that Rubio hurt himself here mainly because I disagree with Lewis’s “bracket.” Six months ago a moderate/tea party “final four” for the nomination seemed plausible to me, but as Cruz has emerged and Rand Paul has refined his message, I think we’re more likely to see the field shake out among a bona fide centrist, a tea-party champion, and a compromise “hybrid” candidate who can pull from both. When Rubio committed to the Gang of Eight bill, he was all but giving up on being the tea-party champion. The only way he could be that now is if both Paul and Cruz decided not to run, the odds of which are minuscule. So Rubio’s either going to vie for the King RINO or “hybrid” slot in the field, and since Christie seems increasingly assured of winning the former, the obvious choice for Rubio is the latter — which means pandering to tea partiers occasionally to stay viable as a guy with “enough” conservative cred that they won’t revolt if he’s nominated. Rand Paul, very quietly, is now angling for the same “hybrid” slot, I think. He’ll slide over and re-position himself as the tea-party champion in case Cruz doesn’t run, but if Cruz does run, Paul wants to be seen as a guy who can unite various factions — tea partiers, libertarians, and moderates with his policies on social issues like the drug war. That’s why Paul stayed low key (like Rubio) throughout the “defund” effort. He was showing the establishment that, unlike Cruz, he can be trusted not to spearhead an endeavor this quixotic just because tea partiers are all for it. I forget who, but someone said on Twitter yesterday that Paul could have made life very difficult for McConnell by pounding the table about “defund.” He didn’t. Don’t think it went unnoticed.

Ultimately, anyone who wants to stay eligible for the “hybrid” slot has to triangulate between RINOs and tea partiers. And that means occasionally passing a tea-party litmus test when one is presented. Like David Freddoso says:

I’m not a “close-the-borders” kind of conservative — quite the opposite. But if I were, I’d be highlighting Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s lusty embrace of “defund.” What better way to fool the base and develop a riposte in a presidential primary (or even a Senate primary) against any opponent who brings up the immigration issue? “I was there standing with you when we defied the President and tried to defund Obamacare! I was there standing with you when it didn’t matter or accomplish anything at all.” It means nothing, of course, but it covers a multitude of sins.

I don’t think it covers a multitude of sins so much as it gives conservatives a way to talk themselves into supporting Rubio in 2016 if they’re unhappy with their other choices. That’s the whole blueprint behind the “hybrid” strategy — there’s a great mass of Republican voters who might find Christie too abrasive and squishy and Paul/Cruz too fringe-y to trust with power. What if Rubio’s there as an alternative? He wants those voters to say to themselves, “I hate that this guy sold out on amnesty. But … McCain also sold out on amnesty in 2007 and we nominated him. And Romney’s RomneyCare sin was bigger than Rubio’s and we nominated him. And Rubio’s certainly more conservative than either McCain or Romney. And hey — he backed ‘defund’ even when the establishment RINOs were screaming at the tea party for doing it. Yeah, I guess I could live with this guy. He’s better than Christie/Paul/Cruz, in any case.” That’s the Rubio strategy, I think. Lewis is bummed that Rubio is no longer his ideal, but Rubio knows (I think) that the way to being nominated by the GOP isn’t to be the most ideal candidate but the most acceptable one. Backing “defund” — quietly — helps him do that.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

In the immortal words of Mr. Chris Rock, let’s “give him a cookie.”

ebrown2 on October 17, 2013 at 4:05 PM

I don’t think he gained a thing. If we’re talking 2016 Presidential contenders, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz(assuming he runs) easily were the big winners. Peter King is a big loser(in more ways than one), but he’s not a serious candidate anyway. Rubio is a non-factor. Sure he supported the defund effort, but he never really put himself out there as a vocal advocate aside from a few speeches on the Senate floor. He was practically AWOL during the Ted Cruz filibuster.

Doughboy on October 17, 2013 at 4:05 PM

Of course he did, you might say

I wouldn’t say that. But Ted Cruz sure did!

Stoic Patriot on October 17, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Rubio didn’t gain anything with me. Now, let’s see what do does on ILLEGAL immigration.

Mirimichi on October 17, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Rubio won’t break 5%. He has a few GOP governors ahead of him as well as fellow Senators Cruz and Paul.

He made his bed with McCain and now he has to lie in it.

mankai on October 17, 2013 at 4:10 PM

HEY RUBE-IO! You Rubio supporters are fools. He’s the worst of the worst type of politician – a wolf in sheeps clothing.

BJ* on October 17, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Not from where I sit. He’s solidly GOPe. He has lied over and over to the very constituency that hired him. Can he be fired? Hope so.

Bmore on October 17, 2013 at 4:12 PM

Rubio will have to choose between the conservatives or establishment wings of the party eventually. Conservatives need to prepare for a real battle. The establishment is on the move to crush and demonize the conservatives. In fact, McConnell gave an interview with The HIll blog this afternoon and promised he would never let another government shutdown happen again. The old guard GOP is well and truly the enemy and Rubio is going to have to either choose to help us defeat them or he himself will be defeated.

KickandSwimMom on October 17, 2013 at 4:13 PM

He can go rot somewhere with McCain.

mbecker908 on October 17, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Did Marco Rubio gain anything by doing what the voters of Florida sent him to Washington DC expected him to do for them when they elected him?

The only reason we are talking about ‘did Rubio gain anything’ is because of his colossal misstep with signing onto the Gang of 8 regarding the amnesty agenda of the progressive-fascists with already established members of the Quisling Republican caucus.

That cost him a huge level of support in Florida – and his re-election will be quite a challenge as the Tea Party supporters who rallied to push him past Charlie Crist will not forget the Gang of 8.

Of those in Florida who I speak to, they use the ‘broken clock’ analogy to reference Rubio – saying his decision this time to support their interests is one of the two times a day a broken clock shows the correct time.

He has time to regain the trust of the conservative Florida voter – but it is going to take time too. One correct step doesn’t reverse a major misstep. People tend to remember the missteps a lot longer.

Athos on October 17, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Whatever “good will” he picked up from the Conservative Base by supporting defending Obamacare, he will lose it during the upcoming Illiegal Immigration Fight.

Of course, with the Vichy Republicans involved, the word “Fight” is an exaggeration.

kingsjester on October 17, 2013 at 4:16 PM

defunding

kingsjester on October 17, 2013 at 4:17 PM

..but Rubio knows (I think) that the way to being nominated by the GOP isn’t to be the most ideal candidate but the most acceptable one.

Sort of an odd, even a false, dichotomy, no? If someone is the most ideal candidate– principled, knowledgeable, effective, charismatic, electable and a proven winner– wouldn’t that make him or her the GOP’s most acceptable candidate?

Oh, wait. It’s the GOP…

de rigueur on October 17, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Why would we listen to anyone who calls the McCain/King/Boehner wing “thoughtful” and “reasoned”?

Darin on October 17, 2013 at 4:19 PM

Say, who is this Marco Rubio that you speak of?

M240H on October 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM

Do you guys really thing Cruz is running in 2016? NO he isn’t running

He had nor does he has any aspirations to run for higher office

Cruz is smart, he knew exactly what he was doing. And it had nothing to do with running for president

A 15% approval certainly isn’t the way to get started.

Redford on October 17, 2013 at 4:21 PM

Rubio shot his credibility.

As for Rand, well, I didn’t like the fact of his careful calculation by hanging back. It smacks of more political playing and opportunism.

I saw photos of Cruz and Lee and Palin at the Vet Memorials March. As far as I’m concerned they are the three Patriots who have a national platform from which they’re willing to speak.

Rand is trying to be Pale Pastels and Bold Colors at the same time. Good luck with that. We don’t need a candidate like that.
Undoing the damage of the Obama years is going to take Bold Colors.

Cruz is at the top of my list right now; Lee for Attorney General, and Palin to rally the troops.

(BTW you have to read Lee’s Facebook page. He has posted some great comments on the role of government. They’re nice little mini-tutorials.).

Rand and Rubio go to the back of the line. Christie doesn’t quali

INC on October 17, 2013 at 4:22 PM

Nope. He blew it with amnesty for illegals.

RoadRunner on October 17, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Reagan at the second CPAC in 1975, Let Them Go Their Way:

Our people look for a cause to believe in. Is it a third party we need, or is it a new and revitalized second party, raising a banner of no pale pastels, but bold colors which make it unmistakably clear where we stand on all of the issues troubling the people?

…A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers.

I do not believe I have proposed anything that is contrary to what has been considered Republican principle. It is at the same time the very basis of conservatism. It is time to reassert that principle and raise it to full view. And if there are those who cannot subscribe to these principles, then let them go their way.

INC on October 17, 2013 at 4:28 PM

Nope. He blew it with amnesty for illegals.

RoadRunner on October 17, 2013 at 4:25 PM

Exactly!

astonerii on October 17, 2013 at 4:29 PM

He is still my top pick for 2016. The next presidential election is still a long time away so it could change.

terryannonline on October 17, 2013 at 4:35 PM

INC on October 17, 2013 at 4:28 PM

It basically took the real conservative wing of the Republican Party from 1964 to 1980 to take back control of the GOP – and they were led by Ronald Reagan and William Buckley.

We started losing control of the Republican Party around 1988-90, and briefly regained it from 1994-1997 before losing it again. We almost got it back in 2001-2004, but lost it in misreading of results of the 2004 election.

It’s past time to take it back once more – because the concept of becoming a ‘pale pastel’ or ‘progressive-lite’ in order to win elections is not a path to success despite the whinging of the Vichy Republicans.

This group of ‘republicans’ saw the result of 2010 and became very very afraid. They should be. The stakes are far too high at this point to accept ‘go along to get along’.

Athos on October 17, 2013 at 4:36 PM

INC on October 17, 2013 at 4:28 PM

Oh, and I also need to say – Excellent Post!

Athos on October 17, 2013 at 4:37 PM

No. He’s still all in for amnesty. He’s a disgrace.

BuckeyeSam on October 17, 2013 at 4:38 PM

From everything I saw, he didn’t really stick his neck out. Pretty tepid support.

Chubbs65 on October 17, 2013 at 4:39 PM

I will vote to defund Rubio.

faraway on October 17, 2013 at 4:41 PM

The Tea Party needs Rubio to run….

Why?

To take some votes and support away from Christie. My fear is Cruz and Paul will hurt each other early by splitting conservative and libertarian votes and Fat Boy will get all the establishment and RINO support. That might be enough to give Christie the nomination. Rubio might cut into that which would be great.

William Eaton on October 17, 2013 at 4:46 PM

Athos on October 17, 2013 at 4:36 PM

I lived through those years, and I think you described what happened.

Thanks! Change a few words and dates and there are many Reagan speeches that still accurately nail the problem and prescribe the way to correct the ship.

INC on October 17, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Rubio is dead tome regardless of what he does from here. He’s a McCain with better hair.

Minnfidel on October 17, 2013 at 4:51 PM

So Rubio’s either going to vie for the King RINO or “hybrid” slot in the field, and since Christie seems increasingly assured of winning the former, the obvious choice for Rubio is the latter — which means pandering to tea partiers occasionally to stay viable as a guy with “enough” conservative cred that they won’t revolt if he’s nominated.

Too late. He can’t regain any conservative cred – if anyone accrues any to him, they’re f*cking stupid and way to gullible.

Midas on October 17, 2013 at 4:51 PM

many Reagan speeches that still accurately nail the problem and prescribe the way to correct the ship.

INC on October 17, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Funny you mention that, I just listened to his 1964 A Time For Choosing last night. Awesome speech.

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2013 at 4:54 PM

Lest we forget, Reagan blew the first amnesty deal.

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Matt Lewis, a big Rubio fan and supporter of immigration reform, offers the flip side of that logic from a centrist perspective, though

AP, why do you think Lewis’s column represents the centrist perspective? It seems to me it’s not altogether different than John McCain’s vis-a-vis the defunding effort.

Dusty on October 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2013 at 4:54 PM

http://reagan2020.us/

I don’t know if you’re familiar with this site, but it has the text of many of his speeches, as well as a lot of other info.

INC on October 17, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Lest we forget, Reagan blew the first amnesty deal.

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Yep and I would never make the same mistake in voting for Rubio EVER or under any cicumstances because of it.

Minnfidel on October 17, 2013 at 5:01 PM

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2013 at 4:56 PM

That he did.

Minnfidel on October 17, 2013 at 5:01 PM

The thing is that Rubio flat out lied about what he would do on amnesty during the Senate primary in Florida. I believe he did so three times.

He gets elected and reversed course–an open and flagrant reversal. His credibility is gone.

INC on October 17, 2013 at 5:07 PM

His credibility is gone.

INC on October 17, 2013 at 5:07 PM

I don’t know if he lied, or simply lost his gonads to stick to principles, which is how Schumer rolled him.

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2013 at 5:08 PM

I don’t know if he lied, or simply lost his gonads to stick to principles, which is how Schumer rolled him.

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2013 at 5:08 PM

He lied.

astonerii on October 17, 2013 at 5:09 PM

I don’t know if you’re familiar with this site, but it has the text of many of his speeches, as well as a lot of other info.

INC on October 17, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Thanks for this. Bookmark’d for tough times like these.

John the Libertarian on October 17, 2013 at 5:10 PM

Rubio was and always will be a turd.

PS: If Cruz/Lee/Paul are going to run in 2016, they should avoid the MFM debates. Tell them to shove it.

Mr. Arrogant on October 17, 2013 at 5:12 PM

Rubio’s got kind of a baby face, which gives a youthful look, which is a good thing generally, except if you kind of gravitate intellectually toward the younger set. No one says a senator has to be an Einstein, but Rubio’s look and actions suggest an inexperienced “rookie” that’s not a mental powerhouse.

It seems previously that the main reason people liked him was because he’s Hispanic, and didn’t fall for the normal amnesty type stuff that many Latinos push. But now, after he was either hornswoggled into the Dem’s amnesty charade, or it was his undeclared intention all along, after his full out amnesty push there is little left for people to like. Other than he’s a “moderate” Republican like Christie.

Well, now he’s not showing a lot of temperance in many seemingly desperate swings to the conservative side on abortion and other issues in an effort to regain his lost support. He should of known that pushing amnesty was a no no, especially after he repeatedly said he wouldn’t do that. It doesn’t seem that conservatives can really put much trust in that baby face.

anotherJoe on October 17, 2013 at 5:13 PM

astonerii on October 17, 2013 at 5:06 PM

Yep and that’s why I would never trust Rubio. Rubio apparently learned nothing from Reagan’s mistake. Rubio’s defenders point out that Reagan did the same thing. As if making the same mistake twice makes it o.k. because you liked the man. I agree, Rubio flat out lied to get elected. Not that it’s shocking in politics, but I’ll be darned if I will ever vote for someone like that. He caved and betrayed us on a major issue. I have voted my last RINO.

Minnfidel on October 17, 2013 at 5:25 PM

Rubio is dead to me so he can’t gain any ground.

Wigglesworth on October 17, 2013 at 5:30 PM

Rubio is dead to me so he can’t gain any ground.

Wigglesworth on October 17, 2013 at 5:30 PM

I’ll pitch in on either the digging into the ground or covering him with ground. He can have all the ground he wants. A thimble full or quarry sized dump truck full.

astonerii on October 17, 2013 at 5:32 PM

Did Rubio gain anything by supporting the “defund” effort?

After 230+ years Benedict Arnold is still known as a traitor.

RJL on October 17, 2013 at 5:36 PM

Marco WHO?

GarandFan on October 17, 2013 at 5:40 PM

If he can’t stand up to Cruz, how can he stand up to Putin?…

Cruz was also stupid enough to stand with Obama and Chuck Schumer against the voters and supporters who elected him. He wasn’t even bright enough to know that he was being set up, used and discarded by Obama and Schumer.

RJL on October 17, 2013 at 5:46 PM

Rubio is Catholic so he should know about venial sins and mortal sins. In the eyes of conservatives, backing amnesty is a mortal sin.

bw222 on October 17, 2013 at 5:51 PM

RJL on October 17, 2013 at 5:46 PM

Cruz or Rubio?

astonerii on October 17, 2013 at 5:54 PM

Rubio is dead tome regardless of what he does from here. He’s a McCain with a better hair combover.

Minnfidel on October 17, 2013 at 4:51 PM

bw222 on October 17, 2013 at 5:55 PM

No, he did NOT help himself with me…..

mmcnamer1 on October 17, 2013 at 5:56 PM

As someone who had Rubio’s number while the base was still slobbering over him, I think I can confidently say that he is finished as a serious national contender. The possible road back for him is counterintuitive: get back behind immigration reform and go all the way with it. Of course, that would require real balls, which Rubio is sorely lacking.

Why even waste ink on Rubio, an even bigger geek and loser than Bobby “I’m not stupid!” Jindal. The more compelling question is what Paul Ryan was thinking. He’s supposed to be the adult in the room, the policy wonk with gravitas, and he behaved like a mewling, ignorant child during the shut down debate. His pointless and disingenuous “no” vote will, in my opinion, only damage him if he chooses to run in 2016. Even Boehner and Cantor weren’t that dumb. Unlike Rubio, much of the base forgives Ryan his various instances of conservative apostasy – he doesn’t have to grovel. So why did he?

Mr. Arkadin on October 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM

Oops!

If he can’t stand up to Cruz, how can he stand up to Putin?…

Cruz Rubio was also stupid enough to stand with Obama and Chuck Schumer against the voters and supporters who elected him. He wasn’t even bright enough to know that he was being set up, used and discarded by Obama and Schumer.

RJL on October 17, 2013 at 5:46 PM

RJL on October 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM

Did Rubio gain anything by supporting the “defund” effort?

Uh, no. This was just one more desperate attempt by Rubio to resuscitate his moribund political career. Rubio threw it all away when he joined forced with obama and democrats to push INSTANT AMNESTY, and he will never recover.

Rubio is a worthless TRAITOR, a well-documented, pathological LIAR, and an obama-style OPPORTUNIST.

Pork-Chop on October 17, 2013 at 5:58 PM

AP, why do you think Lewis’s column represents the centrist perspective? It seems to me it’s not altogether different than John McCain’s vis-a-vis the defunding effort.

Dusty on October 17, 2013 at 4:57 PM

Matt Lewis is about as big a joke as Guy Benson, the primary difference being that Matt is about four innings short of a complete game.

Salem really can find losers.

bw222 on October 17, 2013 at 6:06 PM

I would not eliminate Sarah Palin as a possible 2016 contender.

She would have a very strong base, already has the beginnings of a strong organization, will have a number of people in her debt from support during 2010,2012, and soon 2014.

She also is a *very* credible fund raiser -she would not have a problem raising a whole boatload of $$

Yeah, the media trashed her, and she is a “polarizing” figure, but if she chooses to run, she will be a formidable candidate in the primaries, and I believe also in the general.

Could happen.

Houston Guy on October 17, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Unlike Rubio, much of the base forgives Ryan his various instances of conservative apostasy – he doesn’t have to grovel. So why did he?

Mr. Arkadin on October 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM

I think conservatives are starting to catch on to Paul Ryan. The difference is that Ryan’s support for amnesty is more stealth. Rubio going on Limbaugh and Levin show and doing the commercials that Mark Zuckerberg funded was about as smart as charging a machine gun nest with a pea shooter.

bw222 on October 17, 2013 at 6:11 PM

I think conservatives are starting to catch on to Paul Ryan. The difference is that Ryan’s support for amnesty is more stealth. Rubio going on Limbaugh and Levin show and doing the commercials that Mark Zuckerberg funded was about as smart as charging a machine gun nest with a pea shooter.

bw222 on October 17, 2013 at 6:11 PM

I never liked Paul Ryan since I first heard of him.

His great idea of conservative governance is to shove tens of trillions more debt onto the backs of the unborn and non voting. His idea of spending restraint is front end no cuts followed by the hard cuts decades later which would require future congresses to accept his decades old “cuts” which would just be transferred to their necks.

It is hard to see how any conservative could have ever liked the politician at all.

astonerii on October 17, 2013 at 6:15 PM

It will be Rand Paul vs. the Rino Christie.

Ted Cruz knows that if he runs, he splits the anti-Rino vote and the leftie wins.

The wildcard now is which of the Governors will make the move…Jindal?….Walker?……

I’m thinking it could be Walker vs. Paul and then one drops out to prevent chubby from winning.

KirknBurker on October 17, 2013 at 6:23 PM

I disagree that Rubio hurt himself here mainly because I disagree with Lewis’s “bracket.”

He didn’t help or hurt himself. He was pretty much invisible on the issue, no matter how he ultimately voted.

Lest we forget, Reagan blew the first amnesty deal.

John the Libertarian

Forget? We should NEVER forget what a disaster that turned out to be, which is what makes Rubio’s decision to side with the democrats and be Obama and Schumer’s spokesman on this issue even worse.

xblade on October 17, 2013 at 6:47 PM

Rubio is Catholic so he should know about venial sins and mortal sins. In the eyes of conservatives, backing amnesty is a mortal sin.

bw222 on October 17, 2013 at 5:51 PM

Not with this conservative.

terryannonline on October 17, 2013 at 7:46 PM

“I hate that this guy sold out on amnesty. But … McCain also sold out on amnesty in 2007 and we nominated him. And Romney’s RomneyCare sin was bigger than Rubio’s and we nominated him.

That is neither a justification or an excuse. They are warnings not to repeat the mistake a third time. Nominating those two arguably were some of the worst mistakes of the Institutional Republicans, and in Romney’s case a deliberate slap at conservatives. If in the future they nominate someone who is loved by the Institutional enemies of the country specifically because he betrayed Conservatives; well, it is not the way to get my vote. I’ll go third party or leave it blank.

Subotai Bahadur on October 17, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Allahpundit: “I don’t think it covers a multitude of sins so much as it gives conservatives a way to talk themselves into supporting Rubio in 2016 if they’re unhappy with their other choices.”

Rubio lied that worst of lies – he said he was against “amnesty” so he could get elected – whereupon he shifted left and joined hand-in-hand with Schumer and the other six gangsters to foist “Amnesty” on us.

WTFnF? I would vote for Schumer before I’d vote for Rubio and I’m not even on the far right. Schumer is the devil himself, but at least you know exactly where he stands on the most important key issues. Not so with Rubio.

You cannot say the same thing about Rubio and many others in the wannabe-Democrat wing of the GOP.

DrDeano on October 17, 2013 at 9:13 PM

….whose this Rubio fellow?

KOOLAID2 on October 17, 2013 at 10:30 PM

The only value in a Rubio nomination would be to see some of his other cards get turned over – issues he firmly supports now but will reverse himself on if he gets a smell of the White House.

You wouldn’t see all of them of course. Some of them we would never see till Rubio was actually elected President, and that will never happen.

David Blue on October 18, 2013 at 5:26 AM

….whose this Rubio fellow?

KOOLAID2 on October 17, 2013 at 10:30 PM

Some politician who used to have a future.

David Blue on October 18, 2013 at 5:28 AM

Us Tea Party types don’t see or try to figure out the finer points of a politicians motives or all of the reasons why they do what they do, especially this far out from an election. We see a bigger picture and remember what went on when that picture was taken. The pols should know even if they won’t admit it, that we the people don’t want the kind of immigration reform they’ve tried twice to force on us. We know they are lying about securing the border and are serious about back door amnesty. That gang of 8 bill was written to be as big a disaster for the country as zerocare. Rubio exposed himself as a younger version of McLame and his cohorts. Give him time and he’ll show us just how big a sell out he is capable of being.

Kissmygrits on October 18, 2013 at 8:52 AM