Five reasons not to bet on Marco Rubio for 2016
3. Rubio is likely too conservative
People may be being fooled, currently, into thinking that Rubio is a middle-of-the-road politician. After all, he’s from the swing state of Florida and is sponsoring immigration reform. Rubio was, in fact, the seventh most conservative senator in the 112th Congress. His voting record puts him sandwiched between arch-conservatives Jim Inhofe and Ron Johnson.
Very conservative nominees can win a party’s nomination, as did Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. The issue for Rubio, though, is that these folks became nominees when the party had just recently been in the White House. When the party has been out for two terms or more, the nominees tend to be a lot more moderate – because the party wants to win and wants a centrist pick. The most conservative nominee after the party had been out of office for more than two terms was George W Bush, the “compassionate conservative” who, at the time, was not seen nearly as rightwing as he later was. …
4. Rubio is largely an unknown
How much do we really know about Marco Rubio, and how he’d perform on the big stage? I mean, besides making a Time Magazine cover story, Rubio is quite untested. With relatively little media scrutiny, he had to fight through a credit card expenses scandal (an Ethics Commission ultimately threw out the case); he has also been exposed as having embellished his family history about his parents’ flight from Fidel Castro’s Cuba. …









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
Wut?
sharrukin on February 12, 2013 at 10:57 AM
I don’t buy any of those reasons!
Rubio 2016!
terryannonline on February 12, 2013 at 10:57 AM
Wishcasting.
Purple Fury on February 12, 2013 at 11:02 AM
Wow. Then again, this is coming from the Guardian where anyone to the right of Stalin is probably seen as an archconservative.
Doomberg on February 12, 2013 at 11:02 AM
I’ll tell you one great big reason. Tim Pawlenty.
Mr. Pawlenty began campaigning in 2009. Ames burst that bubble.
Anyone being put forth by the media as a Republican frontrunner for 2016 I seriously, seriously doubt will be in the race past Ames, much less throw their hat in prior to it.
Logus on February 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM
If you’re in the mood for some great unintentional comedy read the whole piece. Here’s a tease:
Enjoy.
Kataklysmic on February 12, 2013 at 11:04 AM
According to whom?
Bitter Clinger on February 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM
Reasons 1 thru 5… meh.
Reason #6: The BSM has 4 years to turn him into whatever they wish him to be by 2016… the ‘stupid’ vote (LIV’s) will think he’s Satan’s towel boy by the time ’16 rolls around.
CPT. Charles on February 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM
That all said – though for different reasons the country cast its die – Obama in 2004/5 was too liberal and largely unknown. Hillary was the “establishment” candidate – among a couple others. Obama was not “next in line” and he did face a very competitive field.
Logus on February 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM
“Right wing” according to who? Karl Marx?
Bush campaigned as a moderate, and he governed as one for eight years. He was never anything near being a conservative.
DRayRaven on February 12, 2013 at 11:09 AM
Rubio is too close to the establishment.
HondaV65 on February 12, 2013 at 11:10 AM
Doughboy on February 12, 2013 at 11:16 AM
Well, the media IS already trying to annoint Chris Christie.
DRayRaven on February 12, 2013 at 11:19 AM
And who isn’t? Who, in your eyes, should be the nominee in ’16? Not saying it ought to be Rubio, but it’s funny to hear people complain about the guy who took on the establishment to run against Crist as being too chummy with them.
changer1701 on February 12, 2013 at 11:26 AM
That will take a lot of annointment.
trs on February 12, 2013 at 11:30 AM
Reasons not to pay attention to horse race betting advice 3 years before the race.
1. It’s three years before the race.
2. Reason 1. is reason enough.
Dusty on February 12, 2013 at 11:30 AM
If anything is going to destroy our chances of keeping the House next year and/or winning the Presidency in 2016, it’s all the infighting between Republicans – RINOs vs. conservatives, “establishment” vs. Tea Party, etc.
There are some candidates, like Christie, who are beneath contempt, but most of the others are varying degrees of “establishment,” anyway – simply by virtue of holding elected office.
All the infighting and namecalling in the GOP is getting rather childish.
DRayRaven on February 12, 2013 at 11:34 AM
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
LOL.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 12, 2013 at 11:35 AM
The media is already performing extensive opposition research into Rubio. They will be quite happy if he is nominated and will of course try to destroy him utterly.
CorporatePiggy on February 12, 2013 at 11:37 AM
Reason No. 6: He’s a Jeb Bush puppet
In 1996, an unknown Rubio offered to help Bob Dole’s campaign and Dole’s Florida director, Al Cardenas, was immediately impressed with Rubio’s potential and hired him. Rubio availed himself well, and two years later, he decided to get into campaigning for real and ran to become a commissioner in West Miami — a position that doesn’t sound like much of a position.
Rubio won, and on election night got a call from Jeb Bush, who by this time was aware of Rubio and his electoral potential no matter how inchoate.
TxAnn56 on February 12, 2013 at 11:37 AM
Then tell the Vichy Right to stop colluding with the dems on everything and to stop attacking the Tea Party and conservativism. Amnesty is sure death for the GOP and the Vichy Right are determined to kill the GOP by pushing that treasonous cr@p on us, again. They didn’t learn their lesson in 2006-2008 and the chasm they allowed this country to approach as they shat all over the conservative base.
Namecalling is nothing compared to what Rubio, the Weeping Boner and the rest of the Vichy have been doing. Worry about actions, not words.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM
Oh wouldn’t The Guardian just love smirky Rick Santorum. Easy [D] blowout.
“Santorum 2016: Because I Have Absolutely Nothing Else To Do”
Marcus on February 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM
That makes him a “puppet”? Apparently we differ on our definition of the term…
changer1701 on February 12, 2013 at 11:43 AM
[DRayRaven on February 12, 2013 at 11:34 AM]
I agree with that. I don’t mind having a GOP establishment. I just don’t like this one and the best thing to do is to change it to one that more to my liking, which is Tea Party-ish. This will take time and constant effort but it’s working already.
It also has the benefit of giving Rove many more options in picking solid conservatives who also can win … or show himself to be a big fat liar. Take your pick.
Dusty on February 12, 2013 at 11:43 AM
Methinks that the left is very worried about Rubio considering that this is the second liberal wishcasting piece that I saw. And he is the establishment candidate. Don’t think that all the GOP insiders aren’t tickled pink about this guy and aren’t going to spend the next three years grooming him so he is a plausible CinC by 2016.
Illinidiva on February 12, 2013 at 11:45 AM
That was just the beginning. There’s not enough space in this box to link all the reasons why he’s a Jeb Bush clone.
TxAnn56 on February 12, 2013 at 11:47 AM
I honestly don’t agree that the Tea Party is gaining ground. If anything, there’s been a major backlash from the party establishment and an effort to “clean out” conservatives in the upper ranks. I have become convinced internal GOP reform is impossible and a new second party will likely have to be started.
Doomberg on February 12, 2013 at 11:47 AM
Ha ha ha ha. But the Tru Cons tell me he is Karl Marx. The Tru Cons tell me he is a slimeball idiot. I think some of the Tru Cons are paid to be here by the DNC.
John the Libertarian on February 12, 2013 at 11:50 AM
So says the open-borders, anti-nation-state guy who thinks that America is the property of the entire world.
You do know that this article is silly propaganda to try and make your slimeball idiot seem more appealing to conservatives, right?
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 12, 2013 at 12:02 PM
The truth is that libs fear him running
terryannonline on February 12, 2013 at 12:04 PM
War on Womenz… The Sequel. Even shriller. BTW, how does Santorum make money or is he for all women staying in the kitchen except his wife?
I think he is a Jeb Bush protege but those two have broken up over 2016. Apparently, Jeb Bush was really contemplating a 2016 vanity run. My own theory on the 2010 Senate race is that Jeb Bush “advised” Rubio to run so that Jeb could extract a little revenge against Charlie Crist. However, Jeb didn’t realize that there would be blowback. So whatever you think of Rubio’s immigration policies, we should be grateful to him for ending the political careers of both those bozos.
Illinidiva on February 12, 2013 at 12:05 PM
ROFLMAO.
“Don’t throw us in that briar patch!” — the left
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on February 12, 2013 at 12:07 PM
Well that was a given with this whole piece.
Marcus on February 12, 2013 at 12:30 PM
LOL!
FloatingRock on February 12, 2013 at 1:09 PM
Rubio is a conservative? What a joke. The word “conservative” has been “severely” redefined recently, thanks in large part to people like Rush who calls big-gov statists like Romney, (and presumably Obama if he only had an R next to his name), “conservative”.
These days “conservative” basically means the same thing that “liberal” does, the only difference is whether there’s a superficial D or R next to the persons name.
FloatingRock on February 12, 2013 at 1:12 PM
Maybe we should start calling Romney/Limbaugh conservatives like Rubio “Tories” or something.
FloatingRock on February 12, 2013 at 1:14 PM
I already have a reason. Don’t need any others. Thanks though.
Bmore on February 12, 2013 at 1:29 PM
Lol! Good one terry!
Bmore on February 12, 2013 at 1:31 PM
It’s not a joke. If Hillary doesn’t run they are in serious trouble running against a young, charismatic and minority Senator.
terryannonline on February 12, 2013 at 1:34 PM
You would think some would pick up on this after years of socons getting kicked around in the primaries.
But, they live in a bubble. And the internets just make that worse.
Moesart on February 12, 2013 at 1:51 PM
And Hillary isn’t The One for 2016.
The lesbian Senator from Wisconsin is. Hill’s time has passed, no matter how much the media try to carry her.
Moesart on February 12, 2013 at 1:52 PM
When It was explained to me what “compassionate conservatism” was I felt like I had been spat on. Later when W bragged, “I ran the conservatives out of the Republican party” that feeling was confirmed.
The Bushes, like Nixon, are considered right wing only because they’re Republicans. If Rubio was really a conservative he wouldn’t be the GOP establishment’s golden boy.
single stack on February 12, 2013 at 1:52 PM
There has been a full court press by the left to discredit him ahead of the SOTU response tonight. Debbie Downer was trotting out her faux senior citizen constituents to smear him. There has been a host of reports telling us why Rubio is a sure loser in 2016 and yet still some commenters here have trouble fitting the pieces of the puzzle together. Go figure.
The left will do to Rubio what they did to Miguel Estrada. No way are Republicans going to nominate a candidate to the Supreme Court or the presidency before they get the chance.
msmveritas on February 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM
Yes it is. Rubio, like McCain and Romney, is the MSM darling that they’re promoting to once again sabotage the GOP in ’16.
FloatingRock on February 12, 2013 at 2:29 PM
Unfortunately, I have to agree. At this point the establishment GOP is ready to accelerate this civil war within. They even want to sacrifice the 2014 and 2016 elections just so the conservative movement gets silenced forever. After all, they will still enjoy their positions of power, even in the minority.
It’s not a question of ‘can the destruction of the Republican Party be prevented,’ but a question of ‘when will the destruction take place?’
Myron Falwell on February 12, 2013 at 3:25 PM