Thursday Reads: Will It Come Down to Rubio Vs. Cruz?
Posted: November 12, 2015 Filed under: morning reads, Republican politics, U.S. Politics | Tags: 2016 Republican nomination race, immigration, Marco Rubio Ted Cruz 32 Comments
Good Morning!!
I’m beginning to get the feeling that Marco Rubio will be the GOP nominee. He seems to be the favorite of the money men, the “establishment” Republicans, and the corporate media. The only problem for him is that he’s still not very popular with voters.
But honestly, who else are the Republicans going to nominate? Trump is a know-nothing, egotistical blowhard, Carson is fabulist who spouts bizarre biblical fantasies and nutty conspiracy theories, Cruz is hated by just about everyone who has ever met him, Bush is the worst candidate evah, and Paul and Kasich are also-rans.
Rubio is young, baby-faced, and clean cut–never mind the fact that he is corrupt, ignorant, inexperienced, and would change any of his beliefs or policies and, if necessary, attack his own mother in order to win. Just look how he has treated his own mentor, Jeb Bush.
The latest media narrative is that Rubio and Ted Cruz are on a collision course.
Politico: The coming fight between Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.
Going into the week, Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio seemed to be the rivalry to watch in the GOP primary. After the fourth Republican debate, that’s been replaced by a new and perhaps more consequential storyline: the coming collision of Rubio and Ted Cruz.
The two Cuban-Americans, both 40-something, first-term senators with tea party credentials, continue to trail outsider candidates Donald Trump and Ben Carson in the polls. But they’re increasingly viewed as the candidates to beat in their respective lanes — Rubio as the new establishment front-runner and Cruz beginning to consolidate support from the party’s more conservative wing. The consensus view that they outperformed their rivals Tuesday has served only to cement that impression.
“There’s this growing sense that Rubio’s the best candidate and that people are getting pretty comfortable with him,” said Bruce Haynes, a Republican strategist. “You can feel Carson and Trump losing support. Cruz is a quiet tide in the night that is beginning to wash out the base on Donald Trump. Now, I think, people are looking at Cruz as the candidate who’s best positioned in a lane to run with Rubio and give him a real fight.”
Both Cruz and Rubio are incredibly mean and ambitious, but I have to believe that Rubio will win out in the long run because Cruz is already the most hated man in DC. I have to believe that event Republican voters will hate him once they get to know him better.
At the NYT, Jeremy W. Peters writes: Confrontation Brews as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio Vie for Conservative Vote.
That fight, which could be the most decisive but unpredictable element of the nomination contest, increasingly appeared to be heading toward a confrontation between two first-term senators both elected with Tea Party support but who have since taken different paths: Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida.
Each made his pitch in subtle but unmistakable ways during the debate and afterward, as they left Milwaukee for a day of campaigning across the country.
The most glaring difference between the two that surfaced during the debate — and continued in interviews each gave in the hours afterward — was over the issue of immigration policy. Mr. Cruz tried to portray Mr. Rubio as a moderate beholden to the Republican establishment, while Mr. Rubio argued that his approach was the most reasonable and workable conservative solution.
Yesterday as Cruz was campaigning in New Hampshire, Peters asked him to distinguish between his immigration policies and Rubio’s.
“It is not complicated,” Mr. Cruz said, then paused before adding, “that on the seminal fight over amnesty in Congress, the Gang of Eight bill that was the brainchild of Chuck Schumer and Barack Obama, that would have granted amnesty to 12 million people here illegally, that I stood with the American people and led the fight to defeat it in the United States Congress.”
Mr. Cruz said: “In my view, if Republicans nominate for president a candidate who supports amnesty, we will have given up one of the major distinctions with Hillary Clinton and we will lose the general election. That is a path to losing.
“And part of the reason the debate last night was so productive is you started to see clear, meaningful policy distinctions, not just between what people say on the campaign trail. Talk’s cheap. But between their records. When the fight was being fought, where did you stand? That speaks volumes about who you are and where you will stand in the future. And we’re entering the phase now in the presidential race where primary voters are starting to examine the records of the candidates.”
Peters also notes that Rubio tried to clarify his immigration views yesterday on Fox News.
“The lesson I learned from that is the people of the United States do not trust the federal government on immigration,” Mr. Rubio said as he listed a tough set of policies he said would “realistically but responsibly” address the problem.
“If you’re a criminal, you’ll be deported,” he said. “If you’re not a criminal, and have been here longer than 10 years, you have to learn English. You have to start paying taxes. You’re going to have to pay a fine. And then you’ll get a work permit.” He did not mention the question that enrages so many conservative voters: whether to eventually grant citizenship to undocumented immigrants.
The problem Rubio has is that he hopes to get support from some Latinos and from moderate Republicans; Cruz is only interested in the right wing nuts.
Reihan Salam at Slate: Where Does Marco Rubio Stand on Immigration?
Back in the 1980s, Pat Schroeder, a liberal congresswoman from Colorado, dubbed Ronald Reagan “the Teflon president” for the way he managed to avoid any blame for the scandals that erupted around him in his second term. One wonders whether Rubio is emerging as the Teflon candidate. With the possible exception of the silver-tongued Carly Fiorina, no Republican presidential candidate has helped himself more over the course of the first four debates than Rubio. On Tuesday night, Rubio fared well again. He wasn’t quite as strong as Ted Cruz, who, as Slate’s Josh Voorhees argues, was the night’s biggest winner. More than usual, Rubio seemed to be drawing on his stock references to his hardscrabble upbringing and his immigrant parents, and his optimistic homilies about the healing power of the American Dream. What was really striking about Rubio’s performance, however, is the way he dodged, yet again, getting drawn into a debate over immigration policy….
It would be one thing if Rubio only avoided talking about comprehensive immigration reform on the debate stage, but the Florida senator has soft-pedaled the issue throughout his campaign, only occasionally explaining why he decided to abandon his comprehensive immigration reform bill, which offered a path to citizenship to unauthorized immigrants and substantially increased legal immigration, among other things. Instead of repudiating the months he spent crafting an immigration compromise, Rubio emphasizes that he couldn’t trust President Obama as a partner, or that the timing wasn’t right. He insists that he pushed the comprehensive immigration reform bill in as conservative a direction as he could.
Yet we don’t have a clear sense of where, in an ideal world, Rubio would like U.S. immigration policy to go. On his nattily designed website, Rubio excerpts a passage from American Dreams, his biography, in which he makes the case for securing the border first, a conservative-friendly stance. He calls for moving from an immigration policy that emphasizes family ties to current U.S. citizens to one that is instead based on skills, which is sensible and broadly acceptable to the Republican right. What we don’t know is what this would mean in practice. Can we really say that we have a skills-based immigration policy if we also have a guest worker program for less-skilled workers, and if guest worker status can be renewed indefinitely? One assumes that guest workers will form families on U.S. soil and that many of them will be reluctant to leave the country once their guest worker visas run out. And though Rubio discusses immigration policy in broad strokes, he doesn’t really tell us about numbers. Will we admit more immigrants under the approach he favors? Or fewer? Even after abandoning comprehensive immigration reform, Rubio has backed legislation that would dramatically expand the H-1B visa program. What does he think about the evidence that the H-1B program is being gamed by offshoring companies with less than sterling records? These are questions I’d like to see Rubio answer at a future debate.
Other elements of Rubio’s immigration approach are likely to prove even more controversial. For example, he makes it clear that he intends to offer some form of legal status to unauthorized immigrants who already live in the U.S., a position that puts him at odds with many Republicans.* If Rubio intends to stick with this position, as I think he does, he’s going to have to actually make the case for it.
It’s difficult for me to understand the Republicans’ attitudes toward immigration, but it does appear that it is one of the most important issues for their base.
Another problem Rubio has is his possible past financial indiscretions. Has he continued this kind of dishonesty in Washington? Will Rubio’s “Teflon” work on this issue too?
The Miami Herald via Raw Story: New info raises more questions: Did Marco Rubio use his GOP credit card to subsidize his life?
For five years, Marco Rubio has tried to put behind him the controversy of his spending on a Republican Party of Florida credit card, taking the unusual step over the weekend of making public nearly two years of American Express statements to show how he spent the party’s money.
In some ways, however, the statements, which he previously refused to make public, raise more questions about how Rubio used the card, rather than laying them to rest.
Some big-ticket expenses he rang up on the card — $1,625 at the St. Regis Hotel in New York, $527 for food and drinks at Disney, $953 for a meal at Silver Slipper, the Tallahassee steakhouse — are the kind of eye-catching charges expected for someone doing party business.
But a slew of small charges at gas stations and for cheap meals — at a time when Rubio was struggling with his personal finances — suggest Rubio made the most of the ample leeway and little oversight party leaders gave employees and lawmakers to spend the party’s cash.
The Florida GOP issued corporate cards, intended for business use, during flush years a decade ago. A spending scandal threw the party into crisis five years later, around 2010, when some of the AmEx statements — including Rubio’s from 2007-08 — were made public. Rubio’s presidential campaign released the remaining two years of statements from 2005-06 on Saturday to show Rubio had repaid the party when he misused the card for personal charges.
An analysis by the Herald/Times of the new statements, however, found Rubio spent freely on the sort of items that are difficult to prove — or disprove — as party business expenses.
There’s much more at the link, and it makes Rubio look like a petty crook. Is there more to this story?
Although I see Rubio as a lightweight, it looks like the “very important people” see him as their best shot to get a Republican in the White House. I think he’s scary because he comes across as so sweet and innocent.
What do you think? Please post your thoughts and links on any topic in the comment thread.
peej
Carissa
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
And yet, to hear Michael Steele last night on Chris Hayes, Jebbie is going to pull this off. Said he did well in the debate, and he’ll do just fine come January and February. Uh huh.
I heard that. I couldn’t understand what he was talking about. Maybe it’s just wishful thinking.
That was my thought. Poor Michael Steele, he really just needs to leave the Republican Party already.
I know. He really doesn’t fit in the party anymore. He’s a moderate.
Excellent post, BB. The more I learn about Marco Rubio, the more I believe he is a crook.
A 2010 article from the Tampa Bay Times gives early details into “Marco Rubio’s Lavish Rise to the Top”. The article describes a continuous pattern of shady financial doings by Rubio throughout his political career.
“In December 2002, Rubio was a 31-year-old political hotshot set on becoming speaker of the Florida House. Rounding up support from legislators across 67 counties is no easy task for a young lawyer and local government lobbyist with a net worth of negative $103,000, a mortgage and student loans.
So Rubio did what many aspiring Florida legislative leaders do — he created a political committee, Floridians for Conservative Leadership, to “support state and local candidates who espouse conservative government policies,” according to IRS records.
But for 2003, the committee spent nearly $150,000 on administrative and operating costs and $2,000 in candidate contributions. Over 18 months, only $4,000 went to candidates other than Rubio, while similar political committees gave tens of thousands of dollars to candidates.
Rubio spent the biggest chunk of the committee’s money, $89,000, on political consultants, $14,000 in reimbursements to himself, and more than $51,000 in credit card expenses. Records show those expenses were for food, lodging and airfare but do not detail who was traveling or where expenses were incurred.
Such large credit card payments contrast with the more detailed disclosures in other legislators’ political committees. Harris [ Todd Harris, Rubio’s campaign adviser in 2010 ] noted that Rubio’s overall spending was in line with other legislators’ committees.
“Marco put his on a credit card and the other guys put theirs on a debit card. So sue us,” Harris said.”
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/national/marco-rubios-lavish-rise-to-the-top/1079473
Very interesting. The Miami Herald article I posted covers a lot of that too, but now they have the actual records that Rubio finally released.
From your link:
That was even before he got the Republican Party credit card.
Oh yeah, I felt this kind of thing all along…I’ve been waiting for the cartoonist to draw him ala Nixon with the peace hands “I am not a crook” for a while now.
Yes, that’s why I posted the Tampa Bay Times link. I thought it added to the Miami Herald article in your post. It shows that Rubio’s pattern of financial shadiness started prior to the Republican Party credit card.
It definitely does. Thank you. I saved your link for further reference.
I agree Beata. He’s got shady financial dealings all over the place. He’s either stupid or corrupt. Either way, he’s not fit for leadership of anything.
I still believe that Trump is going to take the nomination. Don’t ask my why I just think he will due to his celebrity.
I loathe Marco Rubio for all the reasons stated above and Ted Cruz is just another opportunistic blowhard who doesn’t stand a chance in the general once the public meets him up close and personal.
The entire field is a joke and Ben Carson will fade after Iowa. This guy does not possess a clue beyond his biblical renderings and Bush is the overall loser in this mess since he cannot get beyond Trump.
So my money is on Trump at this stage and unless he does something ever stupider than what he has done so far look for him to pull it off.
For this Hillary Clinton should be eternally grateful.
For months I’ve been telling friends who worry about Trump that Rubio is the most dangerous of all the candidates because he’s young, Hispanic, and doesn’t sound crazy (although he’s just as wrong on the issues as the others). Walker as his running mate, maybe?
The GOP ticket I’d most like to see because it would be easiest to defeat? Trump/Christie. Imagine those two blowhards running as a team.
I agree with you about Rubio. He’s slick, slippery, has a quip for everything, and seems to have that teflon coating. He floats like a butterfly, stings like a bee. Crook written all over him.
This is a really good article on Rubio’s proposed immigration “plan.” Basically, it makes zero sense and will lead to millions of people being out of work and unemployable and likely cause several important sectors of the economy to collapse.
Marco Rubio’s immigration plan is 3 steps to nowhere
The Repubs will fall all over themselves to agree with this plan.
Time Magazine exclusive:
College Alumni Raise Doubts About Bernie Sanders Campaign Photo
Thanks for keeping up with the clown car. I don’t know how you do it. I’m at the point that I just have to sit back and wait to see what they decide. I’m still not sold that Rubio will get the nod from the Repubs but I agree that he’s emerging as the best they have among the current nominees.
My crystal ball says it’ll be Clinton/Brown vs. Rubio/Portman.
That’s very Ohio centric, I know, but so is the election.
Sherrod Brown as a running mate would be a great addition.
It is a fascinating though unsettling exercise. Rubio does seem like the most likely of the Republican candidates who actually hold office. Everything I’ve seen of him, going back to the last six years or so, is really repulsive. He is not at all bright; his ideas make no sense. All he has is a certain look, and the capacity to say his vapid things in a forceful manner. He’ll talk about the promise of America; and the future; and youth; and his ethnicity; but he will do everything he can to avoid laying out any actual policy proposals. He can’t debate any issues. He doesn’t even understand them.
However, he presents the classic frightening case, of all that Republican money trying to sell and market a vapid lightweight as a candidate of substance. The marketers manage to sell every variety of useless and even toxic product to the gullible consumers. They will try to sell Rubio in the same way. It will be one of those races where every time that Hillary can appear directly to the people, she will gain support; but if the media can manage to camouflage the campaign with fake and invented issues; and if Rubio manages to stay behind a wall of ads, it will be harder. My father would always say that while the Democrats had to find actual good and knowledgeable candidates, the Republicans could manage to elect virtually anybody, because they had all the money, and owned virtually all of the media. Rubio is “virtually anybody,” bexause he has no qualifications whatsoever.
All that said, Trump still has a chance. There are a lot of Republicans who want to nominate an outsider. The general sense is that Trump will deflate after the early primaries, and then cannot recover. But he still has a decent amount of support’ probably 20% of the Republican voters will keep voting for him. It’s a matter of whether he is really serious about staying in the race or is indulging himself, and will leave after an early setback. Frankly, as awful as Trump is, I dislike Rubio even more. Trump has at least some sense of his own silliness; while Rubio is dead serious in his own arrogance and relentlessly determined ignorance and wrongness.
A couple of things: After the first few contests, the primaries turn into “winner take all” contests courtesy of Prince Priebus’ DIY Political Party demolition kit. Trump, while not winning the nomination, could still take a substantial number of delegates. That would undoubtedly be cashed in for a prime time speaking slot at the convention. Talk about “must see teevee” — Hillary should finance that event. Clint Eastwood’s empty chair skit would look like a Mensa revue in comparison.
The other point is just pure opinion — I share your disdain for Rubio, but I have cautioned for years about the Canadian/Cuban Ted Cruz. He is a toxic mix of smarts, ambition, and a total void of ethics or morals. If Cruz could expect adulation from it, he’d cut off what little chin he has left.
I guess in my mind Rubio versus Cruz boils down to this: Is it better to have a bone dry empty vessel or a vessel filled to overflowing with hatefulness and odious philosophies? I don’t know.
Prolix, Cruz concerns me more than Rubio for the reasons you state. In my opinion, a paskudnyak presents a far greater danger than a piste kayleh.
No disagreement from me, but you know what you have with a paskudnyak whereby a piste kayleh can be captured by anyone and filled indiscriminately. In any event, Cruz does scare me far more than Wally and the Beav’s friend, Marco.
Great new words. I always learn something when I visit.
I agree, Prolix. Rubio will be easier to beat and of less concern because Cruz is a true believer and that’s dangerous.
Should I order a shit sandwich with mustard or a shit sandwich with mayo?
Sue, we need to think of the children. Which shit sandwich would provide them with the best future?
The Shit Club, of course!
Trump or Carson would be shit soup.
They are both pretty flawed, and I especially can’t see anyone getting elected who supports a return to the gold standard. So, it’s early yet, they could take each other out and leave the next best Hispanic-J.E.B.
If a few other of the lower tier drop out, it could leave more money in JEB’s camp, so he just has to hang on.
Not that he is doing a tremendous job.
Great post. Trump’s recent speech in Iowa had me convinced he had drank too much before getting behind a lecture. Carson has betrayed the trust of voters over his whole “West Point scandal”. Bush has too much baggage, so who does that leave us with? Cruz and Rubio appear the only feasible candidates at this stage.
Time will tell.