Posted on 03/21/2015 10:06:33 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Amy Walter of the Cook Political Report is somewhat baffled. A recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll gave Republican voters a list of potential presidential candidates and asked whether the voters could support each candidate in the primaries. On that measure, Marco Rubio finished first. And yet when pollsters have asked GOP voters to name a top pick, Rubio inevitably finishes far from the top. Why is that? And why is Scott Walker doing better?
Walter writes:
Yet, if Rubio’s got such obvious advantages, why is he stuck in the low single digits while Walker has become a “co-frontrunner” with Bush? First, don’t underestimate the power of Walker’s profile as a conservative governor of a blue state. Furthermore, for a party that’s ambivalent at best about the idea of the idea of a “legacy” candidate like Bush, Walker’s understated Midwestern-ism is appealing.
Rubio backers, however, aren’t worried about his low standing in the polls. If anything, they like where he sits today. Rubio gets to go about his work without the same level of scrutiny that Walker and Bush get. They also see Rubio as a candidate who can endure for the long-haul thanks to his natural political talent. Where Bush struggles on the stump, Rubio shines. Where Walker fails to engage, Rubio connects emotionally.
So, when can we expect to see Rubio’s poll numbers catch up with his potential? A high-profile stumble by Bush or Walker could give the Florida Senator an opening. The debates could be another place for Rubio to break out. His allies, meanwhile, aren’t convinced they need those things to happen for him to succeed. Instead, they say, he just needs to keep doing what he’s doing and the voters will catch on to his appeal.
So, um, he's just waiting to make his move? Is that it?
Paul Waldman is also puzzled:
As a liberal, Walker scares me, because among the serious Republican presidential candidates, I suspect he's the one who would govern with the most intense combination of recklessness and malice. But he doesn't strike me as the most formidable general-election candidate. That would probably be Marco Rubio. Although that judgment is subject to change (we'll have to see how they all perform in the rigors of the primary campaign), Rubio's appeal is undeniable. He's extremely conservative, but wears his ideology lightly -- unlike someone like Ted Cruz, he doesn't seem eager to smack voters in the face with how much of a right-winger he is. He's obviously smart, and of course the fact that he's Latino means he could cut in to the Democrats' advantage among that increasingly important group (though by how much, we really have no idea). If I were a Republican, I'd be amazed that more of my compatriots weren't flocking to him.
I think Waldman has partly answered his own question, though he doesn't seem to know it.
Besides the obvious problem (Rubio used to support immigration reform), Rubio is struggling because he "wears his ideology lightly." He'd be doing much better if Republicans thought he scared Paul Waldman and the rest of us liberals and lefties, the way Scott Walker does.
Of course Walker impresses GOP voters: his union-busting, electoral victories, and mutually beneficial relationship with the Koch brothers drive us nuts. Republican voters love that. By contrast, when has Rubio ever left us sputtering with rage? When has he gotten the better of us?
Ben Carson is popular on the right because he launched an attack on President Obama at the ostensibly apolitical National Prayer Breakfast. Chris Christie used to be popular on the right because he fought unions and publicly dressed down teachers and other critics. That's how you win favor on the right -- and Rubio doesn't do it.
I see a post at National Review's Corner titled "Marco Rubio Delivers Withering Rebuke of Obama’s Treatment of Israel." Here's what NR's Ian Tuttle considers "withering":
“As far as I know, after this election, the president has yet to call the prime minister,” said Rubio (the president has since been in touch with Prime Minister Netanyahu). “That is unlike the fact that in March 2012, he was among the first to call and congratulate [Vladimir] Putin in Moscow. Or that in June of 2012, he was among the first to call [Mohamed] Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood when they won the Egyptian presidency. Or that in November of 2012, they called to congratulate the top Chinese communists on their new position -- which by the way is not elected in the way you and I would consider there to be an election.”
Ooh, nice touch there, Marco -- "Chinese communists." I'm sure that goes over really well with the octogenarians on Calle Ocho and in The Villages. As for the rest of us, well, we're thinking 1973 called Rubio and wants its talking point back.
That's a big part of Rubio's problem: Your first impression of him is that he's young, good-looking, and fresh-faced, but eventually you realize that he is (to borrow Michael Kinsley's quip about the youthful Al Gore) an old person's idea of a young person. The Molly Ivins line about Mike Dukakis also applies: The man has got no Elvis.
The man? The boy? I watched a bit of the "withering" clip (originally posted by the Washington Free Beacon, which called it "blistering") -- and, well, it's not. Rubio is supposed to have A-list political talent, but where is it? He delivers the speech with no personality -- it's as if he's a junior speechmaking trainee and he's going to get a passing grade just for getting the words out at all. He comes off as the second-best debater on the second-best undergraduate debate squad in the state, and he looks as if he's still having trouble getting used to wearing a suit:
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
He's got nothing.
Maybe he'll develop a style someday. But then he has to do something to tick us off. Does he even understand that? If he just wants to be a running mate, maybe he doesn't care. Otherwise, I don't see him ever making his move.
Rubio is a lightweigtbwho who will wet his pants under the heat.
I love the way they all ignore Ted Cruz,pathetic,Cruz is the man,courageous and most of all can articulate a message,clean hour clock
It seems that Cubans do not consider themselves either Hispanic or Latino. Also, Cruz is only of half Cuban ancestry.
Well, he got over 40% of the Latino vote three years ago. Do you know what you call a Republican presidential nominee that gets 40% of the vote?
No, I don’t.
Crooks and Liars is a left wing site.
Cuban lineage is traced back to European, African and Native American...
I thought Rubio might be the real deal when we first elected him down here in Florida. But not to long after he was in office, he voted to keep federal subsidies flowing to the sugar kings. It was pretty apparent then that he was a fraud.
That is correct.
If you thought for even an instant that he was the real deal then you refused to listen to what conservatives were pointing out.
From the very beginning of his political career he preached controlling the border to English speaking audiences, and open borders to Spanish speaking audiences.
This was no huge secret.
Videos of his addresses to LA Raza and similar groups were posted online and there were articles about them. I participated in many threads on the topic during his campaign.
You could listen to his speeches for yourself. This was no mere second hand account.
The people who voted for him did so in spite of his own words.
When you have a con man sitting at a little table and the hand painted sign says “crooked three card Monty” it’s hard to feel any sympathy for the suckers.
Once Rubio LED THE CHARGE for Amnesty in the Senate, he was finished as my candidate. I’ll still vote for him if stuck with him in November, but that’s about all the support he’ll get from me.
There is simply NO WAY he can walk back that SPECTACLE.
Invade the world, invite the world.
Mr. President.
Ok.
So is CNN, The Nation, NBC, the New York Times, ABC, much of Fox News, The New Republic, MSNBC, the Los Angeles Times, The Daily Beast, the Washington Post, National Public Radio, CBS, PBS and a thousand other places that are posted here regularly.
Governor Romney only got 27% of the Hispanic vote and only 6% of the black vote in 2012.
I’m not surprised.
Thank you. I’m well aware of that.
Alright. Then why did you tell me that about “Crooks and Liars?” Because you thought I was unaware of their bias? If I’m unfamiliar with a site, I can usually figure them out within 5 minutes. But I’ve posted from that site before, so I was well aware of their slant.
40% of the Latino vote would sound like the next Republican president, but 40% of the overall vote sounds more like ROmeny.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.