Posted on 04/16/2015 8:55:47 PM PDT by entropy12
And if there is one candidate who is the anti-Hillary, it is Marco Rubio. Let me list the reasons.
Youth
This is the most obvious contrast — one that Rubio is pushing to the hilt. Rubio is young. Clinton is not. At CPAC, when asked to say the first word that came to mind when he thought of Clinton, he said, "Yesterday."
Historic-ness
You can already hear the left-wing inevitability noise machine: Oh, how historic it would be to elect the first female president! But of course, there is also something historic about Rubio's candidacy: he would be the first Latino president of the United States.
Wealth
Clinton is running a populist campaign. She is also quite rich. She got rich through — is there a polite way to say this? — her husband's post-presidential influence-peddling.
Policy
Republican Party's single biggest predicament is that it is perceived as no longer caring about the concerns of the middle class. In this respect, Rubio is exactly the sort of candidate the party needs: a true conservative who nonetheless understands the GOP's greatest weakness. His ambitious reforms — his tax plan and its child tax credit, his wage subsidies plan, his proposals for higher education — are all aimed squarely at this problem, as is his opportunity rhetoric. On both the politics and the merits, this is the right response.
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
Maybe, just maybe, you should try to refute the FACTS that were posted by Windflier about your sorry ass excuse for a candidate.
You certainly SEEM to be in love with Romney since three years after he tanked you are still sniffling and sniveling in your sorrow that we lost that 2012 opportunity to ruin the GOP as well as the republic.
I will add to Windflier's facts that Romney organized a business to facilitate abortion by disposing of the little corpses of the aborted. If that is what you want to see in the White House naming SCOTUS justices, then you and I have nothing in common. Your boy lost and anything like him will lose in the future. Suck it up.
Oh, and I was a Reagan State Chairman when he challenged Ford. Were you? Comparing Romney to Jesus Christ will get you nowhere. Jesus Christ did not facilitate abortions by disposing of the corpses, did not force "gay""marriage" down the throats of His society, did not disarm law abiding citizens, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseam.
If Romney is not your hero, prove it by giving your tired unsustainable argument a freakin' rest. Any old piece of crap with a GOP label is not worth voting for and an ever growing number of principled conservative Republicans agree.
Re: Your Post #61:
THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!
Answer the specifics of Windflier’s #60 and check your insults at the door until you do.
the sequence of primaries n 2016:
IA, NH, CO, UT, NV & SC
___________________________________________________________
CO is the third Primary State; huh? Well, the large Hispanic population there could help Cruz and/or Rubio. If Cruz wins IA, does well in Blue Hampshire and then wins CO...... Katie, bar the door.
Someone mentioned that a commentator said that Ted Cruz needs to smile more on the Campaign trail and especially on TV. After I read that, I got to thinking: He really doesn’t smile all that often. Come on Ted; grin a little.
His strength is he is favored by elites.
You are going to lecture me on “insults” ??? The closest thing that comes to that is Madonna teaching a Sunday School Class.
I KNOW MITT ROMNEY SUCKED!!!But, he’d still be better than what we have in there now. And, to call a Republican a dyed-in-the-wool liberal is like saying that a woman who has sex with a man she is not married to is a slut. That may, or may not, be the case. But, if you, and your purist buddies on here, think that B. Hussein Obama is better than Mitt Romney, or any other Republican, then I have nothing more to say to you. Have a nice day.
This nation has changed drastically since 1984 when Mondale ran against Reagan. This is NOT the same America in which I grew up.
Oh really?
According to what evidence, do you make that assertion?
Do you believe that, simply because Mitt has an R velcroed to his sleeve?
Or is there something in his RECORD that gave you the confidence to believe he'd govern any differently than Obama?
By what objective application of logic or reason did you deduce that Mitt Romney would be "better" than Barack Obama?
I posted Mitt's record so you could do some retroactive due diligence. I know you read it. Apparently, it doesn't matter at all to you that Mitt's record is indistinguishable from any liberal Democrat's, yet you stand there yelling to one and all that he'd somehow be "better".
I'm just asking you to do one thing - prove it.
Well it is the Republicans turn, so
Rafael Cruz (R)
Piyush Jindal (R)
Marco Rubio (R)
YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED WINDFLIER..... to publicly admit that you would rather have the Marxist Muslim from Kenya in the White House than Mitt Romney. Shame on you; that is despicable. YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FROM THIS WEBSITE!!! I will have no further communication with you and I hope other FReepers, who love this country, will boycott any postings from you. DO NOT EVER CONTACT ME AGAIN!
Madonna could have been Romney's running mate. Unlike Romney, she did one pro-life number called "Papa, Don't Preach." Maybe she turned Romney down. Can't say I would lame her.
Now let's hear your specific responses, charge by charge to Windflier's #60.
Par. 2: .....Can’t say I would blame her.
I don't normally resort to ad hominem displays when debating another Freeper, but you've proven that I was right to call you an ignoramus. That's truly what you are - by definition.
Tell me where I ever indicated that I would rather have the Marxist Muslim over Mitt Romney. Go on - copy and paste my words to prove the charge.
Oh, that's right. You can't, because I never said that. I never even hinted at it. In fact, you're drawing that lying inference to blacken my name and impugn my standing on this forum. Even worse, you're doing it while running away ("DO NOT EVER CONTACT ME AGAIN!").
Instead of confronting the facts I provided you with, and recognizing the hard truth that Mitt Romney's RECORD is ironclad proof that he's a progressive liberal, you shoot the messenger and chastise me and millions of other conservatives for not joining you in your abandonment of everything you profess to believe in.
Don't you get it? The Powers That Be gave you NO choice in the 2012 election. Electing either one of the bums on the ticket was guaranteed to ratchet the radical leftist agenda forward. You'd have to be terminally gullible to believe otherwise, yet there you sit, proving to one and all that such unthinking naivete really exists among self-professed conservatives.
I've asked you multiple times now, to review Romney's RECORD in office, and make the case that he isn't a liberal masquerading as a conservative Republican. Why haven't you done that? Why are you responding with exclamation points, caps, and phony outrage instead?
Could it be that you're trying to defend the utterly indefensible, and that I've caught you out in public as being a boot licking shill for the liberal GOP establishment? I believe I have, which is why you're spitting nails instead of answering the question.
I can't tell you how many times I made that very point during the 2012 election.
Had Romney been elected, he would have had a soft and compliant 'Republican' Congress that was all to eager to forward every bit of his liberal agenda. For the first time in a very long time, the Congress would have been completely united in feeding every manner of suicidal bills to the President, with full certainty that he'd gleefully sign every bit of it into law.
His record as President would have mirrored his record as Governor, which would have not only killed the Republican brand, it would have done similar damage to what Obama's doing now.
Nice, flier.
Din Maker is stuck on hapless. DM believes simply that since Romney ran on an R ticket, he was a Republican. Well that’s a belly laugh at every level, certainly on every social issue, and on religious freedom, cram down birth control for the Massachusetts Catholic institutions, Massachusetts gay rights— you name it. Romney is and was a liberal, designed by the Din Maker types at the RNC Establishment, supporting some permanently annex of the Republican Party with the Marx family on the Left, who despise all the same things together with Romney.
Obama may be a bummer, Din Maker, but he caused a rally in the congressional elections, if you noticed, and were not too disappointed with the results.
Under Romney, the Party would be dead by now, in those congressional races, instead of wiggling to life with a calvary of candidates who are conservative and ready to knock out RINO’s.
Conservatives on this forum anyway, know better.
Ho hum....... yawn......
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.