Posted on 02/06/2016 9:08:33 AM PST by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
Admittedly, a Jeb Bush townhall and a Chris Christie restaurant visit are bad places to look for Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)voters.
And yet there I was, practically begging New Hampshire voters to tell me they had been leaning toward a GOP establishment candidate, but were now lining up behind Rubio to take down Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX).
"What do you make of the argument that establishment Republicans need to get behind Rubio because he's the only one who can beat Trump?" I asked, over and over, in some form or another, feeling as if the Rubio campaign should probably start paying me.
But in spite of my most flawed interview techniques, I was getting an interesting answer.
Sorry, New Hampshire voters would say, knowing they were stepping all over mytidy little narrative.
Rubio's too inexperienced.
He's too immature.
I want someone who's been a governor.
Maybe in four years.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
The first sentence of the article kind of makes the rest of it irrelevant.
So the sainted Breitbart.com now takes the Huff Post as gospel truth? Quoting verbatim a part of a Huff article with no independent Breitbart reporting, with no analysis, with no verification?
Andrew Breitbart would surely be twisting and turning in his grave, if he could see the lack of basic reportorial standards in a publication that now plays off his name.
Email released by Phyllis Schlafly ..... details Rubio’s record .... what he campaigned on & what he actually did when he got to the Senate ..... excellent summary with links:
Rubio Record (immigration)
http://www.eagleforum.org/immigration/rubio-record.html
From the “CONCLUSION”:
There is no single major distinguishing policy difference between Marco Rubio, John McCain or Lindsey Graham. They have the same trade policy, immigration policy and foreign policy. But on immigration most especially — the issue in which all four have invested the most — there is no daylight separating them.
The difference, then, is one of persona, not policy. And in the arena of immigration, this translates into a vital difference. The biggest change from McCain-Kennedy, which could not get out of the Senate, and the Gang of Eight — which was nursed along by conservative pundits despite being to the left of Kennedy’s bill — was the presence of Rubio. Rubio created the conditions necessary to produce a considerably more open borders bill: conservatives who were invested in the Rubio Brand provided no early pushback but accepted Kennedy’s old talking points, and Rubio gave red state Democrats the political space necessary to support it. This is how it got 68 votes in the Senate.
The stakes of course are raised considerably if Rubio is President or Vice President. Rubio would have a much, much better chance than Obama of getting an open borders bill through Congress — while Boehner could refuse to bring up Obama’s mass immigration/amnesty bill for vote in 2014, Ryan would never refuse Rubio’s bill. Rubio’s presence, as it did with the Gang of Eight, would create the cover for both certain Republicans and all Democrats to get behind a far more open borders plan. Given that nearly every House Democrat sponsored the Gang of Eight House version (including Pelosi and Gutierrez), Ryan would not need to gather that many additional votes (House GOP leaders might have refused Obama’s 2014 request for a vote but they would not refuse President Rubio’s).
All of which adds up to: there is likely no person in the United States of America in a better position to enact mass immigration legislation than a President Rubio — no one who could deliver more votes in both parties for open borders immigration. Senator Rubio is not Main Street’s Obama, he is Wall Street’s Obama: President Obama was a hardcore leftist running as centrist; Senator Rubio is a Wall Street globalist running as a tea party conservative.
Unlike other legislation, the effects of bad immigration policy cannot be repealed. They are forever. The Republican party would never nominate a pro-Obamacare candidate, and it must be an even stronger maxim that it should not nominate any candidate who is committed to a policy of mass immigration. Rubio wrote the Obamacare of immigration policies: a bill that would have eviscerated the middle class, plunged millions into poverty, legalized the most dangerous aliens on the planet, overwhelmed our schools and safety nets, and done irreversible violence to the idea of America as a nation-state. Rubio is the candidate of open borders, Obamatrade and mass immigration, making one last attempt to pull off one big con.
Yup. It’s like complaining you can’t get a rib eye in a vegan restaurant.
This primary is The Cheap Labor Express vs the citizens
They started with 15 candidates against 2
They are now trying to rally around Mario Rubco because their first choice, Yeb! has utterly flamed out
Yeb!, Kasuck, Christie, Fiorino will all feel pressure to get out after NH
The citizens candidates (and their supporters) need to cease fire on each other and concentrate on The Cheap Labor Express candidates
For a guy who sees “nothing”, you obviously get it.
So everyone who supports someone you don't like isn't a citizen?
Talk about taking that birther stuff to the extreme....
Yep. But we are also talking about a poster here who has graced FR with articles from Mother Jones and The Nation and presented them as gospel truth because they were pro-Trump. So, consider the source.
There are those who want to retain the rule of law and American sovereignty. They are on the side of the citizens and the rule of law.
There are others who side with the fraudulently documented foreigners and their employers. They are citizens also but working against us.
I wouldn’t be too surprised to see Rubio take NH. I’m expecting a close second.
Hush money? Secret cash funding Rubio campaign
His poll numbers have crept up since the last Republican debate, and many are wondering who is paying for it.
Florida Senator Marco Rubio is benefiting financially in ways the Associated Press is calling ‘unprecedented’ in American politics.
Money has flowed to the Rubio campaign out of a mysterious, anonymous nonprofit group funded by unnamed donors. And this secret-money group appears to have an unknown relationship with Rubio.
Not a single pro-Rubio television commercial so far in the early primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina has been paid for by the Rubio campaign. Even more strange, the Rubio super PAC that identifies its donors hasn’t run a single commerical either.
It’s all being run by the shadowy Conservative Solutions Project.
This secret-money Conservative Solutions Project is happily picking up the tab for critical expenses that Rubio might struggle to afford.
This secret-money group is giving Rubio at least an $8 million assist, according to advertising tracker Kantar Media’s CMAG.
The candidate has previously presented himself as being opposed to such unaccountable money.
‘I have always supported disclosure,’ Rubio said at a New Hampshire campaign stop last month, in response to a question about money in politics. ‘And I think that as long as people know who is giving you money, and why it is, people can make judgments on why you are doing what you are doing.’
However, the Conservative Solutions Project does not disclose its donors.
The group is spending more than $3 million on a commercial that shows Rubio, 44, speaking at the Iowa State Fair, according to CMAG information about advertising placements on broadcast, cable and satellite television.
That follows a $3 million summertime ad campaign by the same group that promoted Rubio’s strong opposition to the Iran nuclear deal. Conservative Solutions Project also has reserved nearly $2 million in additional satellite TV time through Feb. 16, according to the advertising tracker.
The Conservative Solutions Project continues to decline to say who gave it the $16 million it claims to have. Its donors will never be named in the IRS paperwork it is required to submit. And because of the filing schedule the group set for itself, the public will have to wait until mid-2017, well after the general election, to learn even basic information about its finances during the primary nomination fight.
The Associated Press contributed to this story
Wow. Interesting.
They're on the side of some of the citizens. They're not on the side of the citizens who want more lax immigration.
Don't get me wrong - I think an unlimited labor pool screws over American workers and upsets the balance between labor and capital. And I think letting people who came here illegally become citizens is very, very wrong.
I just don't like the rhetoric that makes opponents of open borders sound like zealots, because that makes it so much easier to discredit their position.
The debate won't be won by those who scream the loudest.
There are a very small number who are working against the vast majority to screw them out of their country.
Borders on treason in my book
The Conservative Solutions Project continues to decline to say who gave it the $16 million it claims to have. >>>
koch bothers
As a super PAC, Conservative Solutions is required by law to disclose its donors. However, a sister organization, Conservative Solutions Project, is a 501(c)(4), meaning it does not have to share its donors publicly. It was formed in 2014, and its president is Pat Shortridge, former chair of the Minnesota Republican Party.
501(c)(4) “social welfare†group must “further the common good and general welfare of the people of the community,†not an individual political candidate, according to IRS tax rules. Conservative Solutions Project claims that it promotes a general conservative agenda, especially with regard to education, but its advertising has featured Rubio and has aired in states important to the presidential nomination.
Conservative Solutions PAC and Conservative Solutions Project share the same leadership team and public spokesman. “Absolutely, the two groups are related,†spokesman Jeff Sadosky told National Journal. “But they are separate and distinct entities. One is focused on supporting Marco Rubio’s potential presidential campaign, and one is focused on issue education.â€
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/conservative-solutions-pacconservative-solutions-project/
I expect some big shenanigans in NH on election day to achieve the goal of Rubio “winning”.
If Matt Fuller really didn't have a few small doubts, he wouldn't have mentioned this...
I think Sanders and Trump both won Iowa...
aerticle would have had more significance and credibility if the reporter had simply gone out into the community asking people what they thought instead of into places that are obviously going to be biased against Rubio or any other candidate for that matter-
I don’t support Rubio- but this article is a bit weird-
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.