Marco Rubio:


Thoughts on Marco Rubio for 2016:

The only person who even had a shot at securing a third party nomination and gaining enough votes to get on the ballot is Jon Huntsman. So all you third party hopefuls out there. Sorry, but it aint gonna happen. You have no idea how many democrats have told me back when I supported Huntsman, that he was the only intelligent and sane GOP choice out there. The Other third parties AKA Libertarians Communists etc… Are too crazy and only really supports one ideology. They won’t succeed!

Over the next four years the GOP will go through a lot of hoops. However, we will not die as many disenfranchised members of the Republican Party believe or even hope for. We will completely abandon the Conspiracy Theorists like the Paul cult, The Racists, the Anti-Gays, the Fringe Social Conservatives and the Tea Party. We will embrace Mexicans and Latinos. We will move more towards the left or really the center on issues like Abortion, immigration, and even parts of spending. The best person that fits this genre of new Republican to lead us in 2016 will I think be Rubio. And I am no Rubio-bot as that term will appear in the 2016 election season. He’s just the most logical choice right now. The Party has already picked him to be the front- runner and the favorite. They know someone like Paul Ryan is too conservative, and though I pointed out my admiration of Hunstman before, Romney killed his chances. Sadly, another mormon won’t win the nomination.

Romney ran his platform purely on economics obviously that didn’t work. Romney claimed to be a social conservative when we all knew he really wasn’t. That pissed everyone off!!! All major Tea Party candidates are getting their butts kicked by the MSM and the Democratic Anti-Tolerance Propaganda Machine. We need a change and while I think it would be good to try a social conservative. I know they won’t win. We just need someone who can articulate the message that the Republicans want to send out. We can no longer have the media and crazy tea party types do this for us!

We already have the man, will the party change with him?


I agree with absolutely nothing in that post


You can have this new GOP and I will practice my “I told you so’s”.

It sounds like we will both be quite happy.


Yup, push the base out. That will work! Good thing you’re starting early. You’ve got a lot of butt to both kiss and kick!


2016 according to jj


Isn’t Marco Rubio socially Conservative?


Rubio is a neocon so this will likely be the case.


I love Marco Rubio, he’s my second or third choice right now, but what you’ve said about moving to the center on issues is the last thing that needs to happen.
From what I’ve heard of Rubio’s plan for immigration, it sounds fairly solid, but I fear it will be another great regret like with Reagan.
Yes, we need to be more open to minorities, but if we sacrifice what we stand for in the process, then you can count me out!
I say count me out as an extreme Republican; I love the Republican Party, but if you don’t want me, then so be it…


I find that to be hilarious, because the Simpsons are awesome (well they have been going downhill for a bit…but that particular episode is awesome)

But jj does have a point, even if it it’s an unsavory point in the eyes of many of the social conservatives our there, the GOP as it is will have a heck of a time winning. Look at electoral distribution: Virgina has been lost twice, North Carolina was just barely held in 2012, Georgia is looking more pink than red (Obama was within 10% of winning both times), New Mexico isn’t even comparative anymore, Colorado & Nevada will be uphill battles, the status quo isn’t working. What options are on the table? Realistically.


that dang water incident…


Rubio is an establishment moderate with a neoconservative foreign policy. Just more of the same that has screwed the party and country up over the past 2 decades.


Before Rubio decided to co-author the Immigration bill, I thought for sure that he was the man. However, it is hardly practicing conservative principles when the bill adds
6.3 trillion dollars to the National debt. In addition, America cannot provide sufficient job growth for citizens now. So, what is the logic for granting citizenship to millions of people? This is not the time to advocate for a pathway to citizenship. Now is the time to cut taxes, lower regulations, and cut spending!


? Where did that number come from? I haven’t heard that before?


Heritage Foundation
Heritage Foundation: Immigration reform will cost $6.3 trillion - David Nather -


Marco Rubio has a lot to prove before I will ever vote for him. If the republican establishment blindly decides to back Rubio way before people even start committing publicly to run for president I’m absolutely done with any part of the GOP and I will vote libertarian from then on out starting in the next presidential election. And I’ll know if the next election will be a fair one or not. I’m not an idiot.


If this proves to be true, then I’m done with Rubio and will never vote for him. The National debt is the nations biggest problem right now and this will prove his priorities are out of whack. We are out of money. Reduce the National Debt by 10 trillion and then we will “start” to talk about that bill.


[quote=“Bigfoot_88, post:7, topic:38180”]
Rubio is a neocon so this will likely be the case.
[/quote]Ronald Reagan and GWB were neo-cons as well. Those are the Republicans that can be elected.

Romney was as well but he was all over the map on everything. Last GOP Presidents like that were Nixon and Bush Sr. Didn’t end too well for either of those.


Yes! I agree it is disturbing, but if this eases your mind, it is over 6.3 trillion over 50 years. However, that does not ease my mind. Any time you say the word “trillion” my skin crawls. Rubio, how could you agree to that?


Heritage…I think they’re just a tad bit partisan, plus I googled the cost and that estimate seems to be coming under a lot of fire, even from conservatives.


[quote=“Robert_Clay, post:19, topic:38180”]
Heritage…I think they’re just a tad bit partisan, plus I googled the cost and that estimate seems to be coming under a lot of fire, even from conservatives.
[/quote] They included the approximate amount of revenue as well. Please explain why the study is invalid.