Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
August 04, 2015, 12:35:25 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
87302 Posts in 2281 Topics by 1069 Members
Latest Member: ctelerant
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  Dog Brothers Public Forum
|-+  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities
| |-+  Politics & Religion
| | |-+  Senator Marco Rubio
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Senator Marco Rubio  (Read 12608 times)
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #50 on: February 07, 2015, 12:38:13 PM »

Very good article with balance about Rubio.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-ryanization-of-rubio-20150130
« Last Edit: February 07, 2015, 12:41:04 PM by DougMacG » Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4530


« Reply #51 on: February 07, 2015, 01:34:37 PM »

Thanks Doug.  I look forward to hearing more from Rubio's idea machine.

I am displeased with the immigration issue.  We cannot cave to this.   
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #52 on: February 07, 2015, 10:08:50 PM »

Thanks Doug.  I look forward to hearing more from Rubio's idea machine.

I am displeased with the immigration issue.  We cannot cave to this.   

Politifact:  Rubio admits that was the wrong route and instead proposes a piecemeal approach to immigration reform.  http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jan/14/fact-checking-marco-rubios-book/

That experience should keep him from peaking too early in the polls. )   He lost his own supporters there.  It was a valuable lesson for him to work with and then get backstabbed by the likes of Shumer and Durbin.  In his defense, he knew the so-called final Senate bill would still go to negotiations with the Republican House.  Now he can articulate both sides along with middle ground on that tricky issue perhaps better than anyone.  Others with a harder line will be more popular with conservatives early in the race, and Jeb has a lock on the pro-amnesty vote.  Rubio's efforts there make him less scary to some general election voters.  One of the biggest questions late in the primaries will be which conservative can win.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #53 on: February 10, 2015, 10:35:42 AM »

I wonder what Rubio needs an New Hampshire operative for if he is just selling a book.    wink

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/02/09/rubio-nabs-key-former-romney-aide/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #54 on: February 17, 2015, 11:28:54 AM »

In the early 2016 Republican presidential jockeying—as the field of potential candidates grows, and as Jeb Bush , Mitt Romney , Scott Walker and Rand Paul grab the recent headlines—an interesting development is unfolding just beyond the limelight: In the eyes of many in the party, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has quietly moved into the upper tier of that long list of potential candidates.

He gave a well-reviewed performance at a recent gathering of donors organized by the conservative Koch brothers. He has raised eyebrows by securing the services of Jim Merrill, who directed both of Mitt Romney’s presidential runs in New Hampshire, and the support of George Seay, a Texas financier who raised money for then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry last time around. He has laid a substantive groundwork with a series of detailed policy speeches over the past year.


More intriguing, perhaps, there is little indication that the likely entry of Mr. Bush, the man seen as Mr. Rubio’s political mentor, is going to deter him from proceeding. Over the weekend, Mr. Rubio happened to be in Iowa, home of the nation’s initial nominating caucuses, signing copies of what looks an awful lot like a campaign book of policy ideas. In the next week he’s off to the early-primary states of New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada to do the same. A springtime presidential announcement seems likely.

All of which raises the question: In a field populated with other senators and an even bigger figure from the state of Florida, what is the case for Marco Rubio?

It starts with the obvious: Mr. Rubio is a bright and articulate politician with the kind of broadly conservative credentials required in the Republican Party circa 2016. And his ability to break out in fluent Spanish in a news conference or a Telemundo interview gives him a chance to reach a Hispanic audience that keeps slipping away from the GOP.

Still, those attributes aren’t sufficient. For Mr. Rubio, success also depends on the magic of political timing—that is, the chance that he has arrived offering precisely what the market happens to be demanding.

On that front, his case rests heavily on two predicates. The first is that Republicans, sufficiently disillusioned with the political establishment, are ready to break tradition by trying somebody who is newer and younger—and who hasn’t waited his turn.

This, of course, is what the Democrats did in picking Barack Obama in 2008. But it isn’t what Republicans tend to do. The GOP normally picks the candidate whose turn has come, and usually the one around whom the party’s establishment has coalesced. In 2012, Mr. Romney was the obvious establishment choice, and one who had paid his dues by running once before. George W. Bush was the establishment choice in 2000. Bob Dole , George H.W. Bush, Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon all had been around the block by mounting serious prior candidacies before the party turned the reins over to them.

The Rubio candidacy rests in part on an assumption that the party, like the country more broadly, now has grown ever more disillusioned with the political establishment in recent years. Certainly some strong new forces are coursing through the party. More than half the Republicans in the House have been elected since 2008. A tea-party insurrection has been roiling the GOP since 2009.

And when Mr. Romney raised the possibility that he might return for a third presidential run in 2016, the idea of turning again to such a paragon of the establishment didn’t exactly ignite a wildfire of enthusiasm. Such signs give hope to Rubio forces.

Mr. Rubio’s second asset is the work he has done in the past couple of years developing a voice and a track record on foreign policy. As the economy appears to be improving and global conditions are deteriorating, the premium attached to the ability to maneuver on this front is rising. That’s an area of advantage for Mr. Rubio over governors—say, for example, New Jersey’s Chris Christie and Wisconsin’s Scott Walker, both of whom had their problems while dipping their toes in foreign waters on recent trips to London.

Those advantages are offset by two significant problems. First, Mr. Rubio’s profile as a 43-year-old with just four years of experience in the Senate is awfully reminiscent of Mr. Obama’s in 2008. Some in the GOP will argue against repeating that experience.

And second, Mr. Rubio will continue to get grief among some in the party for having sponsored a comprehensive immigration reform plan that envisioned an eventual path to legal status for many illegal immigrants.

Those aren’t small obstacles. The question for Mr. Rubio is whether they are trumped by the advantage of good timing.

Write to Gerald F. Seib at jerry.seib@wsj.com

 
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #55 on: February 17, 2015, 04:43:10 PM »

I agree in part with Gerald F. Seib, WSJ.

Taking the last points first.  It is certainly true that Rubio's effort on immigration reform hurt his current standing with conservatives.  Offsetting that in part is that the same effort softens his image with the center making him more electable, if nominated.  It also deepened and broadened his knowledge of an issue that isn't going away, and it gave him behind the scenes, face to face experience dealing with the Democratic core of congress, people like Dick Durbin and Chuck Shumer.  Rubio's effort there was an error and a failure by his own admission, but one hell of a learning experience that would have been entirely missed by being just one voting Senator sitting on the sidelines.

To note the similarities in age and background of Rubio to Obama is to miss the essence of both of these people and their past experiences.  Seib answers that; one voted present and one served with increasing responsibilities of leadership.  One spoke in cliches and wanted to tear down the country and one is spelling out how exactly to bring its greatness.  Also one state, Illinois, ended up in failure and one, Florida, in success.

I find the 'establishment candidate' argument empty this time around.  Who is the establishment  right now?  Reince Priebus, a 42 year old from Wisconsin?  Not Chris Christy, he is his own maverick.  Romney is out.  Scott Walker is the opposite of establishment; no one like a Karl Rove would have advised him to take on those entrenched interests.  J.E.B. might seek 'establishment' money but he also dances only to the beat of his own drum.  Who is the proven winner in this crowd.  None of them.  Christy is back to a 37% approval in his own state.  Walker untested on this stage.  And Jeb has been out of politics by choice for quite a long time.  Rubio enters the contest even up on that score, IMHO.

Will any of these candidates including Rubio rise in the campaign and the debates to be seen as Presidential?  I don't know.  Rubio has become fluent in foreign policy issues; does that translate into being seen as a credible and responsible Commander in Chief?  I don't know.  What I know is that this is a wide open primary and it will come down to a number of factors.  Who connects?  Who will do right on foreign policy in a troubled world?  And my central point here:  Who (taking Stephen Hayes description of Rubio) is the most talented communicator that makes the case for limited government and American greatness better than anyone in the Republican field?  If someone other than Rubio, can do that better than Rubio, and has executive experience and foreign policy credibility, Presidential temperament, clean background and all the rest, then good for us, let's take him or her.  Maybe Mike pence on paper, but I don't see a better communicator out there, and that is what we need right now if we want anything for the American future beyond a gridlock that leaves all liberal, leftist programs fully in place.

Rubio's ability to speak fluent Spanish at this point in time in our nation's history could prove instrumental.  Add cute wife and kids to it and Hillary for an opponent and this starts to look a little like 1960, JFK vs. Nixon.  Funny that JFK turned out to be the supply-sider with a tilt toward individual responsibility, and Nixon became the big government statist.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2015, 04:55:02 PM by DougMacG » Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #56 on: February 20, 2015, 04:46:03 PM »

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/02/20/this-marco-rubio-statement-on-rudy-giuliani-is-about-perfect/ 
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4530


« Reply #57 on: February 20, 2015, 06:09:01 PM »

"Yes, there are some on the right who will not like that Rubio said Obama loves America, but these were not voters Rubio was going to win"

Well I am on the right and I don't like it.  Isn't obvious he doesn't love America?   

He is using his position and power to push a one world government dream of the left.

Rubio may or may not win my vote.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #58 on: February 20, 2015, 06:17:47 PM »

Is this really a sword to die on?

He is running to be President of ALL the people, no point in needlessly persuading low and middle info voters that he has a visceral attitude against a man they regard as pleasant and his platitudes as plausible.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4530


« Reply #59 on: February 20, 2015, 06:45:20 PM »

We make a stand or cave?

We are already dying if you ask me.  What you say Obama does not have a visceral dislike of America?   Why ignore it?
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #60 on: February 20, 2015, 08:32:44 PM »

The point can still be made without hitching his wagon to defending Rudy.
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4530


« Reply #61 on: February 20, 2015, 09:00:05 PM »

One has to have the temperament of iron I suppose.   Can't say the truth to the "left".  Just can't.   They come after you like a brick s..t-house.

Look at the way they are going after Gulliani even though he states the obvious.   Everything he said he backs with facts.   So he can't voice his opinion?

I could almost but not quite let Rubio off with the "I believe [Obama] loves American.  I have a harder time doing that when he essentially calls Gulliani's remark "embarrassing".

We all have our opinions and those are mine.  I am not embarrassed.   I am more embarrassed by the cave ins on the right.   



Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #62 on: February 21, 2015, 09:45:08 AM »

Did Marco really need to get tied up in this meaningless kerfuffle?  http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/02/20/giulianis-biographer-destroys-him-in-scathing-op-ed-on-how-rudy-loves-america/

I think he made the right choice in not getting tied up with it and instead to talk about his vision for America.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #63 on: February 21, 2015, 10:09:24 PM »

Did Marco really need to get tied up in this meaningless kerfuffle?  http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/02/20/giulianis-biographer-destroys-him-in-scathing-op-ed-on-how-rudy-loves-america/

I think he made the right choice in not getting tied up with it and instead to talk about his vision for America.

I agree.  There is a real skill to staying on-message without putting down your questioner.  Reagan had about 3 things he wanted to accomplish as President.  For Rubio, I would say, a similar challenge.  He has his vision, agenda, campaign and book - all about growing peace and prosperity, and the MSM has this shiny object, a quote they find controversial and irresistible.  He needed it to go away; he isn't running against Obama - or Rudy.

Stephen Hayes (2016 thread):  "When I sat in on Rubio’s debate-prep sessions for a profile I wrote in 2010, I was blown away by his ability to think on his feet. Rubio routinely came up with memorable one-liners that other candidates would pay consultants thousands of dollars to imagine."

Wash Post blog, Crafty's link:  "In one fell swoop, Rubio gets in a dig at the media, bring in another regular gaffer in Biden, places himself above the fray, says Obama loves America, and criticizes Obama in a very blunt way."

More than that, he ends with, "I think his ideas are bad."  The follow up question, if there was one, puts him right back on message:  Here's why I think his ideas are wrong and here's how I think we should do it differently...

Chuck Todd, host of Meet the Press, said of Rubio's response, "that’s how you do this."
http://www.hughhewitt.com/chuck-todd-on-the-presidents-very-rough-week/

Hillary's managers couldn't answer a similar question in months, and she couldn't do it without a script and a rehearsal.  Crafty said of Ben Carson, no electoral experience.  (I point this out once in a while, but) Rubio won Florida by a million votes.  Key Democrats are looking to jump into the Florida Senate race only if Rubio doesn't.  Not too many other so-called tea party Senators representing swing states evoke that kind of fear or respect.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #64 on: February 25, 2015, 03:04:41 PM »

 

Marco Rubio began his race for the Republican presidential nomination with a bang by snagging Jim Merrill, Mitt Romney's top campaign aide in both of his presidential bids. Though the cat's out of the bag, Rubio's not expected to formally announce until April.

In joining the first-term senator from Florida, Merrill declared, "What Mitt [Romney] said is right. It's time for the next generation of Republican leadership." Merrill called Rubio the "most exciting candidate in the field." He continued, "I wouldn't be doing it if I didn't think he could win. He knows ... [how to] engage voters, do town halls, run personal door-to-door campaigns. I've never seen a more talented guy."

Rubio, the son of naturalized Cuban immigrants, would be the first Latino Republican candidate. That in itself should warm the cockles of establishment-type GOP hearts. And make no mistake -- Republicans must improve with minorities.

Bright, articulate and energetic, Rubio served eight years in the Florida House of Representatives, eventually being elected speaker in 2006. In 2009, he ran against Charlie Crist in the Florida senatorial primary. Beginning as an underdog, Rubio climbed the polls quickly and won the primary. Crist then ran as an independent, but Rubio beat him again in a three-way race.

In his first term as a U.S. senator, Rubio has authored, introduced or co-sponsored more bills than many of his senior colleagues, and he's established himself as a substantial cultural and fiscal conservative.

Rubio's major obstacle in his quest for the nomination may be fellow Floridian Jeb Bush, the man rallying GOP elites. With the establishment behind the former Sunshine State governor and with his own family's connections, Bush has many wealthy donors already committed to him.

By comparison, Rubio has so far won the backing of George Seay, a Texas financier who supported Gov. Rick Perry in 2012, and Norman Braman, a car dealer billionaire and philanthropist. He was well received at a gathering of donors the Koch brothers put together and will likely win yet more support. But he's still David to Bush's Goliath.
His pitch is that he's the right messenger (an eloquent, young, Cuban-American who can appeal to a diverse array of voters) with the right message (an optimistic plan for American exceptionalism, born of his personal story) for the 21st century.

Rubio espouses conservative cultural and fiscal conservative values -- he's pro-life, pro-religious freedom and pro-Second Amendment. He opposes same-sex marriage and recreational marijuana use. He wants to limit the growth of federal spending via a balanced budget amendment and to restore George W. Bush's tax cuts. He favors helping small business through tax cuts, including capital gains, and promoting research and development in science and technology, including bringing the moribund space program back to life.

In his senatorial race, Rubio was the Tea Party candidate, and he probably can still expect substantial Tea Party support, even with several candidates competing for that backing.

Some pundits compare Rubio to Barack Obama's running against a party favorite. Virtually no one knew Obama, so running against Hillary Clinton was risible. She was so far ahead in the polls that his candidacy seemed quixotic. But despite Hillary's seeming popularity, many Democrats didn't want a Clinton dynasty. Obama knew it, and he was able to out-charisma Hillary for the nomination.

In most respects, there's no similarity between Rubio and Obama, but the comparison stands up on one point. Like Obama, Rubio is young and has a popular message, so with a few dozen stump speeches the polls could begin to swing. And average Republicans are leery of a Bush dynasty. Then again, this analogy discounts the several other candidates who have their own sizable followings -- something Obama did not face.

Rubio presents himself and his family as being winners because of American exceptionalism -- a word conservatives ache to hear again from their president. Unlike the current Oval Office occupant, Rubio exudes patriotism. His parents came from Cuba, escaping poverty and seeking opportunity, and they found it in America. We need a leader who can show us that this great nation will revive economically, will destroy ISIL and will begin to reverse its cultural decline. Maybe Rubio can do it.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #65 on: February 27, 2015, 11:37:51 AM »

http://www.c-span.org/video/?324558-3/senator-marco-rubio-rfl-remarks-cpac-2015
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #66 on: March 02, 2015, 10:44:02 PM »

Elizabeth Warren isn't going to like this.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/rubio-previews-tax-reform-plan-at-donor-meet-115626.html
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #67 on: March 03, 2015, 07:38:27 AM »

One pundit said that people like Rubio can overcome the cash disadvantage they have compared to establishment candidates by taking interviews like this one with a television station in New Hampshire and staying until the last question is answered.  No handlers, no script, no podium, this didn't cost him anything except a trip to the studio.  It ran on NH tv and was covered by a Florida newspaper.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/sfl-ap-rubio-close-to-2016-decision-20150302-story.html
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #68 on: March 17, 2015, 03:46:44 PM »

Washngton Post, The Fix:
Nobody can match Marco Rubio’s upside
Although Rubio hasn't been at the top of GOP primary polls for many months, the new poll shows he's the guy most Republicans could see themselves voting for.
More at the link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/03/16/marco-rubio-the-gops-upside-candidate/
-----------------------

And a BIG negative story yesterday on Rubio at Politico - contains nothing that wasn't vetted in 2010 and nothing in it comes close to landing a punch.  It could even be Rubio people making sure this story is forever old news.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/marco-rubios-house-of-horrors-116075.html
Marco Rubio’s house of horrors
A Tallahassee home co-owned by a scandal-plagued ex-congressman is the locus of questions about the senator’s finances and judgment.
By Marc Caputo  3/16/15

The friend's money problems had to do with the lobby expanding gambling in Florida and Rubio opposed that.  He paid the bills when the friend didn't.  Used his RNC credit cards a couple of times and reimbursed them. 

His tenant at the "House of Horrors":

The tenant declined to speak with POLITICO, but she said in a written statement that Rubio and his wife “have been very gracious and understanding of my circumstances.” She called them “extraordinary landlords” and expressed her “deep appreciation … for all that you’ve done.”

Try getting a tenant to give their landlord a great reference.  It's not that easy!

Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #69 on: March 23, 2015, 08:54:45 AM »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdMWbqZsyuM

Israel should have this friend in the White House. 
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4530


« Reply #70 on: March 23, 2015, 09:08:23 AM »

Agreed.   Watch for Hillary come out to secure the Democratic Jewish vote with strong remarks for Israel.

If she doesn't I would be very surprised. 

And I wouldn't count on the Democratic party to lose the liberal Jewish vote either way though.  Maybe they would sit out the election but it seems hard to believe any of them would be willing to vote for a Republican.   To them Repubs are worse than Nazis.  cry
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #71 on: March 23, 2015, 11:05:56 AM »

Agreed.   Watch for Hillary come out to secure the Democratic Jewish vote with strong remarks for Israel.

If she doesn't I would be very surprised. 

And I wouldn't count on the Democratic party to lose the liberal Jewish vote either way though.  Maybe they would sit out the election but it seems hard to believe any of them would be willing to vote for a Republican.   To them Repubs are worse than Nazis.  cry

That's right.  No R is going to win the liberal Jewish vote.  But most of my Jewish friends are traditional Democrats, CFOs and small business owners, who are conflicted with what they see happening.  They are successful and see firsthand the policies of attacking success.  Not just federal, but we have some new state taxes here worse than Calif!  They see over a prolonged period that it is Republicans (and Christians) who want to protect the Jewish state of Israel, and it is liberals and Democrats who keep siding with the terrorists who attack Israel and committed to its destruction.  At some point you stop pulling that lever.

Meanwhile, the Dem coalition has Muslims, gays and Jews all playing on the same team.  And they think WE have problems!  Chipping away at the support of core Democrat demographic constituencies is exactly what we need.  If the black vote for Obama at 98% drops to maybe 88% with weaker enthusiasm and if the Dems hold on Jews that already dropped 21% in 8 years (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/11/are-democrats-losing-the-jews/382665/) falls even further, and if gains are made with Hispanics...  trends like that can change the direction of the country.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #72 on: April 03, 2015, 11:03:54 AM »

Where the Rubio Tax Plan Falls Short
The child credits and new rates pit groups against one another in a way that across-the-board rate cuts do not.
Sen. Marco Rubio at the Capitol Hill announcement of a tax-reform plan drawn up with Sen. Mike Lee, March 4. ENLARGE
Sen. Marco Rubio at the Capitol Hill announcement of a tax-reform plan drawn up with Sen. Mike Lee, March 4. Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images
By
Amity Shlaes And
Matthew Denhart
April 2, 2015 7:17 p.m. ET
87 COMMENTS

Can a technical debate over tax plans trigger an identity crisis in the Republican Party? Apparently, yes. Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Mike Lee of Utah recently launched their “Economic Growth and Family Fairness Tax Reform Plan.” Within a few days former presidential candidate Steve Forbes fired back with a flat-tax plan. In policy circles the big question is whether Jeb Bush and Scott Walker will back “Rubio-Lee” or “flat tax.”

The Rubio-Lee plan takes a different approach in the name of achieving the old Republican goal of growth. But the approach is so different that it can hurt the viability of the Republican Party and even set in train changes that may slow future growth.

Signaling opportunity throughout the tax code has long been the basis of the philosophy known as supply-side economics, or “Reaganomics.” Reaganomics treats even individual wage earners as entrepreneurs. The marginal rate to which a worker is subject under the progressive tax schedule is crucial.

A higher rate on the next dollar a worker earns discourages him from working more. The highest tax bracket is especially important as top earners produce the most and innovate the most. Incentivized by a low top rate, they will increase earnings more than those further down the income scale. That top marginal rate also functions as a symbol of how society rewards enterprise.

Of course, Republicans have also long routinely backed targeted tax devices for groups: the child credit, education credits and so on. But such mini-entitlements were add-ons to build political coalitions that could support the main cause: dramatic across-the-board rate reductions.

Broadly speaking, the evidence from the Reagan years supports the traditional Republican emphasis on the top marginal rate. A stream of revenues stronger than the Treasury had predicted, $11 billion more, followed Reagan’s 1981 cut in the top rate to 50% from 70%.

The topmost earners responded especially vigorously, working and earning more. As economist Lawrence Lindsey pointed out years ago (Journal of Public Economics, 1987), about 40% of the extra revenue collected came from the top taxpayer group. As Mr. Lindsey noted in his 1991 book, “The Growth Experiment,” the top 0.1% of taxpayers paid 14% of the taxes in 1986, compared with only 7% in 1981.

The Rubio-Lee plan lowers the marginal rate on the corporate income tax significantly, to 25% from 35%. But on the personal side their proposal drops the top marginal rate on individual income by a puny 4.6 percentage points, to 35% from 39.6%.

By comparison the top rate in the 1986 tax law was 28% (down from 50%); 33% in George W. Bush’s 2000 proposal, and 28% in Mitt Romney’s 2012 proposal. Mr. Forbes’s flat tax is 17%.

What’s more, Rubio-Lee lowers tax thresholds drastically. Singles with taxable income as low as $75,000 find themselves entering the 35% top bracket; for couples the top rate applies after $150,000. Currently, individuals don’t hit the 35% bracket until $411,501, and the same holds for couples. The very top current rate, 39.6%, doesn’t set in for individuals until $413,201 and for couples until $464,851 in taxable income. It is no wonder that Democratic and liberal strategists have singled out the Rubio-Lee plan for praise.

Rubio-Lee also raises the child credit to an unusually generous $2,500 per child, available even to wealthy families. Current child credits feature restrictions on use, and income limits. In short, the senators are flipping traditional GOP priorities. Add-ons for groups trump pro-growth cuts.

Since Rubio-Lee taxes income below the $75,000 and $150,000 thresholds at a low 15%, it is unclear how many Americans would end up paying more in taxes overall than they do at present. But the plan pits groups against one another in a way that across-the-board cuts do not. Couples with several children who live in low-tax states with lower-cost housing are entitled to breaks. Couples who live in high-tax states and are childless are not. Businesses enjoy lower rates than wage earners.

The nonpartisan Tax Foundation recently estimated that Rubio-Lee would increase economic growth so that by 2025 the economy would be 15% larger than otherwise, almost entirely due to business tax cuts. The effect of the child credit on growth is reckoned at zero. Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute notes that if Rubio-Lee dropped all the preferences it contains, old and new, the plan could drop its top income-tax rate to 20% or lower.

Growth fueled by corporate tax cuts may suffice to offset costly items like the child credit on paper. But the Tax Foundation’s scoring doesn’t capture the cost of resentment between groups, or that of a tax code that emphasizes families over individuals. Rubio-Lee does not make enough effort to encourage that group of top income earners to strive.

A Republican plan that emphasizes “fairness” to this extent risks establishing a trend. Rubio-Lee sets the stage for greater tax gifts to particular groups in the future, with eventual hikes to the top marginal rate. If the self-styled party of enterprise does not emphasize the individual, no one will.

The overall seriousness of the Rubio-Lee plan is commendable. But to make the plan worth endorsing requires a major change: scrapping the child credit and replicating the business side cuts on the individual side.

Miss Shlaes is the author of “Coolidge” (HarperCollins, 2013). Mr. Denhart is the executive director of the Calvin Coolidge Presidential Foundation.
Popular on WSJ


Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #73 on: April 03, 2015, 10:40:15 PM »

Good analysis here.  I held off commenting on the Rubio (and Mike Lee) tax reform plan because I also found it a little bit lacking.

Schlaes skips over a major point, the Rubio-Lee plan eliminates all taxes on capital gains.  That is a big deal, a windfall to me, good economic growth policy, but not a good political calculation as I see it.  Capital gains should be indexed to inflation using the same cost of living adjustment that social security uses.  You can't, in this political environment, eliminate a basic tax associated mainly with 'the rich'.  And you shouldn't, as she points out, lower the threshold for the top rate.

Ted Cruz was asked about the Rubio-Lee plan, and his own plan (there isn't one yet).  He said he prefers the flat tax.  I do too.  But he also said (paraphrasing) that you make compromises and take every step you can get to lower the rates and simplify the code.  In other words, all of these campaign plans are negotiating points for a future President.  If the politics is played right, the plan can be written in a Republican congress, maybe by Paul Ryan, current Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

In 2012, we had WONDERFUL Republican candidate tax plans, from Herman Cain's 9-9-9, to Pawlenty's to even Huntsman's plan which was very pro-growth.  Mitt Romney's plan would have doubled our growth rate.

But we lost and got none of those.  We aren't looking for the best plan.  We are looking for the best plan that will get implemented.

I hope that Rubio sharpens his pencil, lowers his rates and raises his income thresholds.  We know that he doesn't want to tax people at 35%.  I hope he realizes 35% federal is at least 45% combined in some states.  Florida has no income tax.  Whatever he does comes up with, he has to answer for in the debates and Meet the Press appearances, etc.

I've had my own tax plan concept in mind for a long time.  When I finally took pen to paper I found out it is harder than it looks to set brackets and rates, raise all the money we supposedly need and appease all the political forces. 

When the current tea party wave started in about 2010, it seemed to me that one of the main lessons of the previous ten years and unifying forces of the movement was that we need to cut spending first.  To Rubio's credit, real entitlement reform is a main focus.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #74 on: April 04, 2015, 01:14:40 AM »

Certainly Rubio is aware of this editorial by the WSJ and I'm guessing he is giving it some thought.

Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #75 on: April 13, 2015, 08:55:51 AM »

Wash Post: In South Florida, Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are forcing locals to pick sides
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-south-florida-jeb-bush-and-marco-rubio-are-forcing-locals-to-pick-sides/2015/04/09/331951a6-d3e3-11e4-a62f-ee745911a4ff_story.html

Odd to me the article  is so positive.  I thought most people don't like their local politicians.
--------------------------------------------------

Today's kickoff of the Rubio campaign steps on the Hillary rollout.  Strange that she picked it that way.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/04/13/rubio_campaign_launch_aims_to_capitalize_on_clintons_126244.html
Rubio Campaign Launch Aims to Capitalize on Clinton's
By Caitlin Huey-Burns - April 13, 2015

Rubio Looks to Find His Opening in the 2016 GOP Field
By Julie Pace - April 13, 2015
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/04/13/rubio_looks_to_find_his_opening_in_the_2016_gop_field_126242.html
Rubio is about to step into a field that is shaping up to be crowded and competitive.

He won't be the only senator in the race.

He won't be the only tea party-aligned candidate.

He won't even be the only Floridian, the only Cuban-American or the only candidate claiming foreign policy expertise.

Some are better known - Bush, for one.

But it is early, and Rubio's advisers say they are playing a long game. "Campaigns are won at the end, not at the beginning," said Alex Conant, Rubio's spokesman.

Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #76 on: April 13, 2015, 08:59:18 PM »

The Rubio Run
The 43-year-old is strong on foreign policy, less so on taxes.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) announces his bid for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination on Monday. ENLARGE
Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) announces his bid for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination on Monday. Photo: REUTERS/Joe Skipper
April 13, 2015 7:16 p.m. ET
34 COMMENTS

Marco Rubio on Monday joined Ted Cruz and Rand Paul in the run for the Republican presidential nomination. It must be more than coincidence that the first three declared candidates are first-term members of the U.S. Senate. Aside from reducing the World’s Greatest Deliberative Body to a trampoline, the eager trio reflect the undercurrent of impatience these days in Republican politics—with the incumbent President, with Washington and with each other.

Like Ted Cruz, Senator Rubio is the son of Cuban-American immigrants. As a mere fact of biography, this speaks well of the American political system and the Republican Party that produced them.

Of the three, Senator Rubio has the most political experience. Despite his 43 years, he is essentially a lifetime politician, starting out as a city commissioner of West Miami and rising to become Speaker of the Florida House. Mr. Rubio gained his Senate seat in 2010 by defeating former Florida Governor Charlie Crist, one of the worst career politicians of the last generation.

To his credit, Mr. Rubio has used his Senate office as more than a planning headquarters for his presidential run. From his seat on the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Rubio, with Senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain, has become one of his party’s most visible and best-informed critics of President Obama’s foreign policy in Ukraine, Iran and a Middle East beset by Islamic State.

His opposition to Mr. Obama’s Cuba opening is well known, but as noteworthy has been his effort to keep in public view the Venezuelan government’s assaults on its democratic opposition.

More so than Senators Cruz and Paul, Mr. Rubio has shown a willingness to work with colleagues, notably the Senate’s immigration reform in 2013. Mr. Rubio showed a measure of political courage in grabbing that issue, though he became notably silent as the debate moved to the House, where reform died.

He has immersed himself in the details of the country’s fiscal and social problems and offers some thoughtful reforms, such as consolidating the myriad federal anti-poverty programs into a single grant sent to the states with fewer strings. It’s an idea that deserves discussion.

His recently announced tax-reform plan, introduced with Utah’s Senator Mike Lee, reflects the tensions inside the GOP. It proposes dropping the corporate rate to 25%, a consensus figure. But it proposes remarkably timid reductions in marginal tax rates for individuals, leaving the top rate at 35% on relatively modest incomes. Instead the plan’s centerpiece is a large, new tax credit—$2,500 per child.

With this proposal, Senator Rubio makes himself the party’s most visible ally of the “new” Republican idea that the Reagan tax-cutting agenda is a political dead end, and that the party now must redistribute revenue directly to middle-class families. It’s not clear how Candidate Rubio would hope to win a tax-credit bidding war with Hillary Clinton, who’d see and raise on the size of the credit and make it refundable to non-taxpayers. The Rubio tax credit looks like an obvious political gambit with no economic growth payoff.

The Senator nonetheless has the rhetorical gifts to make a compelling case for himself. His message is aspirational, and he offers a generational contrast with Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Rubio’s biggest challenge will be convincing primary voters that this precocious energy adds up to something better than voting for one of the successful Republican Governors with a record of real accomplishments.
Popular on WSJ


Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #77 on: April 14, 2015, 02:04:05 PM »

I disagree with Morris here; I thought Rubio's announcement speech yesterday was quite good. 

http://www.dickmorris.com/rubio-announces-whats-different-about-him-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #78 on: April 14, 2015, 09:01:23 PM »

You think Team Rubio is euphoric about the way Drudge handled his campaign kick-off?
 
That’s Rubio in the middle, with his parents. No, no, I kid. I really like the guy and was writing about him back in August 2009, when he was a little-known long-shot in the Senate primary. I’m just saying I wouldn’t send Rubio to buy beer without his ID.
Stephen Miller with a pretty good observation: “His other strength is none of the potential GOP candidates have had the practice to run against someone like Clinton. Marco Rubio has, having dispensed limousine loving, ventriloquist dummy Charlie Crist to the political ash heap. Crist and Clinton are cut from the exact same elitist cloth, believing themselves entitled and destined, the voters be damned. Both of them have gotten creamed in elections staking out that position by someone an electorate found more charismatic and in tune with every day values.”
You can argue that Scott Walker ran against and beat a larger collective opponent in his recall election and, perhaps, his 2014 reelection bid. Ted Cruz might argue he was as big a long-shot when he began against David Dewhurst in the Texas Senate primary. Bobby Jindal’s early 20-point lead helped drive then–Louisiana governor Kathleen Blanco to not seek reelection, but she was seriously damaged goods after her bumbling response to Hurricane Katrina. And the one other caveat is that Rubio beat Crist in a three-way race in 2010. Having said that, you could argue Rubio beat Crist twice, once by driving him to quit the GOP primary and declare himself an independent, then again on Election Day.
Over on NRO’s home page, I take a look at Marco Rubio’s two years spent as Speaker of the Florida House -- his management and leadership style, what he accomplished and what he left unfinished, and how he dealt with a thoroughly uncooperative Florida senate and the shamelessly demagogic, opportunistic Crist.
As Speaker and in earlier leadership positions in the Florida House, Rubio demonstrated a willingness to delegate to focus on his strengths, communicating and negotiating. The record suggests that a President Rubio would drive a hard bargain, and hold out until the eleventh hour, but rarely walk away from the table without a deal.
The Speaker of the Florida House is an important and powerful position, but one perhaps a bit easier to reach than comparable positions in other states. Representatives in Florida are limited to four two-year terms. The Speaker of the House is elected by his fellow representatives for a two-year term, and is usually in his final term -- meaning the Florida House is effectively led by a new speaker every two years.
Because of the term limits and constant turnover at the top, careers in the Florida state legislature accelerate quickly. The legislature works a brief, fast-paced schedule, a 60-day session starting in March, supplemented by occasional special sessions. The legislature is the GOP’s ballgame; Republicans have controlled the Florida House and Senate since 1996. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t often deep divisions; Rubio’s tenure as speaker exacerbated friction with the man who would later become his defeated Senate rival, then-governor Charlie Crist.
This is part of my new year’s resolution to attempt some actually useful campaign journalism by digging into chapters of the GOP contenders’ lives that haven’t been covered extensively yet. The first offering was looking at Ted Cruz’s work for the Federal Trade Commission from 2001 to 2003, where he earned a reputation as a passionate boss intent on tracking the success of the office’s efforts in granular detail.
I had some material that didn’t quite fit in the Rubio piece. If you’re not a fan of Rubio, curse the heavens, because his political career came close to ending quite early.
For starters, he nearly lost his first Florida House election, coming in second in the first round and winning the runoff by 64 votes.
In his early years in the state legislature, he was skyrocketing in stature -- he was named Majority Whip within his first nine months on the job -- but going through extreme financial difficulties.
He was making $72,000 as an often-unavailable land use and zoning attorney at the now-defunct law firm Ruden McClosky and made $28,608 as a state legislator. Money was so tight for the young lawmaker and his wife and then-one child that he sold his car and moved in with his mother-in-law. In his autobiography, An American Son, Rubio writes he strongly contemplated leaving politics to focus on earning enough money to support his growing family.
A new job offer came along before Rubio finalized his decision to quit politics; in 2001, Rubio moved to Becker & Poliakoff to expand the firm’s practice in Miami-Dade, making $93,000 per year. By 2004, when Rubio was the Speaker-in-waiting, the law firm Broad and Cassel hired him at $300,000 per year.
The Alleged Democratic Contender Everyone Forgot About
Yesterday I mentioned how Democrats and their allies can convince themselves that their candidate is the perfect to handle any situation. (Admittedly, Republicans do this as well.) I distinctly remember the night of Biden’s selection in 2008, some enthusiastic young Democratic talking head on CNN insisting that Biden was a foreign-policy “genius.” It was a good example of the Democrats’ need to not merely tout their candidates, but to whip themselves into a frothing frenzy of enthusiasm for the messiah-like choices of Obama.
Obama’s first Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, saw things differently, calling him “wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.”
Asked to back up his harsh words Jan. 13, 2014, on National Public Radio’s Morning Edition, Gates replied:
“Frankly, I believe it. The vice president, when he was a senator — a very new senator — voted against the aid package for South Vietnam, and that was part of the deal when we pulled out of South Vietnam to try and help them survive. He said that when the Shah fell in Iran in 1979 that that was a step forward for progress toward human rights in Iran. He opposed virtually every element of President Reagan’s defense build-up. He voted against the B-1, the B-2, the MX and so on. He voted against the first Gulf War. So on a number of these major issues, I just frankly, over a long period of time, felt that he had been wrong.”
For what it’s worth, it’s not clear Biden applauded the fall of the shah. He just offered to send the Mullahs a couple hundred million dollars shortly after 9/11, “no strings attached.”
Here we are today:
Vice President Joe Biden said he had not made a decision on whether he will run for president and sounded the alarm about Republican plans to cut estate taxes.
Biden made the statement in a roundtable discussion with reporters at the White House Monday including The Detroit News a day after former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced her run for the Democratic nomination. He said he has plenty of time to decide.
“I haven’t made up my mind on that. I have plenty of time to do that, in my view,” Biden said. “If I am wrong, I’m dead wrong, but there’s a lot the president and I care about that has to get done in the next two, three months and when you run for president you’ve got to run for president — and I’m not ready to do that — if I am ever going to be ready to do that.”
Remember, Joe Biden isn’t a joke. Newsweek assured us of this:
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #79 on: April 15, 2015, 11:35:41 AM »

First this, the case against Marco Rubio by Paul Mirengoff at Powerline.  Even his biggest critic in conservative media says, "Marco Rubio is smart, likable, talented, and conservative".  "We don’t know how Rubio will perform as a candidate over the long haul, but all indications are that he is a gifted politician."
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/04/the-case-against-marco-rubio.php
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The money and votes will gravitate to whoever can win – if, that is, the person is somewhat ideologically acceptable to the rank and file."

http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/14/why-marco-rubio-is-the-gops-best-hope/

Why Marco Rubio Is Probably The GOP’s Best Hope
When it comes to raw political talent, it unlikely the Republicans can do better
By David Harsanyi

Marco Rubio announced his candidacy for presidency of the United States at the Freedom Tower in Miami on Monday, highlighting his family’s hardscrabble immigrant roots, embracing traditional values but also vowing to usher in a “new American century.”

As a matter of political pragmatism, is there any convincing reason Rubio shouldn’t be the Republican to take on Hillary Clinton in 2016? Because when it comes to natural political talent, it unlikely the GOP can do better.

For starters, Rubio is the most compelling speaker in the Republican field.

Sen. Mike Lee says Rubio “can bring grown men to tears with emotion.” This is something voters value. And judging from yesterday’s performance, Rubio’s speeches can be infused with an emotional quality that  much of the prefabricated rhetoric we hear does not have. Not only do you sense that his belief in American exceptionalism is genuine, but that his populist sensibilities will allow him to credibly broach the subject of inequality – mostly, because he has a captivating family story to lean on.

Let’s face it, even if Rubio is overrated, he’s probably the kind of consensus candidate GOP primary voters are going to have to settle on, anyway.

Other than his futile shot at immigration reform, Rubio has been reliably conservative. The Jeb Bush candidacy, driven by oodles of cash but little popular support, makes Rubio seem more palatable, while the Cruz candidacy, almost exclusively propelled by the grassroots, makes him seem less severe. The money and votes will gravitate to whoever can win – if, that is, the person is somewhat ideologically acceptable to the rank and file.

As Politico points out:

An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll last month reflected that upside among the rank-and-file. More Republicans, 56 percent, said they could back Rubio than any other candidate, including Bush (49 percent). Only one-quarter in that survey said they could not back Rubio, compared to 42 percent for Bush.
Rand Paul? As appealing as libertarian-ish ideas probably are to a number of voters – and you hope that the GOP embraces some of these reforms – it seems unlikely that the entire party can undergo a historic ideological shift during a primary season. That is especially true on foreign policy. Rubio is a hawk, and world events insure that a hawk will win the GOP nomination.

After a temporary dovish turn, the Right has gotten more aggressive on foreign policy. Some of this is, no doubt, a reaction to President Obama’s polices on Iran, Russia, ISIS, and Israel. According to a Pew poll taken late last year, 54 percent of Americans overall believed that Obama’s approach on foreign policy was “not tough enough” – which includes a sizable majority of Republicans. Rubio, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is one of the more passionate advocates for a more aggressive United States in the world.

Now, it’s also true that Rubio is a first-term senator with no record of any tangible accomplishments other than working his way into a presidential run.

If you believe this is a disadvantage, you haven’t been paying attention to contemporary politics. If Americans were concerned with achievement, Barack Obama would never have been allowed near the presidency. What voters want is someone who makes them feel secure, someone who can empathize with their struggles, confirm their ideological worldview, and someone who will give them the soaring rhetoric that makes them feel that their politics matter.

So, for Rubio, a lack of a record may be helpful in a number of ways. Today, a record is an opportunity for others to mangle every decision you’ve made. A blank slate allows voters to imagine all the wondrous things you can provide them and allows the politician a malleable set of policy goals.

To be fair, as a member of a congressional minority, Rubio didn’t really have many opportunities to build a record. Still, in the primaries, GOP contenders (who aren’t senators) are going to have tough time accusing Rubio of being slacker. What will they say? He wasn’t obstinate enough in stopping Obama’s agenda in the Senate? To some extent, Obama has also inculcated Rubio from media attacks regarding his experience as a first-term senator running for president, for obvious reasons.

The Left’s reaction to Rubio’s announcement also tells us that the Florida senator is a formidable pick. There were far fewer histrionic hit pieces about a GOP candidate’s extremism than usual. If the most potent attack mocking a candidate is a single awkward water-bottle incident, then demonizing him won’t be easy.  Whereas liberals quickly found distractions for nearly all other presidential announcements – Rand Paul is a misogynistic hothead with crazy ideas; Ted Cruz is nutty theocrat with crazy ideas – the Left was grasping for an effective line of attack.

Don’t get me wrong. In the end, no matter what Republican candidate offers, he will be cast as a thug looking to steal bread and condoms from the poorest single working moms in the country. So the most vital skill any candidate can have is the ability transcend coverage and make his or her case to voters. Setting aside reservations about policy, is there any other Republican who can do that more effectively than Rubio?

Of course someone – maybe Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Bobby Jindal, Carly Fiorina, Chris Christie, John Kasich, Lindsay Graham, and who knows who else? – can change the dynamics of the race. Perhaps someone will surprise us. Although, it seems unlikely any of them could be the kind of compromise candidate that the establishment and the rank-and-file could agree on. And none of them will be able to contrast themselves with a tedious and creaky Hillary rollout the way Rubio just did.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #80 on: April 15, 2015, 05:31:31 PM »

http://www.glennbeck.com/2015/04/15/how-good-were-you-with-math-glenn-confronts-mike-lee-on-his-controversial-tax-plan/
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #81 on: May 09, 2015, 09:28:26 PM »

http://theantimedia.org/marco-rubio-is-being-funded-by-private-for-profit-prisons/

Obviously a lefty site, but I confess to not being familiar with the various arguments on this issue.
Logged
G M
Power User
***
Posts: 12617


« Reply #82 on: May 09, 2015, 09:50:50 PM »

http://theantimedia.org/marco-rubio-is-being-funded-by-private-for-profit-prisons/

Obviously a lefty site, but I confess to not being familiar with the various arguments on this issue.


http://www.vice.com/read/whos-getting-rich-off-the-prison-industrial-complex

Lots of private prison money donated to dems.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #83 on: May 15, 2015, 08:41:02 AM »

Charlie Rose asked Marco Rubio about Raul Castro’s comment that he likes Pope Francis so much he might rejoin the church, Mr. Rubio shot back, “That’s gonna be a pretty long confession.”
Logged
ccp
Power User
***
Posts: 4530


« Reply #84 on: May 15, 2015, 08:53:36 AM »

“That’s gonna be a pretty long confession.”

What a great answer!   grin

Reagan would have had this kind of quip!
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #85 on: May 15, 2015, 11:58:35 AM »

A great answer indeed  grin
=======================

 By
Peggy Noonan
May 14, 2015 7:23 p.m. ET
218 COMMENTS

Hillary Clinton continues her silent glide toward the White House. The Republican candidates make themselves available almost every day, get pressed, grilled and occasionally cuffed around. Since announcing a month ago Mrs. Clinton has not had a single news conference or formal interview. NPR’s Tamara Keith counted 13 questions to which she has responded in that time. The answers include “I’m having a great time,” “It is fabulous” in Iowa, she wants to be “the champion of Americans,” and “I want to hear people.” Wednesday she embarked on a listening tour of Manhattan billionaires.

This is not just a dynamic of the campaign of 2016, it is a scandal of 2016. Democratic operatives think candidates don’t lose support for stiffing the press. I don’t know. Campaigns, like candidates, get reputations. This is less like a campaign than a silent movie with mad organ music.

Marco Rubio, at the Council on Foreign Relations, this week unveiled what his aides call the Rubio Doctrine. Good for him: Candidates ought to be putting their stands into documents that can be inspected and pondered. His foreign-policy vision consists in three “pillars”: American strength, protection of the American business position in a global economy, and moral clarity regarding America’s core values.

The first pillar should be a unifying principle for all Republicans. The world and we are safer when America is stronger, period. We must be known to the world as the possessor of the mightiest military on earth. “Weakness is the friend of danger,” he said. It is. We must spend what we must, and modernize to meet future possible challenges, he argued. We do.

The second pillar is similarly sound. Everything we have comes from what we sell and make. As a nation we must see to our economic security, including supporting free trade and fighting unfair and destructive business practices.

The third pillar is more wobbly. Here Mr. Rubio took a pronounced neoconservative turn. He urged America to “think big,” to “advance the rights of the vulnerable” who are “persecuted.” “The American people hear their cries, see their suffering . . . and desire their freedom.” That sounds anodyne unless it’s not. Certainly our policies should not and cannot be detached from our values. But I would have liked to hear something more steely-eyed: The third pillar is not a statement but a question whose asking has served us well for more than two centuries. “What is in the interests of the American nation?” What actions or endeavors will serve to make us stronger, safer, more able to flourish in the 21st century?

In question-and-answer following the speech, moderator Charlie Rose quickly cut to the chase. “Should we be the world’s policeman?” Mr. Rubio: “I don’t think that’s necessarily the role that I would advocate.” He then pedaled back to the importance of diplomatic leadership.

Here is what is concerning: In our time “moral clarity,” has, as a former member of George H.W. Bush’s White House put it, “tended to stack the terms of a debate without having to address the merits of a policy.” “Moral clarity” tends to start with ringing cries and end with manipulations.

In making his case Mr. Rubio disparaged “nation building at home.” But it is not invalid to say that America needs to become more fully what we say we believe in, and put a priority not on projecting our values militarily but reflecting them more deeply at home. It is true that the world now has less respect for us as a moral actor in the world, but it is not only because of the bad leadership of the past seven or 15 years, take your pick. It is not only because the world knows of our economic problems and the dysfunction and corruption of our governing class. The world is less impressed by us because they’ve been here. Mr. Rubio referred to globalization as a force transforming the world, but it also means a lot of the people of the world—especially the political, military and business elites—have come here to visit, and looked around. They have a sense of our public schools, our culture, our infrastructure (they take Amtrak to Washington), our Fergusons, our fear that our next generation will have it worse.

They no longer see us as their fathers and grandfathers did, as the Great Example. It is not unpatriotic or sissified to want to emphasize strengthening and renewal at home while our foreign policy protects our position and advances our interests.

I wish every candidate who rightly lauds Ronald Reagan’s candor and moral clarity would then note: “And interestingly enough, he never invaded the Warsaw Pact countries.” He used words, diplomacy and other forms of muscle to change the world.

Also, is Mr. Rubio’s position really where GOP base voters are? I find them more hard-eyed than romantic.

That said, Mr. Rubio is an impressive figure in a way that isn’t captured by words like “smooth” and “articulate.” He has in his head a fact-horde, which is immediately accessible to him as he speaks. You get the impression no briefing has ever been wasted on him. And he’s quick. When Mr. Rose asked him about Raúl Castro’s comment that he likes Pope Francis so much he might rejoin the church, Mr. Rubio shot back, “That’s gonna be a pretty long confession.”

Intelligence isn’t judgment. But Mr. Rubio broke through in a new way this week.

Whereas Mr. Rubio was sharp, alive and in the game, Jeb Bush limped shruggingly along. I don’t understand his inability to deal with Iraq. It’s the one question he knew was coming, yet all week it seemed to take him aback. He seemed to see it as an unfair or trick question. He’s something new in politics, the defensive zealot. He can’t let go on certain controversial issues—Common Core, for instance—and is dodgy on inevitable ones. He goes from misunderstanding the question to saying he isn’t sure of the answer to let’s not make soldiers suffer by asking it to OK, I wouldn’t have gone in. He looked hunted when he said that.

He deserves credit for being out there and taking every question, but he’s running for president. His views on Iraq tell us something about his foreign policy predispositions and assumptions. I know he didn’t want to hurt the feelings of his brother, but I don’t care about the feelings of his brother. I know he didn’t want to bring discomfort to his family, but this is not about his family. This is about what is a wise foreign policy for America. It’s about what you’d do as president.

I’m already tired of everyone’s interlocking loyalties, their politesse, their worries about legacies. “Sure, she’s always playing the angles, but I’ve been with them a long time.” “I can’t be disloyal.” “It was a hugely consequential foreign-policy blunder but I can’t say.”

What is wrong with these people and this picture? It isn’t about them. It’s about America. Could someone be loyal to her?
Popular on WSJ


Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #86 on: May 16, 2015, 10:31:11 PM »

"I wish every candidate who rightly lauds Ronald Reagan’s candor and moral clarity would then note: “And interestingly enough, he never invaded the Warsaw Pact countries.” He used words, diplomacy and other forms of muscle to change the world."

A pillar of advance the rights of the persecuted in your foreign policy does not mean that you will invade the countries where you wish to foster change away from tyranny, as evidenced by her own summary of Reagan's tough foreign policy. 

Also, the pillar of peace through strength says that as you rebuild economic, military, naval, defense, and leadership strengths you will have less actual need to fire weapons at enemies.

Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #87 on: May 22, 2015, 06:25:21 PM »

Thank you msm, though don't trust the source.  This is what I have been talking about.  Rubio is likable.  She is not.  Rubio can make a genuine appeal to Hispanic Americans based on a vision of the American Dream.  She can parrot a single issue policy point on which she has flip-flopped.  He is young and vibrant.  She is ... well, judge for yourself.  He rose on the merits of his own talents.  She is some aberration of an old fashioned power broker, married for power, and plays off of that every time she gets stuck.  Rubio has core convictions.  She is calculating on every position.  He is quick and steady on his feet and extremely articulate without notes or teleprompter.  Would very likely eat her lunch in a debate. She is a stumbler without a focus group and team of writers.  The more candid she is, the more she falls in it.  Rubio is all-in, not even running for his Senate seat.  She is legally in, announced via a video, made the fewest open appearance and takes the fewest questions imaginable.  Still busy addressing her own latest scandals.  She is keeping up the speaking income, the criminal, non-non-profit foundation and hedging on key issues.  Rubio is scandal-free.  She is synonymous with corruption.  Rubio brings Florida with him.  She has no state other than the states of corruption and confusion.  Illinois, NY, Arkansas and DC are not in play and she has no special appeal in any of them anyway.  Rubio has a beautiful, monogamous wife and adorable children.  She has Bill and Chelsea, hopes her little grand-daughter can grow up in an entitled world and someday make million dollar, 20 minutes speeches too!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/23/us/politics/prospect-of-hillary-clinton-marco-rubio-matchup-unnerves-democrats.html?_r=0

Prospect of Hillary Clinton-Marco Rubio Matchup Unnerves Democrats

By JEREMY W. PETERS      MAY 22, 2015

WASHINGTON — They use words like “historic” and “charismatic,” phrases like “great potential” and “million-dollar smile.” They notice audience members moved to tears by an American-dream-come-true success story. When they look at the cold, hard political math, they get uneasy.

An incipient sense of anxiety is tugging at some Democrats — a feeling tersely captured in four words from a blog post written recently by a seasoned party strategist in Florida: “Marco Rubio scares me.”

What is so unnerving to them at this early phase of the 2016 presidential campaign still seems, at worst, a distant danger: the prospect of a head-to-head general-election contest between Mr. Rubio, the Republican senator from Florida, and Hillary Rodham Clinton.
 
Yet the worriers include some on Mrs. Clinton’s team. And even former President Bill Clinton is said to worry that Mr. Rubio could become the Republican nominee, whittle away at Mrs. Clinton’s support from Hispanics and jeopardize her chances of carrying Florida’s vital 29 electoral votes.
 
Democrats express concerns not only about whether Mr. Rubio, 43, a son of Cuban immigrants, will win over Hispanic voters, a growing and increasingly important slice of the electorate. They also worry that he would offer a sharp generational contrast to Mrs. Clinton, a fixture in American politics for nearly a quarter-century who will turn 69 less than two weeks before the election.

As her supporters recall, Barack Obama beat Mrs. Clinton for the nomination in the 2008 elections after drawing similar contrasts himself.

Patti Solis Doyle, who ran Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign for most of the 2008 contest, said Mr. Rubio “could have the ability to nip away at the numbers for the Democrats.”

Ms. Doyle, the first Hispanic woman to manage a presidential campaign, added that Mr. Rubio could allow Republicans to regain a “reasonable percentage” of the Hispanic vote, which hit a low of 27 percent in the 2012 presidential election.

“He is a powerful speaker,” she added. “He is young. He is very motivational. He has a powerful story.”

Recognizing how essential it is to win Hispanic support, Mrs. Clinton has gone further in laying out an immigration policy than she has on almost any other issue, saying that she would extend greater protections to halt deportations of people in the United States illegally. She has also hired a former undocumented immigrant to lead her Latino outreach efforts.

Her own strategists, their allies in the “super PACs” working on her behalf and the Democratic Party all say they see plenty of vulnerabilities in Mr. Rubio’s record and his views. And they are trying to shape the perception people have of him while polls show that he is still relatively unknown: Yes, the Democratic National Committee said in a recent memo, Mr. Rubio was a fresh face, but one “peddling a tired playbook of policies that endanger our country, hurt the middle class, and stifle the American dream.”

So far, Democrats who have combed over Mr. Rubio’s voting record in the Senate have seized on his opposition to legislation raising the minimum wage and to expanding college loan refinancing, trying to cast him as no different from other Republicans.

The subtext: He may be Hispanic, but he is not on the side of Hispanics when it comes to the issues they care about.

Democrats will try to use Mr. Rubio’s youth and four-year career in national politics against him, depicting him as green or naïve — a liability at a time when unrest abroad is a top concern. “A Dan Quayle without the experience,” suggested Christopher Lehane, a veteran strategist who has worked for the Clintons.

Bill Richardson, the former governor of New Mexico, who is of Mexican heritage, said Democrats would also make an issue of Mr. Rubio’s mixed record on how to overhaul the immigration system: He initially supported a Senate bill to grant people in the United States illegally a path to citizenship, but he later backed down.

Mr. Richardson said that would poison his chances with Hispanic voters. “His own Hispanic potential would defeat him,” he said.

It is also unclear how much Mr. Rubio would appeal to Puerto Ricans, Mexicans and other voters with Latin American ancestry who may not feel much
cultural affinity with a Cuban.

Still, when many Democrats assess Mr. Rubio’s chances, as nearly a dozen of them did for this article, they put him in the top tier of candidates who concern them the most, along with former Gov. Jeb Bush, another Floridian who is courting Hispanics, and Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin.

Mr. Rubio’s heritage and his youth could be particularly dangerous to Mrs. Clinton, they said. Each of those points could help neutralize one of her biggest strengths: the opportunity to help elect the first female president, and the experience Mrs. Clinton gained as secretary of state.

Mr. Rubio already appears to be pursuing that strategy. By calling himself a candidate of the “21st century, not the 20th,” he seeks both to turn Mrs. Clinton’s long career against her and to entice voters who may desire a change of direction.

In Florida, Democrats who have watched Mr. Rubio’s rise warn against playing down his strengths.

Former Gov. Charlie Crist, who lost to Mr. Rubio in the Republican primary for the 2010 senatorial election but later switched parties, said he admired how Mr. Rubio told the story of his immigrant parents — his mother a maid, his father a bartender — and how they worked hard so that he could succeed. “It’s hard to get more compelling than that,” Mr. Crist said.
 
John Morgan, a major Democratic donor in Florida who will hold a fund-raiser for Mrs. Clinton next week, said he planned to raise the issue of Mr. Rubio’s strengths with her.

“Jim Messina talks about how elections are about where we want to go from here,” Mr. Morgan said, naming the strategist who helped President Obama win two national elections. What is problematic about Mr. Rubio, he said, is “his theme will be, ‘We don’t want to go back; we need to go forward.’ ”

“I think they do underestimate him,” Mr. Morgan added. “He’s energetic,
he’s photogenic, and he will say whatever you want him to say.”

Steve Schale, the Florida strategist who wrote the “Marco Rubio scares me” blog post, said that when he worked for the Democratic leader of the Florida House of Representatives, his boss, Dan Gelber, had a saying about Mr. Rubio’s effect on crowds, and about his sincerity: “Young women swoon, old women pass out, and toilets flush themselves.”

And Mr. Gelber himself recalled the day in Tallahassee, Fla., in 2008 when he and Mr. Rubio, then the speaker of the State House, gave their farewell speeches. He spoke first, followed by Mr. Rubio, as Mr. Gelber’s wife looked on.

“She’s sitting there weeping,” Mr. Gelber recalled, still incredulous. “And I look up, and I mouth, ‘Are you kidding me?’ ”

Mr. Gelber praised Mr. Rubio’s ability to use his family’s story to convey compassion for people marginalized by society, but he said he believed, as many Democrats do, that this was disingenuous.

“It’s a little maddening when his policies are so inconsistent with that,” Mr. Gelber said. “My head would explode.”

A Rubio-Clinton contest could ultimately come down to Florida. Republicans can ill afford to lose the state if they hope to win the White House. And bleeding Hispanic votes could make Mrs. Clinton’s path much harder.

“Losing a point among whites means winning Hispanics by about 5 percent more just to make up that loss,” Mr. Schale wrote in his memo on Florida’s election demographics. If Democrats continue to lose white voters, he added, Mr. Rubio’s place on the ballot would only complicate matters.

“He should be the one you don’t want to face,” Mr. Schale wrote.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #88 on: May 26, 2015, 05:39:57 PM »

Great, detailed story about the 3rd primary.  If Rubio locks in South Carolina and then takes either Iowa, New Hampshire or both, it could be over early.  Like Obama in 2008, it looks like Marco Rubio is running a 50 state race.  Mentioned also is that all the candidates would like the endorsement of Sen. Tim Scott.  Not that Rubio needs a Senator or general election help in SC, but maybe we should add him to our VP watch list.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/his-state-to-lose-20150522


Another good article:  Can Marco Rubio Make Peace With Conservatives on Immigration?
(We have already covered these points here.)
http://dailysignal.com/2015/05/25/can-marco-rubio-make-peace-with-conservatives-on-immigration/
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #89 on: June 02, 2015, 01:30:43 PM »

Rubio 1st in CNN poll (and 4th in ABC poll).  Gained 7 points on Jeb Bush in one month, passing him by one, all within the margin of error.   Walker and Huckabee also double digits.  These early polls are all over the map but the averages and trend lines matter.  Best position I think is to be top of the second tier, not at the very top too early where everyone needs to knock you down.  As long as this stays 5 or 6-way close, the candidates need to audition for the general election rather than knock down each other.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/06/01/2016.poll.pdf
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #90 on: June 05, 2015, 01:39:01 PM »

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/06/04/marco_rubio_expects_a_vibrant_spirited_primary_competition_will_drive_excellence.html

A good interview with the gals on Fox.  I think they found him likable.  Unlike the other side, he answered all their questions.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #91 on: June 05, 2015, 07:52:21 PM »

I think ccp already caught this.  The NY Times went to Miami and other places to dig up dirt on Marco Rubio and found traffic tickets!

They went back to 1997 (pre-children BTW) and found that he had 4 and she had 13.

Meanwhile Hillary is at least a 3-time loser felon, 3 strikes and you're out.  Also Hillary's spouse has to explain his RECENT travels with teenage prostitutes, whether he indulged or not.

The comparison between the Rubios and the Clintons takes us back to George H.W. Bush commenting on a grocery store scanner after spending 8 years in the shelter of the White House.  Check my math on this but Hillary Clinton HAS NOT EITHER OWNED OR DRIVEN A CAR IN ALL OF THIS TIME. possibly never.  They didn't even own a house for most of their adult life, she has said, going from the Governor's mansion to the White House, with drivers and pilots.  How is that for relating to the problems of what they now call the "little people".

Here is the photo the NY Times ran with the traffic ticket expose'.  This isn't going to hurt him...



http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/05/marco-rubio-and-his-wife-cited-17-times-for-traffic-infractions-2/?_r=0
« Last Edit: June 05, 2015, 08:24:30 PM by DougMacG » Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #92 on: June 08, 2015, 04:01:44 PM »

Rubio's pollster has written the road map to the Presidency that any succdessful Republican will need to follow.

http://triblive.com/politics/politicalheadlines/8428695-74/ayres-rubio-among#axzz3cVSlLNQ5

"For Republicans to become competitive again in presidential elections, Republican candidates must perform better among whites, especially in the overwhelmingly white states of the upper Midwest, and much better among minorities.”

Specifics on issues are included.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #93 on: June 10, 2015, 07:11:02 AM »



Rubios' house and neighborhood above.


And Hillary's house below, away from the little people, with armed guards "protecting" the email server.


Rubio revels in media attacks.
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/244491-rubio-revels-in-being-target-of-media-attacks

Next up, Rubio's fishing boat next to John Kerry's yacht.
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #94 on: June 17, 2015, 11:16:04 PM »

http://nypost.com/2015/06/16/why-marco-rubio-scares-all-other-presidential-candidates/

What makes Rubio so frightening to others is, simply, that he is a freakishly gifted politician — and a daring one.
He chose to challenge the sitting governor of Florida, Charlie Crist, for the Republican nomination for Senate in 2009 when Crist was at 60 percent in the polls and he was at 3 — and not only knocked Crist out of the GOP race but then beat him by 20 points when Crist ran as an independent in the general election.
It was an unprecedented triumph, like a rookie pitcher winning 25 games, and only another politician knows just how seriously he must take a rival like that.
But here’s the real thing about Rubio. I’ve listened to him and watched him talk, both in private sessions and on the Senate floor in speeches you can see on YouTube.
He is, without question, the most naturally gifted off-the-cuff political speaker I have ever seen.
Logged
Crafty_Dog
Administrator
Power User
*****
Posts: 33861


« Reply #95 on: June 18, 2015, 01:57:42 PM »

 Marco Rubio has many strengths as a presidential candidate, not least a focus on restoring broad-based economic opportunity and the talent to communicate his ideas. Which is all the more reason to lament that he’s taken a major detour from pro-growth tax reform.

The proposal he’s developed with Utah Senator Mike Lee does have some strong pro-growth components for business and investment. It lowers the corporate rate to 25% from 35% and zeroes out the double taxation of dividends, capital gains and interest at the individual level. The plan also introduces full expensing for capital purchases (instead of arbitrary depreciation schedules) and the global norm of a territorial tax for corporate profits.

This would be real progress. In a March analysis, the Tax Foundation estimates that Rubio-Lee would juice GDP by 1.44% on average each year over the next decade, 15% in total. Because the incidence of the corporate tax is shared among workers, capital owners and customers, the study expects real hourly wages will soar by 12.5% on average.
***

The bad news, and it’s considerable, is that these gains are accompanied by a major increase in the child tax credit. This credit was created in 1997, and after a George W. Bush expansion it now provides $1,000 a year for each dependent under 17, phasing out between $75,000 to $95,000 for single filers and $110,000-$130,000 for families.
Opinion Journal Video
Committee to Unleash Prosperity Co-founder Steve Moore on the return of the Republican Party's 'Pat Buchanan' wing. Photo credit: Getty Images.

Rubio-Lee would raise the credit to $2,500 per head. The left-leaning Tax Policy Center (TPC) estimates this would forgo revenue of $1.576 trillion over a decade. The Tax Foundation estimate is in the same ballpark—notably, on both a static budget basis and using dynamic scoring.

The reason is that unlike the investment portions of Rubio-Lee, the child tax credit does nothing for economic growth. The only growth case for it is the Keynesian claim that it would boost consumer spending and aggregate demand, but by now we’ve seen how that doesn’t work.

The tax credit also harms incentives because it phases out as incomes rise and thus creates fearsome infra-marginal tax cliffs that make it harder to escape poverty. Rubio-Lee tries to avoid this problem in part by making the $2,500 credit universal, regardless of income. But the cost of the credit for affluent families will never withstand political vetting and so an income phaseout is likely to remain.

This fiscal baby shower means Messrs. Rubio and Lee don’t reduce the top individual income rate lower than 35%. Their individual tax simplification collapses the current seven tax brackets down to two, with the lower bound 15%. But here’s a major rub: To compensate for the cost of the child credit, their 35% rate reaches down the income ladder to start at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers. The top statutory rate of 39.6%—43.4% counting the ObamaCare surtax—now kicks in at $464,851 for joint filers.

Marginal rates on income would fall “on net,” according to the Tax Foundation analysis, though only modestly and “those in the 10% bracket and some in higher brackets would see the tax rate on their last dollar of income increase.” The TPC estimates 62% of households would see a lower tax liability, with the most substantial benefits flowing to married couples and especially those with children.

Never mind, whisper supporters, the main appeal of the child credit is political: It polls well and it makes the income tax distributional tables look better, potentially mitigating some class-warfare opposition.

But there are also big political problems. One is that child subsidies concede the use of the tax code for social policy, and more political mediation over neutrality and individual decisions. By dumping the goal of a cleaner, more neutral code, Republicans will have less credibility to oppose liberal favoritism. Democrats can always outbid Republicans on this kind of policy, starting with the demand that the credit be “refundable,” or paid in a check to those who have no tax liability.

Mr. Rubio concedes that the credit has no growth impact but says he has been persuaded by Mr. Lee that it is needed to offset the costs of the societal good of raising children. As they see it, the next generation will finance pay-as-you-go Social Security and Medicare. Thus parents deserve the offset of the credit more than childless workers.

But by this logic the government should reclaim the credit for children who turn out to be net taxpayer liabilities. It would be better policy simply to cut payroll taxes rather than add another layer of tax-credit complexity—or better yet, restructure entitlements so they are less of a drag on young workers.
***

The larger political danger would arrive if Mr. Rubio became President. In the inevitable negotiations with Congress, his tax cuts on capital would surely be watered down while his giant tax credit would pass. What happens if the economy failed to respond?

The precedent here is George W. Bush. In the 2001 tax law he pared back his campaign proposal and agreed to delay his marginal rate cuts. But he accepted tax rebates in two installments as well as the larger child credit. The economy showed a GDP fillip but then quickly flagged.

Only when Mr. Bush pushed in 2003 to accelerate the rate reductions and slashed the capital gains rate to 15% from 20% did the economy take off and save his re-election. Another tax cut that fails to boost growth could tarnish tax reform for a generation.

Mr. Rubio has let himself be swayed by a coterie of non-economist conservatives who view the tax code as an engine of social policy. This crowd denigrates marginal-rate cuts as politically déclassé, but then the child credit is one of the hoariest forms of tax gimmickry, an echo of Jimmy Carter’s New Jobs credit, or Mr. Bush in 2001 and his Pelosi tax rebates in 2008.

After a decade of sub-3% growth and stagnant middle-class incomes, the highest priority for the next President should be accelerating economic growth. What a pity that Mr. Rubio is compromising his otherwise laudable case for economic revival with a new entitlement for some families.
Popular on WSJ

   
Logged
DougMacG
Power User
***
Posts: 6587


« Reply #96 on: July 01, 2015, 11:52:14 AM »

It's not a luxury yacht if you have to pee off the side.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/25/politics/marco-rubio-money-luxury-boat-2016-election/index.html
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!