Rubio will run for the Senate
And Cruz has endorsed him:
“Marco Rubio [is] a friend and has been an ally in many battles we have fought together in the Senate. I’m glad to support him in his bid for re-election,” Cruz said in a Facebook post. “Marco is a tremendous communicator and a powerful voice for the American Dream.”
You may recall that Rubio had said for a long time that he was leaving public life and going into private life. But post-Orlando, he suggested that he had changed his mind, so this announcement should come as no surprise. The reason he gave, however, was this:
“In politics, admitting you’ve changed your mind is not something most people like to do. But here it goes,” he wrote. “I have decided to seek reelection to the United States Senate.”
Rubio’s announcement marks a 180-degree turn from where he was even just a month ago, when he insisted he would give up his Senate seat at the end of this term.
Rubio also told Fox News’ Chris Wallace, “I changed my mind.”
The Florida freshmen said he had reversed course because “the Senate’s role of being able to act as a check and balance on bad ideas from the president I think are going to matter more in 2017.”
In his email, Rubio said he’s aware his opponents will use his decision “to score political points against me.”
“Have at it,” Rubio wrote. “Because I have never claimed to be perfect, or to have all the answers.”
There are a lot of people on the right who detest Rubio for his Gang of 8 activities. I believe that his sponsorship of the bill was a huge mistake, not just because the bill itself was misguided and naive but also because it burned his bridges with many previous supporters, who felt (and rightly so) betrayed. I don’t want to fight the whole Gang of 8 controversy again, so I’ll just refer you to this comprehensive article, which explains some of the reasoning behind Rubio’s support of the measure. You either buy the explanation or you don’t; I do, with reservations.
And if you want to refresh you memory on my reaction to the Rubio/Christie battle in the debates, see this and this.
The bottom line for me, though, is this: if Rubio really does have a better chance of winning the Senate seat in Florida than the other GOP candidate would, I’m all for his entry into the race. It’s hugely important for the GOP to retain that seat whoever becomes president, Hillary or Trump. Rubio is otherwise quite conservative, and I think he’s learned his Gang of 8 lesson. I also happen to think that if he had steered clear of that bill, we’d be looking right now at GOP presumptive-nominee Rubio and probable next-president Rubio.
But back to the present. Indications are that Rubio is considerably more popular than the other GOP candidates for the position of Florida senator. Even Donald Trump—of all people—has said so:
“Poll data shows that @marcorubio does by far the best in holding onto his Senate seat in Florida. Important to keep the MAJORITY. Run Marco!” Trump said.
He’s running.
Marco is so, so likable. Also sharp as a whip, a great speaker and an expert on the military.
Go Marco.
Cornhead:
Yes, that Christie debate episode destroyed him, because it (falsely, as I outlined in my posts on the subject) seemed to expose him as an empty, repeating, programmed machine. He’s slick, but he’s smart and he can think on his feet.
“The Florida freshmen said he had reversed course because “the Senate’s role of being able to act as a check and balance on bad ideas from the president I think are going to matter more in 2017.”
Not even necessary to finish that sentence with “…no matter who wins“, was it?
Even though being strong on immigration has for three decades been one of my top criteria, I supported Marco early because I thought he was very electable and I believed him when he said he had learned a lesson. On my other top issue, national defense and foreign policy, he is deeply informed and advocates a hawkish strategy. More power to him!
Alan F:
Agreed.
A number of people I know who are Democrats but not leftists told me they were very interested in Rubio and probably would have voted for him over Hillary. I am convinced he would have won a strong victory if he had managed to get the nomination, and that he’s learned his lesson on immigration.
He was not my first choice as candidate, but I have always seen his strong points.
Ah well. There’s always 2020…2024…maybe.
Rubio is a good guy who made a newbie mistake by trusting Chuck Schumer. I’m glad he’s running again.
Yep, Rubio got schooled by Schumer. Rubio should have been asking the question why the Senate Democrats didn’t put up an amnesty bill between January 2009 and January 2011? You live and learn. I think Rubio learned a valuable lesson, though I am not sure going back to the Senate is necessarily good for his political future, but it should save a seat for the Republicans.
Marco is right about the importance of Senate opposition no matter who the next President is. He’ll be 100 times better than Alan Grayson. I’ll be glad to vote for him in November.
Our FL teaparty was one of the first to champion him against Charlie Crist. Disappointment was great for the Shumer fiasco, but the last straw was his backing the Gillibrand bill to deny due process on college campuses. He’s smarter than that so it appeared to me a great lapse in judgement or overweening ambition. I also will vote, work and donate for his campaign and hope he spends more time in FL talking to his constituents this term. Its just a shame that all the really good people set to run in the primary now can’t vie for other offices, as they could have if he had decided earlier.
I’m one of those former supporters. I don’t buy that Rubio has learned his lesson, nor that it was naivete that led to his embrace of Schummer.
Read these articles and make up your own mind as to Rubio’s veracity;
“Ted Cruz Leaps To ICE Officer Chris Crane’s Defense Following Marco Rubio’s Smear”
“Nation’s ICE Officers Detail How Marco Rubio Betrayed Them”
“Law Enforcement Sides with Chris Crane After Rubio’s Anti-ICE Tirade”
Rubio didn’t make ‘a mistake’ when he joined the gang of eight, he needed something ‘big’, an accomplishment he could point to, to support his run for the Presidency. Especially since his attendance record in the Senate was so abysmal.
Rubio changing his mind is just another example of his political opportunism. Rubio continuing in the Senate will prevent a democrat from gaining another Senate seat. It will also offer Rubio another opportunity to betray America and as soon as he believes he sees a personal advantage for doing so, he’ll betray us again. It’s what snakes do.
“I’m one of those former supporters. I don’t buy that Rubio has learned his lesson, nor that it was naivete that led to his embrace of Schummer.”
I agree. But then I fail to see any real statesmen in the reuplicks area, on second thought Lee appears to have principles.
But he is still a better bet than the shallow trash on the other side running against him.
Ah yes, the golden boy of establishment Republicans comes around for another bite at the apple now….
vanderleun:
No, Rubio is not “the golden boy of establishment Republicans.”
He was the “golden boy” of conservatives. Tea Party candidate, etc.
He had a fall from conservative grace and became persona non grata with a great many conservatives because of his support of the Gang of 8 bill (a support he later reversed, but the damage to his reputation had been done). But otherwise (as even Limbaugh said), he is a very consistent conservative:
Do you really you want to join the chorus of ignorance and claim otherwise? If you want to learn something about Rubio’s conservatism, read this article that I linked to in the post.
If there was a “conservative golden boy” in this race, one could argue it was Jeb Bush, who turned out to be not so golden.
Rubio’s candidacy in Florida could help save the Senate from Democratic control. As this post indicates, he has a better chance of winning the state than the other GOP contenders in Florida. I assume you’re not keen to have the Senate fall into Democratic hands, so I wonder why you are perturbed at Rubio coming round for what you term as “another bite at the apple.”
neo,
My opinion and I suspect many others is that when it offers political advantage, Rubio IS a democrat. Betrayal is memorable because of the importance of what is betrayed. Turncoats betray over major rather than minor matters, as reward must be commensurate with what is risked. Rubio was willing to sacrifice his Senate seat to have a shot at the ‘brass ring’. That he fatally miscalculated doesn’t absolve him of his betrayal, nor does his verbal conservatism on other issues change what his betrayal revealed of his character.
Geoffrey Britain:
I’m sorry, but that’s absurd. Rubio is no Democrat in any sense of the word.
His conservatism on other matters is not just verbal.
You consider his “betrayal” fatal to your support of him. That’s your decision; I don’t share it. That’s fine. But for you to say he’s not a conservative, or that his conservatism is just “verbal,” is not supported by the facts. The facts are here and here, and there’s plenty more in that vein.
You don’t have to like Rubio. You can feel he betrayed you, or that he’s an opportunist, or whatever. But he hasn’t just spoken as a conservative, he has consistently acted as one except for the Gang of 8.
And he’s about a gazillion times more conservative than Donald Trump, of course, and far more consistently so (who by the way, also supported the Gang of 8 bill).
“No, Rubio is not “the golden boy of establishment Republicans.””
Is now.
vanderleun:
No, he’s not.
“Golden boy” has a meaning. It doesn’t mean “a person who many of them came to reluctantly support when the only other choices had come down to the execrable Trump and the hyper-conservative Cruz, and all their real “golden boys” (Bush, for example) had crashed and burned.”
Nope, that’s not a golden boy.
Hussein is the Golden boy of the Leftist death cult and alliance, though.
Much of what people think of the GOP establishment isn’t verified or specified. Since it comes from the perceptions of people who cannot target DC, nor do they know how DC and its insides work.
The hint is, look at the staffers who work, sometimes unpaid as interns, for various Senators. Rubio’s problem starts there, but doesn’t end there. McCain has the same problem, and it exploded against Sarah Palin.