I would also add, the antidote.
Why not Rubio, you ask? Let me break that down a little.
To win an election, you have to have a committed, deep base of voters. You need folks who will charge up a hill for you. Donald Trump has that. His base wants to see the world burn (as long as it doesn’t touch their self-interests). Ted Cruz’s base wants to renew the promise of America. He is running on principle and not backing down. Even his enemies acknowledge that.
Marco Rubio is running on. . . .his looks? His ability to perform well on stage? What is he running on? Because, guess what, he’s not running on amnesty. He’s not running on sugar subsidies as critical for national security. His team (and friends in the media) are running around tacitly acknowledging that. It sounds like this, “While it is true that Marco doesn’t have a deep base, but rather support from various coalitions, his growth potential is unbelievable.”
As you run through the checklist of where Marco Rubio is on the issues for this campaign cycle, what are you left with? He’s very solid on the life issue. And? What does that leave you with?
A guy who helped author and try to ram through the Gang of 8 bill, who loves government subsides, who thinks we should be into nation building and you come up with a pro-life statist.
Which brings me back to Ted Cruz. You want principle, he has it. You want limited government, he’s your man. You want good judges, buy Ted Cruz all day long with confidence.
Polls show he beats Trump badly head to head and can win the general election. He stands on principle and his own merits.
Rubio does not because he cannot.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.