Very accurate analysis from NYT: Paul vs. Rubio [YouTube]

[Jeremy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-fNHqKbO3E

[rubioneocon]

Great . . . very accurate indeed imho. Thanks for posting this.

NY Times "a stinger at John McCain . . . old moss . . ."
Rand was great today.

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/rand2016_zpsa0495fab.png

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/randcpac010c_zps139daa7c.jpg



http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/sunblush/randstandcpac021b_zpsaef2f148.jpg

[camp_steveo]

I disagree about this analysis being very accurate.

IMO, Rand was far more Presidential sounding than Rubio. If the GOP prefers Rubio to Paul they are still hopelessly lost.

[jtstellar]

who's rooting for rubio.. seriously. is that just the new establishment narrative through media and website pundits? guy seriously reminds me of a male version of christine o'donnell, decent looking, can hardly put 3 sentences together

[supermario21]

I think it's the neocon foreign policy establishment pushing him more than anyone else. Think about it, ignoring Rand, Lee and Cruz for example are nowhere near as hawkish as Rubio is. The war machine sees it as Rubio (or Tom Cotton in the house, see people pushing him for AR senate) or bust.

[economics102]

who's rooting for rubio.. seriously. is that just the new establishment narrative through media and website pundits? guy seriously reminds me of a male version of christine o'donnell, decent looking, can hardly put 3 sentences together

Very simply put, Rubio is a candidate that can become popular if given saturation media coverage. Which is, sadly, all that's necessary in this country. Popular enough to win? Maybe not, but popular enough to derail a candidate with bona fide real grassroots popularity like Rand.

In other words, Rubio is another Rick Santorum.

[Michigan11]

Well I think there are many "lenses" to look thru here, when talking about Rand and Rubio. Rand as a republican bringing up civil liberties as a part of his and the "new" GOP's platform is threatening to the Democrat Party and their "pundits" and "elected offficials" and most "republicans". In fact that filibuster joined people together from both parties which probably scared the hell out of many establishment types on both sides.

Rubio, if he continues mostly rhetoric of the same ol' same ol', continues to perpetuate the divide, and is no threat at all to the parties or pundits power.

It is clear as day, watching Rubio, that this guy is no threat electorally, in fact he has a 'lisp', and sounds kind of fruity to me. Rand looks like he is the frontrunner, I can honestly say this, even with my perception tilted obviously towards Rand. In fact I don't know of anyone else mentioned who could beat Rand in the GOP nomination in my opinion.

[T.hill]

There is a lot of good things goin' for Rand and one distinct one is that, even as bad as Rubio is with foreign policy, has been decent with domestic policy. Partly, because a lot of his support comes from the Tea Party and is being pressured into positions by people like Rand and Ted Cruz. If Rand's biggest opponent even leans toward him on domestic policy it increases Rand's credibility. In Rubio's speech at CPAC today he even mentioned taking a federalist position on gay marriage.

[Occam's Banana]

RE: OP video: Just about every time that Stevenson fellow used the word "conservative" it would have been far more accurate to use the word "Republican."

He needs to get a clue. Republican != conservative.

(I mean, Chris Christie is a "real conservative" ?! Yeah, right ...)

[anaconda]

guy seriously reminds me of a male version of christine o'donnell, decent looking, can hardly put 3 sentences together

O'Donnell wasn't an establishment tool.

[anaconda]

even as bad as Rubio is with foreign policy, has been decent with domestic policy.

Patriot Act extension and indefinite detention?

[Bastiat's The Law]

I disagree about this analysis being very accurate.

IMO, Rand was far more Presidential sounding than Rubio. If the GOP prefers Rubio to Paul they are still hopelessly lost.
Rubio is all empty rhetoric, Rand is 100% substance. They are night and day different. Rubio's speech sounded like something off the cutting room floor of the Romney campaign.

[Bastiat's The Law]

I think it's the neocon foreign policy establishment pushing him more than anyone else. Think about it, ignoring Rand, Lee and Cruz for example are nowhere near as hawkish as Rubio is. The war machine sees it as Rubio (or Tom Cotton in the house, see people pushing him for AR senate) or bust.
I hope we have a plan for Tom Cotton. He's Lindsey Graham 2.0...That man is dangerous.

[J_White]

accurate u say ?
I think what this shows is that Blackout has begun !!
He is using the same terms that they used for Ron Paul - Rubio is establishment and a credible Prez candidate, while Rand is fringe !! Really ?
they are already building on the same script that they used so successfully before ! Rubio is "electable" - yea, just like Romney was !!
Rubio is Republican conservative, while Rand is Libertarian - trying to drive a wedge.
Rand has done quite a good job of balancing Libertarian views and Republican politics, but he needs to be on his heels and be ready for these tactics,
else it will be 2007 and 2011 all over again !

[Mr.NoSmile]

I found this photo funny. Originally from:

http://tentofabraham.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/the-wisdom-of-marco-rubio/

http://tentofabraham.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/marc-rubio.jpg?w=600

Quite surprised there hasn't been more hammering on Rubio for that comment. In fact, I'd argue that this could come back to bite him. As it's almost saying that what the GOP did in 2012 was not a failing idea and could maybe work again. That, coupled with him saying that he's not a bigot will definitely come back.

[itshappening]

Yeah it was really odd for him to say what he said.

He seems to have bought into the "we just didn't explain things better in 2008 and 2012"

Everything's fine, nothing to see here. Elect me your nominee so I can just make the same kind of tired speeches McCain and Romney made, call for more war and lose in a landslide. That's what the GOP needs!

Rand meanwhile has vision, ideas and a blueprint for a 'new GOP' much like Clinton had for a 'New Democrat Party' in 1992 when people thought they were finished.

[Uriah]

I disagree about this analysis being very accurate.

IMO, Rand was far more Presidential sounding than Rubio. If the GOP prefers Rubio to Paul they are still hopelessly lost.

He was talking about the traditional presidential candidate. Obviously, we agree much more with Paul's views than Rubio's. I think the clip was accurate. Rubio is presenting himself in a traditional way to run for president.

[itshappening]

He was talking about the traditional presidential candidate. Obviously, we agree much more with Paul's views than Rubio's. I think the clip was accurate. Rubio is presenting himself in a traditional way to run for president.

A continuation of the McCain and Romney formula. I think he's on to a loser as the GOP want to move away from that. He's also much younger than them to and greener. He's not a very good presidential candidate in my estimation.

[TheTyke]

O'Donnell wasn't an establishment tool.

Maybe not then, but she is now. I defended her somewhat because the attacks had little merit, but now her emails and list are used for nothing but pumping up establishment candidates. During 2012 they even took the pains to list every Republican running for president but exclude Ron Paul.

[sailingaway]

I'm hiding this here because I don't want to draw Santa supporters off google, but he just gave a very emotional speech. His nephew died yesterday and he is telling people he almost didn't come today (he had big events as I posted earlier and people coming for them).

I am very sorry about his nephew. That is terrible. I'm sure Santa feels very badly about it as well. Anyone would.

But I am remembering that Santa is very good with personal grief and uses it, imho, to great effect. It isn't hurting him today, either: h xp://twitchy.com/2013/03/15/sad-news-rick-santorums-nephew-has-passed-away/

[sailingaway]

Maybe not then, but she is now. I defended her somewhat because the attacks had little merit, but now her emails and list are used for nothing but pumping up establishment candidates. During 2012 they even took the pains to list every Republican running for president but exclude Ron Paul.

Yeah, she was dead broke as I recall. It likely made taking the well funded path seem more enticing.

[Occam's Banana]

Quite surprised there hasn't been more hammering on Rubio for that comment. In fact, I'd argue that this could come back to bite him. As it's almost saying that what the GOP did in 2012 was not a failing idea and could maybe work again. That, coupled with him saying that he's not a bigot will definitely come back.


Yeah it was really odd for him to say what he said.

It was not really odd at all. Rubio's statement could easily be defended on the basis of traditionally conservative skepticism of progressive "new ideas" (whether he meant it that way or not).

It could also have been an attempt by Rubio to indirectly suggest that Rand's positions are too "progressive" or "anti-conservative" (more restrained foreign policy, leniency for non-violent drug offenses, etc.).

In fact, it may very well have been both (two birds, one stone) - in which case, it was quite clever of him (or his speech-writers or handlers) to say such a thing (especially since Rand is shaping up to be his chief rival).

I very seriously doubt that Rubio means that nothing "new" should be done (or presented) differently vis-a-vis the abysmal McCain or Romney POTUS runs.