PDA

View Full Version : Alert: Rubio running ads in New Hampshire




Warlord
05-14-2013, 12:04 PM
http://calcg.org/files/8/809/21b.gif


With a prominent fellow Republican wrapping up a whirlwind tour of Iowa last week, U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., will launch a new ad in New Hampshire, the state that traditionally holds the first presidential primary.

Through Reclaim America, a PAC with ties to Florida’s junior senator, Rubio unveiled Monday a television ad being run in New Hampshire. The ad praises U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., who has been drawing fire in recent weeks for her support of the Second Amendment -- including ads being funded by a group with ties to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Ayotte, who has turned a few heads as a possible presidential candidate, generally is considered a better fit as contender for the vice presidency. She is not up for re-election until 2016.

Despite Ayotte being safe until 2016, Rubio and Reclaim America are doubling down on the senator from New Hampshire, urging supporters to sign a petition backing her.

“Liberals just can’t get over the fact that their most recent attempt to restrict our Second Amendment rights was defeated soundly by the American people," Reclaim America noted on its petition supporting Ayotte. “Since their big government message failed on its own merits, they will now try to discredit supporters of gun rights by spending millions on attack ads that distort the truth.

“Their next target is Senator Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire,” Reclaim America continued. “Outside groups are now pouring special interest money into New Hampshire to attack Senator Ayotte for supporting the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Senator Ayotte stood tall in her defense of American gun owners and our Second Amendment rights, now it’s time for us to stand tall in defense of her.”

Rubio himself was enthusiastic in his praise for Ayotte on Monday. “Proud to support Kelly Ayotte, a great GOP senator from New Hampshire,” Rubio posted on Twitter.

With a six-figure ad buy expected for the new commercial, Rubio is clearly looking at raising his profile in New Hampshire. With U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., increasingly looking like a candidate for the Republican nomination in 2016, it makes sense for Rubio to turn to New Hampshire.

More:
http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/while-rand-paul-mines-iowa-marco-rubio-looks-new-hampshire-2016

surf
05-14-2013, 12:25 PM
time to invade Cuba...

kahless
05-14-2013, 01:23 PM
No matter how Rubio tries to spin it otherwise, hidden in the 800 page immigration reform bill that he is fighting for is what amounts to a national biometric ID. We all will be subject to "Identity Authentication Mechanism".

Brett85
05-14-2013, 01:32 PM
Unreal. The Presidential election now starts three years before the voting actually starts.

supermario21
05-14-2013, 01:35 PM
Forget the ads...he's defending Ayotte, chief neocon of the 2010 class. That's what grabs my attention more.

Warlord
05-14-2013, 01:48 PM
Forget the ads...he's defending Ayotte, chief neocon of the 2010 class. That's what grabs my attention more.

All but 5 senators could be considered neocons.

Brian4Liberty
05-14-2013, 01:55 PM
The Squish Caucus will have a ton of money to throw around during the next election. Zuckerberg and Adelson will foot the entire bill if they need to.

PatriotOne
05-14-2013, 02:06 PM
Unreal. The Presidential election now starts three years before the voting actually starts.

4+ yrs. Pretty sure the planning of Rand's run started in Nov 2012 at the very least...lol.

FSP-Rebel
05-14-2013, 02:12 PM
No matter how Rubio tries to spin it otherwise, hidden in the 800 page immigration reform bill that he is fighting for is what amounts to a national biometric ID. We all will be subject to "Identity Authentication Mechanism".
Which when it's made note of will be especially interesting considering NH banned Real ID implementation in their state back in '06 IIRC, perhaps '08. Smart posturing by Rubio, however.

puppetmaster
05-14-2013, 02:20 PM
4+ yrs. Pretty sure the planning of Rand's run started in Nov 2012 at the very least...lol.


decades before I bet

compromise
05-14-2013, 02:33 PM
All but 5 senators could be considered neocons.

That is not true. Neoconservatives differ from mainstream conservatives as they support foreign aid, nation building and humanitarian intervention. Hawkish conservative =/= neoconservative.

The incumbent Senators who opposed intervention in Libya (based on Sens who voted for Rand's resolution, signed Rand's letter to Obama opposing it or voted against it in the House): Collins, Scott, Flake, Johnson, Lee, Paul, Moran, Sessions, Coburn, Cornyn and Toomey. Heller backed Rand's de-authorization of the Iraq War. Crapo, Risch, Barrasso, Grassley and Enzi voted against NDAA. Murkowski voted against the Patriot Act. Boozman, Coats, Fischer, Shelby, Thune, McConnell and Vitter voted against various foreign aid bills. Cochran, Corker and Hoeven voted to speed up withdrawal from Afghanistan. That adds up to about 26 Senators.

Most of the rest are not ideologically neoconservative. They just toe the party line and change positions if the winds change. The neoconservatives dominated the White House during the 2000s, so they went with that. If the GOP moves in a more libertarian direction, so will they. There are few true followers of the neoconservative ideology in the Senate other than McCain, Graham, Rubio and Ayotte.

As for the Dems, they do not identify as conservatives, therefore cannot really be neoconservatives - there are many liberal internationalists though, but most support speeding up withdrawal from Afghanistan.

NERVE
05-14-2013, 02:34 PM
I thought by now that most would be trying to distance themselves from Rubio.

ican'tvote
05-14-2013, 02:38 PM
Do these ads mention Rubio?

Warlord
05-14-2013, 02:56 PM
That is not true. Neoconservatives differ from mainstream conservatives as they support foreign aid, nation building and humanitarian intervention. Hawkish conservative =/= neoconservative.

The incumbent Senators who opposed intervention in Libya (based on Sens who voted for Rand's resolution, signed Rand's letter to Obama opposing it or voted against it in the House): Collins, Scott, Flake, Johnson, Lee, Paul, Moran, Sessions, Coburn, Cornyn and Toomey. Heller backed Rand's de-authorization of the Iraq War. Crapo, Risch, Barrasso, Grassley and Enzi voted against NDAA. Murkowski voted against the Patriot Act. Boozman, Coats, Fischer, Shelby, Thune, McConnell and Vitter voted against various foreign aid bills. Cochran, Corker and Hoeven voted to speed up withdrawal from Afghanistan. That adds up to about 26 Senators.

Most of the rest are not ideologically neoconservative. They just toe the party line and change positions if the winds change. The neoconservatives dominated the White House during the 2000s, so they went with that. If the GOP moves in a more libertarian direction, so will they. There are few true followers of the neoconservative ideology in the Senate other than McCain, Graham, Rubio and Ayotte.

As for the Dems, they do not identify as conservatives, therefore cannot really be neoconservatives - there are many liberal internationalists though, but most support speeding up withdrawal from Afghanistan.

If you look at the senators I bet 90-95 have voted for war either Iraq war or Kosovo and every year they vote to fund the wars. on Libya all the Dems supported their team and you only got that number of GOP votes against it because it was Dem president.

Warlord
05-14-2013, 03:01 PM
In addition to funding the wars, voting for wars/foreign aid the senate passes pro-war resolutions overwhelmingly all the time with pro-war Menendez the so called liberal from New Jersey now leading the charge. There's no country he doesn't want to stick his nose in .

The senate is overwhelmingly pro-war, pro-intervention, pro-empire, neocon (whatever you want to call it) and always will be.

What you saw from some GOP senators was merely political posturing just like they did with Kosovo. The interventionists still got their war there though and the alleged opposition didn't matter.

Brian4Liberty
05-14-2013, 06:17 PM
Do these ads mention Rubio?

There have been a lot of ads running on "conservative" radio and tv which feature Rubio, and ask for people to support "conservative immigration reform".

What a joke it is. They say what we have today is default amnesty, and then ignore the elephant in the room, i.e. no enforcement of existing law.

Warlord
05-14-2013, 06:20 PM
There have been a lot of ads running on "conservative" radio and tv which feature Rubio, and ask for people to support "conservative immigration reform".

What a joke it is. They say what we have today is default amnesty, and then ignore the elephant in the room, i.e. no enforcement of existing law.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REsRK6dat64
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REsRK6dat64

Brian4Liberty
05-14-2013, 06:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REsRK6dat64
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REsRK6dat64

Savage has always been good at calling out "red diaper doper babies". The neo-Trots fit the bill.

Spoa
05-14-2013, 07:00 PM
Let's be fair here. Rubio is defending Ayotte's vote against the Toomey-Manchin Amdt. (which we all opposed). If she doesn't get the support she wants, she may join the Democrats and vote for gun control legislation that Reid has sworn to bring up again.

New Hampshire people and us should be encouraging her to stand strong against gun control amendments. If we have to fight Rubio, let's fight him for opposing Senator Paul's budget or standing against good amendments presented by Senator Cruz. That would make more sense than attacking him for something we agree with him on.

AJ Antimony
05-14-2013, 07:01 PM
That is not true. Neoconservatives differ from mainstream conservatives as they support foreign aid, nation building and humanitarian intervention. Hawkish conservative =/= neoconservative.

The incumbent Senators who opposed intervention in Libya (based on Sens who voted for Rand's resolution, signed Rand's letter to Obama opposing it or voted against it in the House): Collins, Scott, Flake, Johnson, Lee, Paul, Moran, Sessions, Coburn, Cornyn and Toomey. Heller backed Rand's de-authorization of the Iraq War. Crapo, Risch, Barrasso, Grassley and Enzi voted against NDAA. Murkowski voted against the Patriot Act. Boozman, Coats, Fischer, Shelby, Thune, McConnell and Vitter voted against various foreign aid bills. Cochran, Corker and Hoeven voted to speed up withdrawal from Afghanistan. That adds up to about 26 Senators.

Most of the rest are not ideologically neoconservative. They just toe the party line and change positions if the winds change. The neoconservatives dominated the White House during the 2000s, so they went with that. If the GOP moves in a more libertarian direction, so will they. There are few true followers of the neoconservative ideology in the Senate other than McCain, Graham, Rubio and Ayotte.

As for the Dems, they do not identify as conservatives, therefore cannot really be neoconservatives - there are many liberal internationalists though, but most support speeding up withdrawal from Afghanistan.

Your informative research isn't welcome here!

:)

AJ Antimony
05-14-2013, 07:08 PM
Did any of you actually watch the ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7nXGiWrSnaI)? I wouldn't call it a Rubio ad. Yes, Rubio is behind the ad, but it's a 'support Ayotte' ad rather than a 'support Rubio in 2016' ad.

As of right now, it looks like Rand and Rubio will be the front runners in 2016. Rand is going after the evangelicals, libertarians, and Tea Party/conservative voters. Rubio seems to be going after the neoconservative voters that Rand isn't touching. We'll see who else they target over the next 3 years, but if Rand claims that general conservative vote and if Rubio takes the bait and aligns with the neoconservatives... well... let's just say one wing of the party has energy and is increasing in size whereas the other is old, moss-covered, and decreasing in size.

Brian4Liberty
05-14-2013, 07:36 PM
Let's be fair here. Rubio is defending Ayotte's vote against the Toomey-Manchin Amdt. (which we all opposed). If she doesn't get the support she wants, she may join the Democrats and vote for gun control legislation that Reid has sworn to bring up again.

New Hampshire people and us should be encouraging her to stand strong against gun control amendments. If we have to fight Rubio, let's fight him for opposing Senator Paul's budget or standing against good amendments presented by Senator Cruz. That would make more sense than attacking him for something we agree with him on.

I'm all for Reagan's 80/20 rule. But that doesn't mean I'll fall for it when a Squishy-con tries to highlight the 20% where we are in agreement.

Spoa
05-14-2013, 07:40 PM
I'm all for Reagan's 80/20 rule. But that doesn't mean I'll fall for it when a Squishy-con tries to highlight the 20% where we are in agreement.

That's not what I'm talking about. Rubio is defending Ayotte from Bloomberg's attacks against her in New Hampshire.

http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-conservative-group-and-nra-rush-to-senator-ayottes-aid-in-nh-after-numerous-anti-gun-ads-air/

The NRA is also helping. Ayotte isn't one of my favorites either, but she did the right vote in this case and if she needs to be defended, I don't know why we would oppose Rubio defending her.

Brian4Liberty
05-14-2013, 08:06 PM
That's not what I'm talking about. Rubio is defending Ayotte from Bloomberg's attacks against her in New Hampshire.

http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-conservative-group-and-nra-rush-to-senator-ayottes-aid-in-nh-after-numerous-anti-gun-ads-air/

The NRA is also helping. Ayotte isn't one of my favorites either, but she did the right vote in this case and if she needs to be defended, I don't know why we would oppose Rubio defending her.

Sure, I'll give her a pat on the back for supporting the Second. Same as some Dems who voted to support it.

But is the point here to spend a ton of money so that she won't change her vote on this one issue? Are we being blackmailed?

Spoa
05-14-2013, 08:09 PM
Sure, I'll give her a pat on the back for supporting the Second. Same as some Dems who voted to support it.

But is the point here to spend a ton of money so that she won't change her vote on this one issue? Are we being blackmailed?

I wouldn't say it like that. I like Freedomworks' quote: "Politics goes to those who show up." The noisiest ones get their wishes usually. We have to be vocal and noisy to get what we want. If all Ayotte hears are people blasting her, she'll give in to pressure. She's not as principled or strong as people like Senators Cruz, Paul, Lee, etc.