Marco Rubio's Shot to Be President Is Not Dead Yet, According to the Internet
He managed to bring down the harrumph from fellow GOPer leaders like Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, from California, who said Rubio and his "weasel words" can't be trusted.
Republican Rep. Peter King of New York angrily said Rubio should "stay home" after Rubez voted against $60.4 billion in aid for a Hurricane Sandy relief bill.
A Tea Party anti-immigration rally held in Washington, D.C., drew boos when Rubio's name was mentioned.
And then there are the polls that show Republicans aren't too fired up about Charisma Boy! as they once were.
But now several news outlets -- via big headlines -- are saying no so fasss, meng when it comes to Rubio's demise.
The Atlantic's Connor Friedersdorf declares, "Rumors of Marco Rubio's Political Death Are Greatly Exaggerated" in his headline.
Friedersdorf argues that Rubio ain't the first presidential candidate to piss off hardliners in his own party:
Let's reflect on some recent Republican Party history. Here are its nominees going back to 1980: Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, John McCain, and Willard "Mitt" Romney. The last amnesty was signed by the most popular of those men. Post-Reagan, the most conservative voters in the GOP have never succeeded in elevating their preferred candidate, with the arguable exception of 2000, when George W. Bush began two terms in office, all the while supporting immigration reform that resembles what Marco Rubio was trying to pass. Prior to winning the nomination in 2008, McCain had completely alienated immigration hardliners, during a period of debate over reform that was much more heated than today's fight, that took place before the GOP establishment deemed the issue a long-term loser.
The Washington Post's Jonathan Bernstein's headline was similar to Friedersdorf's but more direct and succinct: "Stop burying Marco Rubio."
In his piece, Bernstein makes similar arguments -- pointing out the history of candidates who were counted out. But he also says it'll probably come down to how immigration reform ends up and that, no matter what, Rubio's shot at the GOP nomination won't be decided right just now:
Mind you, I'm not predicting a Rubio nomination. I have no idea which of the plausible nominees will wind up winning what may shape up as a very open contest. I'm just extremely skeptical that Rubio's chances have ended with his support for comprehensive immigration reform. Until we see how immigration plays out, it's just too soon to have any idea how it will effect the 2016 nomination battle.
And then there's former GOP nominee John McCain himself chiming in on the quit-trying-to-make-Rubio-dead thing.
Marc Caputo's blog headline states: "John McCain: 'it's just foolish' to write off Marco Rubio for president."
"I think it's just foolish," McCain told The Republic on Friday. "I'm not endorsing anyone, but I can tell you Marco Rubio is an articulate spokesperson for what conservatives believe in, in principle. And if we pass immigration reform, which is certainly not clear, he would get enormous credit for it."
At the same time, reports are coming in that Rubio has been feverishly working to iron things out with the tea baggers. He hit up a Senate's tea party caucus on Tuesday.
The meeting brought Rubio face to face with tea party groups such as the antitax Americans for Tax Reform (redundant!), and the 60 Plus Association, a group that advocates on issues relevant to the elderly.
The tea baggers are still frustrated with Rubio, to be sure.
But as we've pointed out before, they should come back to Rubio's corner in droves come 2016, when he'll likely be the one guy who can give someone like Hillary Clinton a run for her money.
Because if there's one thing tea baggers hate more than an illegal immigrant, it's a Clinton.
But the bottom line, as always, is history is riddled with examples of politicians counted out only for them to emerge on top.
Remember when Obama lost the first debate against Mitt Romney?
So does Mitt Romney.