By David Harsanyi
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Marco Rubio announced his candidacy for presidency of the
United States at the Freedom Tower in Miami on Monday, highlighting his
family’s hardscrabble immigrant roots, embracing traditional values but also
vowing to usher in a “new American century.”
As a matter of political pragmatism, is there any
convincing reason Rubio shouldn’t be the Republican to take on Hillary Clinton
in 2016? Because when it comes to natural political talent, it unlikely the GOP
can do better.
For starters, Rubio is the most compelling speaker in the
Republican field.
Sen. Mike Lee says Rubio “can bring grown men to tears
with emotion.” This is something voters value. And judging from yesterday’s
performance, Rubio’s speeches can be infused with an emotional quality
that much of the prefabricated rhetoric
we hear does not have. Not only do you sense that his belief in American
exceptionalism is genuine, but that his populist sensibilities will allow him to
credibly broach the subject of inequality – mostly, because he has a
captivating family story to lean on.
Let’s face it, even if Rubio is overrated, he’s probably
the kind of consensus candidate GOP primary voters are going to have to settle
on, anyway.
Other than his futile shot at immigration reform, Rubio
has been reliably conservative. The Jeb Bush candidacy, driven by oodles of
cash but little popular support, makes Rubio seem more palatable, while the
Cruz candidacy, almost exclusively propelled by the grassroots, makes him seem
less severe. The money and votes will gravitate to whoever can win – if, that
is, the person is somewhat ideologically acceptable to the rank and file.
As Politico points out:
An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll last month reflected that upside among the rank-and-file. More Republicans, 56 percent, said they could back Rubio than any other candidate, including Bush (49 percent). Only one-quarter in that survey said they could not back Rubio, compared to 42 percent for Bush.
Rand Paul? As appealing as libertarian-ish ideas probably
are to a number of voters – and you hope that the GOP embraces some of these
reforms – it seems unlikely that the entire party can undergo a historic
ideological shift during a primary season. That is especially true on foreign
policy. Rubio is a hawk, and world events insure that a hawk will win the GOP
nomination.
After a temporary dovish turn, the Right has gotten more
aggressive on foreign policy. Some of this is, no doubt, a reaction to
President Obama’s polices on Iran, Russia, ISIS, and Israel. According to a Pew
poll taken late last year, 54 percent of Americans overall believed that
Obama’s approach on foreign policy was “not tough enough” – which includes a
sizable majority of Republicans. Rubio, a member of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, is one of the more passionate advocates for a more
aggressive United States in the world.
Now, it’s also true that Rubio is a first-term senator
with no record of any tangible accomplishments other than working his way into
a presidential run.
If you believe this is a disadvantage, you haven’t been
paying attention to contemporary politics. If Americans were concerned with
achievement, Barack Obama would never have been allowed near the presidency.
What voters want is someone who makes them feel secure, someone who can
empathize with their struggles, confirm their ideological worldview, and
someone who will give them the soaring rhetoric that makes them feel that their
politics matter.
So, for Rubio, a lack of a record may be helpful in a
number of ways. Today, a record is an opportunity for others to mangle every
decision you’ve made. A blank slate allows voters to imagine all the wondrous
things you can provide them and allows the politician a malleable set of policy
goals.
To be fair, as a member of a congressional minority,
Rubio didn’t really have many opportunities to build a record. Still, in the
primaries, GOP contenders (who aren’t senators) are going to have tough time
accusing Rubio of being slacker. What will they say? He wasn’t obstinate enough
in stopping Obama’s agenda in the Senate? To some extent, Obama has also
inculcated Rubio from media attacks regarding his experience as a first-term
senator running for president, for obvious reasons.
The Left’s reaction to Rubio’s announcement also tells us
that the Florida senator is a formidable pick. There were far fewer histrionic
hit pieces about a GOP candidate’s extremism than usual. If the most potent
attack mocking a candidate is a single awkward water-bottle incident, then
demonizing him won’t be easy. Whereas
liberals quickly found distractions for nearly all other presidential
announcements – Rand Paul is a misogynistic hothead with crazy ideas; Ted Cruz
is nutty theocrat with crazy ideas – the Left was grasping for an effective
line of attack.
Don’t get me wrong. In the end, no matter what Republican
candidate offers, he will be cast as a thug looking to steal bread and condoms
from the poorest single working moms in the country. So the most vital skill
any candidate can have is the ability transcend coverage and make his or her
case to voters. Setting aside reservations about policy, is there any other
Republican who can do that more effectively than Rubio?
Of course someone – maybe Scott Walker, Rick Perry, Bobby
Jindal, Carly Fiorina, Chris Christie, John Kasich, Lindsay Graham, and who
knows who else? – can change the dynamics of the race. Perhaps someone will
surprise us. Although, it seems unlikely any of them could be the kind of
compromise candidate that the establishment and the rank-and-file could agree
on. And none of them will be able to contrast themselves with a tedious and
creaky Hillary rollout the way Rubio just did.
No comments:
Post a Comment