BS. I suggest you take a look at an electoral map and also where most Hispanics live. According to the exit polls, Hispanics/Latinos made up 10% of the total vote, compared to 13% for blacks and 3% for Asians. Whites made up 72% of the vote--I presume that that figure includes some white Hispanics since 53% of Hispanics self-describe themselves as white. Non-Hispanic whites are 66% of the population.
Hispanics voted 71% to 27% for Obama. Even if Rubio were to increase his vote total of Hispanics by an additional 13%, it would be of dubious value electorally except perhaps for FL. Ted Cruz received about 36% of the Hispanic vote in Texas compared to Romney's 30%. And this is Texas. No way Rubio gets 40% nationwide especially if Hillary is the Dem nominee.
Reps are deluded if they believe that nominating a token candidate to take advantage of identity politics will be successful against the Dems. And I bet that Hillary will surpass Obama in getting the woman's vote. Obama got 55% of the woman's vote.
He is Reaganesque in his speaking, and has been a solid legislator for conservatives (not perfect, but solid).
What has he done of note?
If he navigates a reasonable result on immigration, I think he’ll prove to be a worthy candidate. I’ve said for awhile, this immigration will make or break Rubio’s presidential aspirations. His position is reasonable; the question is whether legislation reflect his ideas or is a sellout to the left to allow amnesty after the fact.
Reasonable? I beg to differ. Rubio has joined with Schumer, McCain, and Graham to give us essentially McCain-Kennedy all over again. He is supporting amnesty. As someone who has actually read Simpson-Mazzoli, Hagel-Martinez, and McCain-Kennedy, what we see is old win in new bottles. Rubio is just the new salesman for amnesty.
Any legislation that legalizes the status of those who broke our laws by entering our country illegally and allows them to stay and work here is amnesty. We must not only prevent the Democrats and some moderate Republicans from hijacking the meaning of the word amnesty, but the public must be made aware about the true impact of an amnesty.
The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty would be $2.6 trillion just for increased entitlement program costs. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.
Besides, granting citizenship to 11-12 mln (some estimate it at 18 mln) will perpetuate the democrats rule. We wil have a one party system for decades to come.
Rubio isn’t Hispanic. He’s a white Cuban who speaks Spanish. The mixed blood Mexicans - the biggest ethnic group of Latin Americans in the US will never vote for him.
Excellent post on Rubio. Stated it best of all
Besides, amnesty is a poisoned chalice. What good is it to win an election and then be locked out for decades afterwards? Whatever happened to long term thinking? The big problem is that Hispanics are, on average, much dumber (meaning have lower IQ's) than the Southern and Eastern Europeans who came in the late 19th and early 20th century. And yet that earlier wave of immigration led to Democratic dominance for most of the last 100 years.