IOWA Results

I just assumed they used the same coins they have at Patriots games which allow them to defer to the second half every game...

LOST said:

But I have never seen the appeal of Rubio.  He isn't as pure a Tea-Party Conservative as Cruz. He doesn't have executive experience like JEB or Kasich, and he isn't a complete anti-establishment outsider like Trump. Is he just everyone's second choice?

He's not Cruz, Trump, Clinton or Sanders.  And he put up some winning numbers last night, when none of the other 'mainstream' Republicans did.  

In this very odd political cycle, that may get him a lot of votes.  

I spoke to a Democrat colleague of mine today (2 time Obama supporter) and asked him in this race of 5, who would he vote for.  He said Rubio, hands down.  Disenchanted with Obama's second term, and is highly allergic to the other 4.  I know that's only a poll of two (me and him), but when two pretty opposite voter-types agree on the same candidate out of a field of 5, I find it very interesting.  I think a lot of people feel very relieved at the possibility of not having to vote for any of the other four.

He's not as bat-sh#t crazy as Trump or Cruz.

I think you're onto something:

Rubio 2016: He's Not As Batsh#t Crazy As Trump Or Cruz!

yahooyahoo said:

He's not as bat-sh#t crazy as Trump or Cruz.

yahooyahoo said:

He's not as bat-sh#t crazy as Trump or Cruz.

Uh, right.

Some other fun moments from Senator Rubio:In September 2008, Rubio was one of the first Republicans to start claiming that then Sen. Barack Obama was a socialist:

“I love what Barack Obama’s candidacy says about America. I just fear what his candidacy would do to America. To leave our children with a centrally planned socialist economy is not a better plan." 

On March 4th, 2011, Sen. Rubio puts out a press release to state his support for the Defense of Marriage Act after learning the Obama administration would no longer support it.
On June 9th, 2012, Marco Rubio voted to cut eligibility to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, taking away food stamps from some of  America’s poorest citizens.
In November 2012, Rubio gives an interview to GQ Magazine, where he is asked how old he thinks the Earth is. Rubio tries to skirt annoying Fundamentalist Republicans who believe in Creationism, and the bulk of Americans who understand science by giving a particularly cowardly and ignorant answer for a U.S. Senator:

"I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to answer that. It’s one of the great mysteries.” 

 On December 4th, 2012, with legendary former Senator Bob Dole present, pleading with his fellow Republicans to pass it, Marco Rubio votes against The Convention of Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
On January 28th, 2013, Rubio votes against disaster relief funding for Hurricane Sandy victims.
In February 2013, Sen. Rubio votes against the renewal of the Violence Against Women Act.
On March 13th, 2013, Marco Rubio co-sponsored legislation in the Senate to defund the Affordable Care Act.
On June 14th, 2013, Rubio states in two separate interviews in a 24-hour span that he will vote against his own immigration reform legislation if anyone adds an amendment to also provide same-sex bi-national legally same couples the same as opposite-sex bi-national legally married couples.
Senator Rubio voted for the 2013 Government Shutdown. When the time came to reopen it, he was one of 18 GOP Senators who voted to keep it closed.
On November 7th, 2013, Rubio participates in a GOP filibuster of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
On November 18th, 2013, Rubio spoke before the Florida Family Planning Council, telling the crowd of his agenda as a legislator: 

“The moral well-being of our nation is our business. It’s everybody’s business.The debate we should be having isn’t whether or not we have a right to talk about values and morals in the public square, the debate we should be having instead is which values and morals our nation should focus on.” 

In February 2014, Rubio expressed support for Arizona’s SB 1062, a religious freedom bill that would be vetoed by Gov. Jan Brewer:

“Well, I don’t believe that gay Americans should be denied services at a restaurant or a hotel or anything of that nature. I also don’t believe, however, that a caterer or a photographer should be punished by the state for refusing to provide services for a gay wedding because of their religious-held beliefs. So we’ve got to figure out a way to protect that as well.” 

On April 9th, 2014, Marco Rubio takes part in a GOP filibuster of the Paycheck Fairness Act, denying women a chance at equal pay for equal work.
On April 30th, 2014, Rubio takes part in a GOP filibuster of the Minimum Wage Fairness Act. This at a time when income inequality is at the worst levels it has been in America since the Great Depression.
On May 12th, 2014, Sen. Rubio goes on ABC News’ This Week, where he denies that climate change is man-made:

“Our climate is always changing. I do not believe that human activity is causing these dramatic changes to our climate the way these scientists are portraying it and I do not believe that the laws that they propose we pass will do anything about it, except it will destroy our economy.” 

n February 25th, 2015, Sen. Rubio votes against funding the Department of Homeland Security, attempting to defund it to protest President Obama’s executive orders on immigration (for a supposed immigration reformer, this is staggering hypocrisy).
On March 9th, 2015 Marco Rubio became one of the 47 Senators who were potentially in violation of the Logan Act when they jeopardized negotiations between Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian diplomats over their nuclear program by signing on to the letter penned to them by Sen. Tom Cotton. Rubio then used that fact to raise money for his presidential campaign.
Two days later on March 11th, 2015, Sen. Rubio had Secretary of State Kerry testifying before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee and embarrasses himself by asking Kerry if the Obama Administration was letting ISIS win to appease Iran, because they support ISIS.

That’s… beyond stupid. ISIS militants practice Sunni Islam (and a bastardized interpretation of it, at that). Iran’s practitioners of Shia Islam. They’re just as keen on ISIS getting wiped out as we are, and view them as a threat.
In one interview with Bob Schieffer on CBS’ Face the Nation, Rubio manages to go for a hat trick, denying climate change science, argued against same-sex marriage, and say that war with Iran was an “option on the table” within a matter of minutes.

And this:

1. Marco Rubio digs in deep with insane thoughts about women and abortion.
Cloaked in a veneer of respectability and so-called sanity, Marco Rubio manages to say some of the most stunningly crazy things about women and abortion. During an interview with an Iowa TV station this week, Rubio spun a truly bonkers conspiracy theory about the abortion “industry” that seemed based on the recent hit-job hoax film about a Planned Parenthood that exists only in the fevered “pro-life” imagination.
“Because now what you’ve done is you’ve created an industry,” he told the interviewer. “You’ve created an incentive for people to be pushed into abortions so that those tissues can be harvested and sold for a profit.”
Yeupp, looney tunes. His host was skeptical, asking, “Don’t you think that’s a stretch? Pushing people into abortions?” But Rubio was undaunted and proceeded to imply that women are awfully dumb.
“If you go to one of these centers, young women are provided very few options,” he said, not that he has ever been to one of these centers, or apparently known any young women. “In many places, they’re not told anything about, for example, adoption services that might be available to them.… In essence, you come in and it’s already predetermined.… This is what this place does. It provides abortions, and we are going to channel you in that direction.”
Actually, Mr. Rubio, older women get abortions too, and people seeking abortions are, well, already seeking abortions, not being talked into them by dastardly healthcare providers.
It got worse, and crazier, and even more misogynist, culminating in the absurd statement that women now look forward to having abortions because that means payday! Woohoo!
“I just think you’ve created an industry now…." Rubio said, "a situation where very much, you’ve created an incentive for people not just to look forward to having more abortions, but being able to sell that fetal tissue.”

Good stuff. He's as certifiable and Trump and Cruz.

tjohn said:

Good stuff. He's as certifiable and Trump and Cruz.

And therein lies the real danger. Cruz is known in congress as a self-serving heavily disliked creep. If Cruz won and ran, the general election party support would have been "lacking." No one trusts him.

Whereas, Rubio would manage to get the needed party support to enable an effective fight.

ice said:

LOST said:

ice,

Where have you been? I thought you would be on MOL loudly cheering that the Post Office demolition has actually begun.

Yay!  The post office should be completely demolished long before President Rubio takes office!!

 "> 

I have no idea who the next President will be but the new building should be considerably built by that time

The Admiral never lies.

tjohn said:

Good stuff. He's as certifiable and Trump and Cruz.

Trump is putting on a show.

Cruz is a true believer.

Rubio is an opportunist, which does not disqualify a politician and, in fact, may be an asset.

And Chris Christie says the real race is between Rubio and him. If that was literally true I would vote for Rubio.

Or shoot myself.

@mfpark, thank you for reminding us how batsh!t crazy Rubio really is.

Yup, the attack machine will now focus on Rubio, which is just a sign of how well he's doing and what a credible threat he is likely to become.

I can't say I'm a huge Rubio fan (heck, if it were up to me, Jon Huntsman would be president), but I'll sure as heck vote for him over the other four contenders.  To simply call someone 'crazy' in the current field is almost a compliment.

ice said:

Yup, the attack machine will now focus on Rubio, which is just a sign of how well he's doing and what a credible threat he is likely to become.

I can't say I'm a huge Rubio fan (heck, if it were up to me, Jon Huntsman would be president), but I'll sure as heck vote for him over the other four contenders.  To simply call someone 'crazy' in the current field is almost a compliment.

Rubio: Obama speaking out against Islamophobia is "pitting people against each other."

I find Rubio's statement on this to be disgusting.  He should not be President.

Great job mfpark! Lots of that I didn't know - but none of it is a surprise. But I think that the a roll call of idiocy can easily be created for each of these candidates from both parties. I would guess that Hillary and Bernie would have fewer statements that science would seem to dispute on the face of them, so their list of idiocy would be different in kind, but I doubt it would be less full of folly and hypocrisy. 

mjh said:

Rubio: Obama speaking out against Islamophobia is "pitting people against each other."

I find Rubio's statement on this to be disgusting.  He should not be President.

But someone is going to be president.  That is what scares the be-Jesus out of me.  I can't see any of them--Democrat or Republican--actually leading this nation.  But one of them will be.

For my vote, I will hold my nose and vote for whomever is the Democratic nominee because there is no way that any of the GOP candidates is qualified in the least to lead this nation.

Yet Rubio's 4 years of accomplishing nothing make him the most seasoned politician among the leading Republicans.

I'd like to give Rubio credit for at least trying to pass reasonable immigration reform, but he acts as if it never existed.

mfpark said:

mjh said:

Rubio: Obama speaking out against Islamophobia is "pitting people against each other."

I find Rubio's statement on this to be disgusting.  He should not be President.

But someone is going to be president.  That is what scares the be-Jesus out of me.  I can't see any of them--Democrat or Republican--actually leading this nation.  But one of them will be.

For my vote, I will hold my nose and vote for whomever is the Democratic nominee because there is no way that any of the GOP candidates is qualified in the least to lead this nation.

You don't think Kaisich or Jeb Bush is qualified to lead the nation?

I'm not sure any of them would be worse than George W. Bush, with the possible exception of Ted Cruz.

mjh said:

ice said:

Yup, the attack machine will now focus on Rubio, which is just a sign of how well he's doing and what a credible threat he is likely to become.

I can't say I'm a huge Rubio fan (heck, if it were up to me, Jon Huntsman would be president), but I'll sure as heck vote for him over the other four contenders.  To simply call someone 'crazy' in the current field is almost a compliment.

Rubio: Obama speaking out against Islamophobia is "pitting people against each other."

I find Rubio's statement on this to be disgusting.  He should not be President.

I clicked that link. If Obama spoke at a Holocaust Memorial would he be "pitting people against each other"?

If Marco speaks to a meeting of Evangelical  Christians would he be "pitting people against each other".

N.P.R., "Here and Now," two women were 'splaining why Trump was the best candidate for pres.

He is gonna build a wall across the southern border.

"Government is a business." Donald is a businessman and he knows how to run a business. Both of these dolts said this.

Problem is, gub'mint isn't a business. It has a different purpose and different financial structure.

BCC said:

mfpark said:

mjh said:

Rubio: Obama speaking out against Islamophobia is "pitting people against each other."

I find Rubio's statement on this to be disgusting.  He should not be President.

But someone is going to be president.  That is what scares the be-Jesus out of me.  I can't see any of them--Democrat or Republican--actually leading this nation.  But one of them will be.

For my vote, I will hold my nose and vote for whomever is the Democratic nominee because there is no way that any of the GOP candidates is qualified in the least to lead this nation.

You don't think Kaisich or Jeb Bush is qualified to lead the nation?

They have more experience in government than the rest, that is true.  But I do not think that experience alone is a qualification for being a good leader of the nation.  Kasich did show some political savvy when he was in the House, at times working with Democrats on important issues.  So I guess that puts him at the top of a bad lot, in my books.  On the other hand, he has some extreme views not dissimilar to the others on the role of Christianity in our society (not just religion, but his religion), and also on marriage equality (which for me is a human rights issue and an issue of basic fairness and justice).  Bush was a capable enough governor of Florida, especially compared to those who followed him, but he has shown zero ability to mobilize even a faint heartbeat in most people who have bothered to listen to him on the campaign trail.  He seems to have no leadership qualities at all, which is a major problem for the leader of our nation.  On top of that, he has equivocated so much on things that I have no sense of what his core values are at all.  And I think he doesn't know either.  He is too much like Pappy, willing to sell his morality and soul and common sense to get elected at any cost.

But, as I said, I am not all that thrilled by the Democratic choices either.  Hillary also has waffled so much on key issues that she cannot see straight, let alone explain her vision as a leader.  Another one who seems to simply want to get elected just because she wants to get elected.   And Bernie has a great schtick and I believe is the only sincere one in the bunch, but he has never shown any inclination or ability to build coalitions and do the grunt work of crafting achievable legislation and getting it passed, and I see no reason to think he will suddenly change once he gets into the White House.  Hillary's critique that "progress" is a key part of "progressive" is dead on target.

I am pretty disgusted by both parties.  This is the best they can put up for a vote?  Sure, I often feel this way around this time of a campaign, but really, this year they seem a lot less qualified and a lot more lost than in the past.

mfpark said:

BCC said:

mfpark said:

mjh said:

Rubio: Obama speaking out against Islamophobia is "pitting people against each other."

I find Rubio's statement on this to be disgusting.  He should not be President.

But someone is going to be president.  That is what scares the be-Jesus out of me.  I can't see any of them--Democrat or Republican--actually leading this nation.  But one of them will be.

For my vote, I will hold my nose and vote for whomever is the Democratic nominee because there is no way that any of the GOP candidates is qualified in the least to lead this nation.

You don't think Kaisich or Jeb Bush is qualified to lead the nation?

They have more experience in government than the rest, that is true.  But I do not think that experience alone is a qualification for being a good leader of the nation.  Kasich did show some political savvy when he was in the House, at times working with Democrats on important issues.  So I guess that puts him at the top of a bad lot, in my books.  On the other hand, he has some extreme views not dissimilar to the others on the role of Christianity in our society (not just religion, but his religion), and also on marriage equality (which for me is a human rights issue and an issue of basic fairness and justice).  Bush was a capable enough governor of Florida, especially compared to those who followed him, but he has shown zero ability to mobilize even a faint heartbeat in most people who have bothered to listen to him on the campaign trail.  He seems to have no leadership qualities at all, which is a major problem for the leader of our nation.  On top of that, he has equivocated so much on things that I have no sense of what his core values are at all.  And I think he doesn't know either.  He is too much like Pappy, willing to sell his morality and soul and common sense to get elected at any cost.

But, as I said, I am not all that thrilled by the Democratic choices either.  Hillary also has waffled so much on key issues that she cannot see straight, let alone explain her vision as a leader.  Another one who seems to simply want to get elected just because she wants to get elected.   And Bernie has a great schtick and I believe is the only sincere one in the bunch, but he has never shown any inclination or ability to build coalitions and do the grunt work of crafting achievable legislation and getting it passed, and I see no reason to think he will suddenly change once he gets into the White House.  Hillary's critique that "progress" is a key part of "progressive" is dead on target.

I am pretty disgusted by both parties.  This is the best they can put up for a vote?  Sure, I often feel this way around this time of a campaign, but really, this year they seem a lot less qualified and a lot more lost than in the past.

So, as I see it, Sanders has the best approach to dealing with the role money plays in elections, in regulating the financial world, and in tax policy (52% for those over $10 Million per year). I also like his focus on fixing infrastructure. I am very concerned about his ability to deal with foreign policy, and his distrust of "free market" solutions is a problem for me. Clinton has a great foreign policy resume (warts and mistakes included), and is clearly the most qualified but is incredibly self-serving, two-faced, and is not likely to fix our financial markets or our election process. Both of them seem to have a good perspective on justice reform (we imprison more than any other western country - our drug laws being a major part of the problem). Trump just makes no sense from a policy perspective and you have to trust that he can get realistic if you intend to support him, a stretch for me. Cruze is very scary to me for so many reasons, untruthfulness being among the lessor concerns. Republicans as a whole have abandoned fiscal policy to a slavish focus on the size of the debt which I see as a major tactical error as far as managing the economy is concerned. None of their tax policies seem to make sense and  their desire to get into what should be our private lives from an abortion and marriage perspective is too intrusive. They have abandoned their "free market" promise to fight monopoly which makes no sense at all. I can see that Clinton, Bush, Kaisich are the most qualified but I am not in love with any of them. Bad news all in all for sure! - But the real issue is that only 20% at most of our population vote in primaries, and maybe mid 30% vote in elections, so we have met the enemy - it is us!! Like global warming, our continued negligence - in this case a caring and educated electorate voting - is the main reason for all these hassles. 

Moreover, electing a President you like without a supportive Congress is not a recipe for success.  If you want something done in this country you have to have a movement.  This is where you have to give the Tea Parties a lot of credit and God help us if a Tea Partista is elected President.

tjohn said:

Moreover, electing a President you like without a supportive Congress is not a recipe for success.  If you want something done in this country you have to have a movement.  This is where you have to give the Tea Parties a lot of credit and God help us if a Tea Partista is elected President.

Clinton & Gingrich, Reagan and O'Neill? 

How much blame does Obama get for his failure to work with the Republicans? Any?

mfpark said:

BCC said:

mfpark said:

mjh said:

Rubio: Obama speaking out against Islamophobia is "pitting people against each other."

I find Rubio's statement on this to be disgusting.  He should not be President.

But someone is going to be president.  That is what scares the be-Jesus out of me.  I can't see any of them--Democrat or Republican--actually leading this nation.  But one of them will be.

For my vote, I will hold my nose and vote for whomever is the Democratic nominee because there is no way that any of the GOP candidates is qualified in the least to lead this nation.

You don't think Kaisich or Jeb Bush is qualified to lead the nation?

They have more experience in government than the rest, that is true.  But I do not think that experience alone is a qualification for being a good leader of the nation.  Kasich did show some political savvy when he was in the House, at times working with Democrats on important issues.  So I guess that puts him at the top of a bad lot, in my books.  On the other hand, he has some extreme views not dissimilar to the others on the role of Christianity in our society (not just religion, but his religion), and also on marriage equality (which for me is a human rights issue and an issue of basic fairness and justice).  Bush was a capable enough governor of Florida, especially compared to those who followed him, but he has shown zero ability to mobilize even a faint heartbeat in most people who have bothered to listen to him on the campaign trail.  He seems to have no leadership qualities at all, which is a major problem for the leader of our nation.  On top of that, he has equivocated so much on things that I have no sense of what his core values are at all.  And I think he doesn't know either.  He is too much like Pappy, willing to sell his morality and soul and common sense to get elected at any cost.

But, as I said, I am not all that thrilled by the Democratic choices either.  Hillary also has waffled so much on key issues that she cannot see straight, let alone explain her vision as a leader.  Another one who seems to simply want to get elected just because she wants to get elected.   And Bernie has a great schtick and I believe is the only sincere one in the bunch, but he has never shown any inclination or ability to build coalitions and do the grunt work of crafting achievable legislation and getting it passed, and I see no reason to think he will suddenly change once he gets into the White House.  Hillary's critique that "progress" is a key part of "progressive" is dead on target.

I am pretty disgusted by both parties.  This is the best they can put up for a vote?  Sure, I often feel this way around this time of a campaign, but really, this year they seem a lot less qualified and a lot more lost than in the past.

It's not just about experience. It's about what you do with that experience.

mfpark said:

I am pretty disgusted by both parties.  This is the best they can put up for a vote?  Sure, I often feel this way around this time of a campaign, but really, this year they seem a lot less qualified and a lot more lost than in the past.

You feel that way because now is now and the past fades in memory.

How are they less qualified than first-term Senator Obama, empty suit Romney or the great hero McCain who either thought himself immortal or actually believed that Sarah Palin was qualified to be President. Never mind Iowa Caucus winners Santorum and Huckabee. 

BCC said:

Clinton & Gingrich, Reagan and O'Neill? 

How much blame does Obama get for his failure to work with the Republicans? Any?

Less than 10%. We are not talking about Gingrich or Reagan. We are talking about the Republicans who saw as their principal goal denying Obama a second term. Furthermore I remember Obama meeting with the entire House Republican Conference and answering every question they threw at him. Once the Tea Party came to Town every Republican was worried that any perception that they were willing to compromise with Obama would result in a Primary challenge. One of Chris Christie's greatest impediments to winning the Republican nomination is that he hugged Obama. One of Rubio's main challenges to winning the nomination is that he "worked with Chuck Schumer.

LOST said:

mfpark said:

I am pretty disgusted by both parties.  This is the best they can put up for a vote?  Sure, I often feel this way around this time of a campaign, but really, this year they seem a lot less qualified and a lot more lost than in the past.

You feel that way because now is now and the past fades in memory.

How are they less qualified than first-term Senator Obama, empty suit Romney or the great hero McCain who either thought himself immortal or actually believed that Sarah Palin was qualified to be President. Never mind Iowa Caucus winners Santorum and Huckabee. 

BCC said:

Clinton & Gingrich, Reagan and O'Neill? 

How much blame does Obama get for his failure to work with the Republicans? Any?

Less than 10%. We are not talking about Gingrich or Reagan. We are talking about the Republicans who saw as their principal goal denying Obama a second term. Furthermore I remember Obama meeting with the entire House Republican Conference and answering every question they threw at him. Once the Tea Party came to Town every Republican was worried that any perception that they were willing to compromise with Obama would result in a Primary challenge. One of Chris Christie's greatest impediments to winning the Republican nomination is that he hugged Obama. One of Rubio's main challenges to winning the nomination is that he "worked with Chuck Schumer.




 

I am by no means absolving the GOP for their behavior but:

Obama failed to meet the leader of the Senate Republicans for 18 months.

Also this:

'President Obama told author Bob Woodward that he didn't know Rep. Paul Ryan was going to attend at a major speech he delivered last year on spending and debt, and says in retrospect that it was "a mistake" to dress down Ryan and his budget plans to his face in that setting.

In the interview conducted July 11 -- about a month before Ryan was tapped as Mitt Romney's running mate – the president also misstated the first name of the man who is now on the opposing presidential ticket.'

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-bob-woodward-mistake-dress-paul-ryan-face/story?id=17171273

This is a man who is reaching across the aisle? 

tjohn said:

Moreover, electing a President you like without a supportive Congress is not a recipe for success.  If you want something done in this country you have to have a movement.  This is where you have to give the Tea Parties a lot of credit and God help us if a Tea Partista is elected President.

Remember, the Tea Party was funded by Koch bros.

BCC said:

tjohn said:

Moreover, electing a President you like without a supportive Congress is not a recipe for success.  If you want something done in this country you have to have a movement.  This is where you have to give the Tea Parties a lot of credit and God help us if a Tea Partista is elected President.

Clinton & Gingrich, Reagan and O'Neill? 

How much blame does Obama get for his failure to work with the Republicans? Any?

More or less none.  I suppose you can fault him for giving up trying after four years.