I wrote Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential obituary this morning and we’ve had a good back and forth with readers and on Twitter about whether my judgment is premature. Some have noted that McCain got the full force of the Bush-era immigration reform meltdown and still managed to get the nomination in 2008. Mitt Romney, even more improbably, managed to get the nomination even though he’d been the author of the policy around which the 2012 party had united in opposition. It’s worth thinking back – now with a little distance – just how amazing a fact that is.
With McCain I would say that there was a lot to John McCain before immigration reform; something you can’t say for Rubio. With Romney, well, Romney continues to defy my comprehension on both a political and ontological level, though I guess I would note that he’s not president.
But I want to expand on my original point about Rubio. It’s not simply that Rubio appears to have bet big and bet wrong on immigration reform – analogues of which McCain and Romney did too. It’s more than that. It’s that by betting wrong he’s set off a trajectory of events that cut pretty quickly toward his underlying weaknesses as a candidate. Read More
TPM Reader JL thinks I’m writing off Rubio too soon …
Josh, I think your Rubio obit is premature for a variety of reasons:
First, I think it is becoming increasingly critical to differentiate between mid-term politics and presidential year politics. Looked at it through the lens of the former, Rubio appears to be ready for last rites but through the lens of the latter I don’t think so
Starting early next month, TPM will no longer publish full RSS feeds for the public. We’ll replace them with partial feeds. So you’ll still be able to keep up on what we’re publishing. You’ll just need click through to read the full post.
Full feeds will become part of the new TPMPrime membership.
Still a few weeks off but wanted to give everyone a heads up.
New photos of a bloodied Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as he emerged from that boat on that day in April. Pretty arresting images. Take a look.
Earlier this year, House Republicans voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Yesterday, they voted to delay its individual mandate for a year, which would severely undermine the roll out of the law. Later this year, some Republicans will insist again on defunding implementation under threat of a government shutdown. I wouldn’t be surprised if those same Republicans try to axe Obamacare during the fight over raising the debt limit.
But after that, I think there’s a good chance that the legislative assaults against the ACA will stop. That all depends on how smoothly the roll out goes. But if enrollment goes as planned, and the problems are minor and temporary, the whole question of repealing the law will take on a completely different character than it has right now. Right now, repealing the law entails rescinding some real, but fairly ancillary benefits. After January 1, voting for repeal will mean voting to kick a small country’s worth of people off of their health insurance. Read More
Gunman arrested outside the White House said he was only going to “fire a couple of shots.”
Colorado town considers proposal to award bounties for shooting down drones.
As I’ve noted elsewhere, I believe immigration reform is quite likely dead, unless its biggest supporters accept that fact and take the fight into the political and campaign arena rather than letting it die a slow death of opacity on Capitol Hill.
But it’s not too soon to note the main political fatality: Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL). Read More