All right, I'll admit it: With the polls indicating that Obama's visit to California this past weekend enabled Jerry Brown to consolidate his lead over Meg Whitman, I felt blue all day. And then? And then I found this video of Marco Rubio talking to the editorial board of the Miami Herald. Smart, well-spoken, and completely unflappable. (And just watch. They try really, really hard to make him flap.)

Marco Rubio won't help voters out here in the Golden State to come to their sense, but it sure will be a pleasure having him in the U.S. Senate.

The video lasts more than an hour, but just pick a spot at random and listen for two or three minutes. My friends, it'll do your heart good.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :


Joined
Oct '10
Grant Casteel

I appreciate Marco Rubio's conservativsm, but I'm simply in awe of his impromptu speaking ability. He can riff as well as Bill Clinton, with the bonus that what he says isn't jabberwocky.

Cas Balicki
Joined
Jun '10
Cas Balicki

I've heard Rubio speak before, he is a breath of fresh air. In fact he's so good that I will be looking to the Democrats to try in every way they know how to sully him. And, Grant, I too think he's a one of the best speakers I've heard. As for Jerry Brown, Peter, California will have to hit the wall before anything improves within the state, and Governor Moonbeam is the one who will drive it into that wall at high speed, After the crash someone will come allong to pick up the pieces.

outstripp
Joined
May '10
outstripp

An astonishing performance. I'm sold.

River
Joined
Aug '10
River

Like a beacon piercing the fog, a lighthouse on a cliff in the storm.

~Paules
Joined
Jun '10
~Paules

Tantalizing news from NM-3 today. The Republican challenger says that he's holding his own against the Democratic incumbent. The district is normally an unassailable Democratic stronghold, but the rural folk are pouring out in droves during early voting to offset the Democratic advantage in ultra-liberal Santa Fe. If this turns out to be a national trend, Republicans will pick up more than a hundred House seats.

~Paules
Joined
Jun '10
~Paules

Wowsers! American Thinker this morning confirms my analysis. This is big, folks.

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser

We've got big plans for that man. Is VP out of the question in 2012? His obvious competence might defuse any accusations of inexperience.

And Rubio's high profile in the party would likely do more to draw Hispanics into the fold than any single platform change (which we should resist regardless).


Joined
Sep '10
liberal jim

Remember if the GOP establishment had its way he would not be on the ballot. Put his name on my list for 2012. Political pros would say no and GOP establishment would have a hissy-fit – sounds like a winner to me.

Todd
Joined
Oct '10
tms5018
liberal jim: Remember if the GOP establishment had its way he would not be on the ballot. Put his name on my list for 2012. Political pros would say no and GOP establishment would have a hissy-fit – sounds like a winner to me. · Oct 26 at 5:27am

It's sometimes hard to remember, because all we hear is that the tea party has been nominating extremists and wackos.

Edited on Oct 26, 2010 at 6:26am
Todd
Joined
Oct '10
tms5018

Speaking of the tea party effect, which combination of Senators would you prefer.

Option 1 (5 Republicans)

Arlen Specter (yes, I know he switched parties, but stick with me), Charlie Crist (FL), Mike Castle (DE), Sue Lowden (Nevada), and Trey Greyson (KY)

or

Option 2 (3 Conservatives and 2 Democrats)

Pat Toomey (R), Marco Rubio (R) , Rand Paul (R), Harry Reid (D), and Chris Coons (D)

Option 2 is the clear winner for me.


Joined
Sep '10
liberal jim

TMS5018: While the Tea Party sometimes nominates candidates that prove to be unelectable. The GOP establishment often nominates candidates who are not worth electing.

Matthew Gilley
Joined
May '10
Matthew Gilley

tms5018: Option 2 (3 Conservatives and 2 Democrats)

Pat Toomey (R), Marco Rubio (R) , Rand Paul (R), Harry Reid (D), and Chris Coons (D)

Option 2 is the clear winner for me. · Oct 26 at 6:51am

(1) I certainly hope you're not conceding Nevada to Harry Reid.

(2) What about an Option 3, to be a devil's advocate - Toomey, Rubio, Paul, Angle, Castle? Or Option 4 - Toomey, Rubio, Paul, Lowden, Castle? Aren't those better than your Option 2? Go ahead and call me a RINO or whatever, but I simply don't see why "the tea party effect" can't elect rock-ribbed conservatives at the same time it sweeps hyperliberals (Coons) and hyperpartisans (Reid) out of the Senate.

BriarRose
Joined
May '10
Briar Ann

Peter, the first time I heard Marco Rubio speak, President Reagan came immediately to mind. I see in Marco the same confidence, cheerful outlook and unwavering belief in our country. The video does do your heart good!

BriarRose
Joined
May '10
Briar Ann
Scott Reusser: We've got big plans for that man. Is VP out of the question in 2012? His obvious competence might defuse any accusations of inexperience...

As much as I love Marco Rubio, and am voting for him as senator, wouldn't it behoove us to look to state governors or others with executive experience for future presidential candidates?

Todd
Joined
Oct '10
tms5018

Matthew Gilley

tms5018: Option 2 (3 Conservatives and 2 Democrats)

Pat Toomey (R), Marco Rubio (R) , Rand Paul (R), Harry Reid (D), and Chris Coons (D)

Option 2 is the clear winner for me. · Oct 26 at 6:51am

(1) I certainly hope you're not conceding Nevada to Harry Reid.

(2) What about an Option 3, to be a devil's advocate - Toomey, Rubio, Paul, Angle, Castle? Or Option 4 - Toomey, Rubio, Paul, Lowden, Castle? Aren't those better than your Option 2? Go ahead and call me a RINO or whatever, but I simply don't see why "the tea party effect" can't elect rock-ribbed conservatives at the same time it sweeps hyperliberals (Coons) and hyperpartisans (Reid) out of the Senate. · Oct 26 at 9:45am

I didn't mean to write off Nevada. I am just saying that I would agree to lose it in exchange for getting Rubio, Paul and Toomey.

And, that maybe you don't get Rubio and Paul and Toomey without also getting nominees like O'Donnell.

While I was proposing a hypothetical, it might be a pretty good approximation of the real world.

Scott Reusser
Joined
May '10
Scott Reusser

tms5018

Matthew Gilley

tms5018: Option 2 (3 Conservatives and 2 Democrats)

Pat Toomey (R), Marco Rubio (R) , Rand Paul (R), Harry Reid (D), and Chris Coons (D)

Option 2 is the clear winner for me. · Oct 26 at 6:51am

(1) I certainly hope you're not conceding Nevada to Harry Reid.

(2) What about an Option 3, to be a devil's advocate - Toomey, Rubio, Paul, Angle, Castle? Or Option 4 - Toomey, Rubio, Paul, Lowden, Castle? Aren't those better than your Option 2? Go ahead and call me a RINO or whatever, but I simply don't see why "the tea party effect" can't elect rock-ribbed conservatives at the same time it sweeps hyperliberals (Coons) and hyperpartisans (Reid) out of the Senate. · Oct 26 at 9:45am

[...]

And, that maybe you don't get Rubio and Paul and Toomey without also getting nominees like O'Donnell.[...]

I'd certainly be happier with #3 or #4, but tms5018 might very well be correct: in the real world we have to accept an O'Donnell or two as the price of Tea Party mobilization.

But it's worth it.

Dan Holmes
Joined
Sep '10
Dan Holmes

How about this for a 2012 President/VP ticket? Marco Rubio, President/Star Parker, VP!

Both extremely articulate, with compelling life stores to tell, and, as a bonus, both immune to having the race card played against them!

Trace Urdan
Joined
May '10
Trace Urdan

Why can't we get a Marco Rubio in California? I think if Meg Whitman could articulate sound basic conservative policies the way that Marco Rubio does, we wouldn't be looking at a second term for Jerry Brown.

Chris O.
Joined
Jul '10
Chris O.

Thank you for the link, Peter. Let's put Rubio in charge of it all.

J. D. Fitzpatrick
Joined
Oct '10
J. D. Fitzpatrick

In a bout of insomnia, I listed to the whole thing. I also watched his address to the CPAC about 8 months ago. What really impressed me is that he sounded even more articulate answering questions off the cuff than he did delivering that prepared speech.

I recently read a bit about Napoleon in my old copy of Palmer. Napoleon bragged about being able to file a piece of knowledge in his head, forget about it, and pull it out exactly when needed. I get the feeling Rubio's the same way. Hearing him lay out how the country should run even felt a bit like reviewing how the Corsican ogre modernized France.

But maybe rather than tempting fate I should just ditto the Reagan comparison.


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In