Marco Rubio’s Hamlet routine is over and he’s decided to run for reelection to the Senate. Of course, the primary thing we’ve learned about Marco Rubio since he became a U.S. Senator nearly six years ago is that he hates the job and he hates the Senate. He could not have been more clear about this, and he’s had plenty of friends and associates confirm it for us.
Simon Maloy had a good observation on this back in October:
To be clear, hatred of the Senate is no vice. Being a senator is awful, especially right now when a large chunk of Rubio’s party won’t let anything of substance happen because they promised their constituents to not let Barack Obama do president things anymore. Being a freshman senator is really awful – you have zero clout and have to suck up to institutional barnacles like Jeff Sessions and Lindsey Graham to get anything done. The Senate is a terrible place filled with some of the worst people in America. Clearly it’s not the proper environment for someone like Rubio, who is highly ambitious and has little patience for the bureaucratic inertia of government, which kind of makes you wonder why he even wants to be in government at all.
Apparently, he does want to be in government after all, and maybe being a sophomore senator will be modestly less soul-crushing than being a freshman one.
He has to actually get reelected first, though, and those quotes about despising his job are floating out there like giant matzoh balls. It’s not the best way to apply for a contract extension, let’s just say that.
And then there are those missed votes and missed committee hearings. You know, Rubio basically quit doing his work as a senator a little past halfway through his term.
So, he’s got some pretty spectacular name recognition, but he’s nowhere near as formidable as a candidate as he would have been if he hadn’t trash-talked the position he seeks and run for the presidency. In fact, the Democrats are fired up and ready to go, having assembled a nice encyclopedia’s worth of opposition research. The DSCC just released an online ad with some of their greatest hits:
…[N]ational Republicans — including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) — are convinced that Rubio is the only candidate who can keep the seat in GOP hands. Those operatives may look at the Democrats’ ad as proof positive they are scared of Rubio’s unmatched name recognition and proven fundraising ability.
Democrats insist that is not the case. “Marco Rubio has spent his term in the Senate not showing up for work, complaining about his job and when he did show up, taking dangerous votes like the one he cast to keep open the terrorist gun loophole,” said Lauren Passalacqua, the DSCC’s national press secretary.
“After a bruising 20 point loss to Donald Trump in the Florida presidential primary, recent polls have shown again that Floridians just don’t like Marco Rubio, and this video makes it clear why,” she added. “If Rubio decides to run for re-election, his long record of failing Florida voters will be impossible to defend.”
And let’s not forget Rubio’s epic meltdown in the New Hampshire debate when challenged by New Jersey Governor Chris Christie:
Finally, just being in the spotlight as a presidential contender brought a lot of things to light about Rubio’s record. Last New Year’s Eve I wrote about Rubio’s Miami Vice Problem. That kind of information isn’t going to do him any favors this time around.
The Florida Senate race has been lightly polled, but it looks like on the Democratic side that Rep. Patrick Murphy has a persistent lead over the ethically compromised Alan Grayson. Murphy was also leading Republican Rep. David Jolly, who has announced that he will drop out to make way for Rubio.
The other consideration is how the Senate race will be impacted by the top of the ticket. Right now, the polls show a close race there. Rubio will need it to stay that way.
Harry Reid is ethically challenged.
Patrick Murphy is ethically challenged, and he was a Republican in 2013. He’s on the House Intelligence Committee and has a firehose of money coming from Saudi Arabia.
“That foreign money floods into the American political system is hardly a secret, although it is illegal. Nothing much is ever done to stop it. Patrick Murphy’s political career, for example, has been partially funded by one of the most powerful families in Saudi Arabia, the patriarch of which– Clinton Library $1,000,000-plus donor– Nasser al-Rashid, is one of the royal family’s top 3 advisors. They’ve funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars into Murphy’s 3 campaigns– 2 for the House and now one for the U.S. Senate. Even as crooked a player as Harry Reid felt compelled to return a $100,000 check from one al-Rashid son as the disreputable family’s plot to get Murphy into the Senate started coming to light. (By the way, Murphy is on the House Intelligence Committee.)” – from DownWithTyranny!
I would venture to say, as a general statement, that the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party is more ethically challenged than those people running against Clinton Democrats.
As the band The Brains once opined: “Money Changes Everything.”
If you can support a candidate for President whose family has received over three billion dollars from the richest of the rich I think it’s far past talking about who is and isn’t ethically challenged.
The Patrick Murphy in the primary with Grayson? Seems a contest ripe for character assassination…
That’s quite a family, isn’t it, just a cute, loving all-American family. It’s all: ‘What are you talking about, who me?’
Presumably Norman Braman told him “no more Senate means no more goodies.” Why would Braman fund an ex-Senator with no electoral prospects?
The Florida Senate race has been lightly polled, but it looks like on the Democratic side that Rep. Patrick Murphy has a persistent lead over the ethically compromised Alan Grayson.
Let go of your hate. Murphy doesn’t have ethical issues? Why are you being a tool of Harry Reid? Why are you in favor of a guy who voted for the Gowdy/GOP Benghazi fishing expedition?
B/C Martin’s sheet-list is like the no-fly-list. Once on for whatever reason, no getting off, and nothing else may be considered.
Murphy seems to appeal to voters that like candidates that don’t take strong stands on anything (thus, maintaining a maximum degree of flexibility for all those difficult votes in Congress) and are conventionally good-looking enough. IOW, back-benchers and future VP candidates.
FL voters may like the idea of returning Rubio to the Senate because he hates the institution so much that he’s a back-bencher that doesn’t bother to show up for work.
there’s plenty to dislike about Grayson even if you discount BooMan’s personal impression from talking to him. He’s a jerk with his share of policies that bug me. Were I in Florida I’d vote for Grayson over Murphy, but not very happily.
Murphy was one of the fathers of that payday lender bill that got DWS in trouble
I’m not saying Grayson is a prince, or anything of the sort. Only saying that Grayson is the better of the two. Do we really need another Ben Nelson, which is what Murphy would be, in the Democratic caucus. We already have that douchenozzle Joe Manchin. Also, I love that people are okay with Murphy’s parents attempting to buy him that Senate seat, like they did Murphy’s House seat.
The voters that are even thinking about voting GOP for Rubio. They would accomplish more with their vote if they were to write in any GOP empty suit that does not show up for work.
Not only a tool, but a dumb tool.
One poll from Mason Dixon and a couple of old polls from March?
I don’t think that sentence means what you want it to mean.
I know senators and congressmen get nice life-long pensions. Does the size depend on how long you serve? Can’t Rubio sit back and enjoy retirement, maybe get a part-time job on K Street?
looks like they need to serve 6 years in either house so Rubio already qualifies or will by December
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/01/congressional-pensions-update/
with strict literalism.
But even then, I suppose it’s inarguable that he’s been “serv[ing]” somebody throughout those six years.
Somebody named “Marco”.
I choose to remain idealistic sometimes
If he wins he gets paid $174K to lay on the beach in Florida for 6 years. Sounds like a pretty good job to me.
Well except for the alligators, where do I apply??
It’s pretty good clobber for doing nothing most of the time, isn’t it? And that’s not including all the grift and payola that goes with the job.
As they say: what a racket.
I always figured Lil Marco would be back to game the system once again. Don’t care how much he whines about it. It’s a cushy job. Nice for him. Sucks for the rest of us.
Alligators and sharks are easy enough to avoid. It’s the freaking sand fleas and mosquitoes that make FL a no-go zone for me.
It’s the “grift and payola” that comes with a Senate jobs that seems to make so many of them very wealthy. Marco would also want to avail himself of opportunities with wealthy women which is another avenue to getting rich.
Oh no… Florida is heaven. Sarasota!
Never had the pleasure. The west coast (Sanibel Island in particular) is quite lovely, but like the east coast my legs and arms were covered with blisters in about 24 hours.
Because it’s more interesting and warrants more attention than whatever ‘lil Marco does next,
CJR The shadowy war on the press: How the rich silence journalists
The Hill – GOP stirs Clinton-Sanders tensions
Marco and the other fourteen GOP contenders can’t complain that the RNC and Priebus put big thumbs on the scale for Trump or any of the candidates. They played it straight (or Jeb? was so incredibly inept that he lost all the points he was spotted).
Did 51 people in the State Department just announce a war against Russia today?
Who do they think they are? Not even the POTUS can declare war, but unlike State Department folks, he can order military actions. Or maybe it’s a coup operating out of the Department of State (not even John Foster Dulles) was that pretentious.
i don’t know why they’re trying to psych up the press with these leaks anyway. We all know Hillary Clonton will give the war machine everything it wants and more. So why the leak? Do they think this makes her more electable?
This is the most horrific thing to me about a Clinton Presidency. These are the people who are going to be running policy for her State Department. It’s telling that they are telegraphing an end to actual statecraft to achieve diplomatic objectives.
But, they no longer even desire diplomacy. They want outright regime change. Absurd. These idiots are intentionally escalating a game of chicken with another nuclear power. The hubris is sickening.
I think the goal is to put more military pressure on Assad to accept a transitional government. They don’t expect it from Obama but they probably see Clinton or Trump as more open or malleable on the Syria question. Obama has been far from great on Syria but he has restrained the US somewhat. KSA, Turkey, and the Gulf countries have been largely driving this with our support.
Let’s see how Clinton responds to this on the campaign trail over the next few months. Look for how she might connect home-grown terror to Syria, ISIS, and Assad. That will be an indicator of how she might handle Syria in her first term, if she wins.
Er, she has already shown us.
Used the Orlando domestic to justify moar bombing of ISIS.
Likewise Dems grandstanding on the No Fly List, fgs.
And legislatively neutering any attempt to bolster the 4th.
Do we usually think the “war machine” includes the State Dept? We know it does, but generally use the term to refer to the Pentagon, military contractors, and congressional warhawks like McCain.
These mid-level State Dept folks are not and should not be policy-makers and have zero business issuing statements like this. Kerry should fire their asses. (They could be assets put in place by the Bush/Cheney regime.) That’s assuming he’s not using them to speak on his behalf in which case that would re-confirm that he’s a wimp with the added component of being a weasel. Another interpretation is that Obama/Kerry are moving the pieces on the chessboard in preparation for POTUS HRC so that her first war doesn’t come as a surprise to the public. If that’s the case, then it would mean that Obama and Kerry are lower than low.
It’s loaded with neocons, so, yeah. Moar and moar, we are East India Company.
Well your last interpretation is what I was getting at with the question, and it’s frankly the only one that makes sense. It could be people inside trying to embarrass the president I guess, or loyalists to HRC laying the groundwork.
Word is? Kerry agrees with the memo. So really it’s Obama and the top military brass who are against this.
Then Obama should order should fire Kerry and the rest of the lot.
Wouldn’t draw too many conclusions about actions out of the State Dept based on what makes sense to observers. Too many State dept officials and employees have agendas that aren’t disclosed to the public because it would be rejected, and we end up with no choice but to live with the consequences of those agendas when they succeed.
Bombing brown people for their own good is the default Clinton Foreign Policy. She doesn’t require ‘help’ from some mid-level State Department types.
May be her default position, but very foolish to think that she does anything without huge amount of help. All on her own, her political career would have stalled out at the school board level.
I think those 51 god damned idiots are setting it up for Hillary. But who am I?
Dave Eggers – `Could he actually win?’ Dave Eggers at a Donald Trump rally
I trust Eggers’ description of almost anything over most journalists. For accuracy and color. Well worth reading.