Archive for the ‘Marco Rubio’ Category

Last week, Gov. Dayton said that the ACA was unaffordable. This week, in Gov. Dayton’s Strib op-ed, he’s insisting that things really aren’t that bad, saying most people “will NOT see actual health insurance increases of 50 percent or more, because many people, who buy their policies through MNsure, will receive federal tax credits that will significantly lower their costs.”

Gov. Dayton, if these subsidies “significantly lower” health insurance premium costs, why did you insist that the “Affordable Care Act isn’t affordable” anymore? We know you said that because it’s captured in this video:

Gov. Dayton’s most stunning admission in his op-ed is when he said “And while it is true that the Minnesota Department of Commerce finally “approved” the health insurers’ rate increases and enrollment caps, that approval was required to prevent those companies from following Minnesota Blue Cross Blue Shield and major insurers in other states from pulling entirely out of the individual market. Their departures are forcing about 2 million people in 32 other states to also find new coverage.”

That’s admitting that the major insurance companies will pull out of the individual markets if they aren’t granted major premium increases each year! It’s worth noting that Sen. Rubio forced this by getting a bill passed that ended insurance company bailouts. Think about that. President Obama knew that his signature achievement would bankrupt insurance companies if it didn’t have a bailout provision in it.

Compare that with Minnesota prior to Obamacare/MNsure. Minnesota virtually eliminated the uninsured by establishing a high-risk pool in 1976. Thanks to that system, Minnesota’s uninsured rate was a paltry 7.2% in 2007. Last week, I wrote this post, noting that the national uninsured rate was 15.5%.

Gov. Dayton and the DFL enthusiastically passed MNsure when the DFL controlled the legislature and Dayton was the DFL governor. In his op-ed, Gov. Dayton insists he needs an all-DFL legislature:

I ask you to vote for two years with DFL majorities in both the Minnesota House and Senate, in order to fulfill my pledge to you: A Better Minnesota.

Minnesotans, the last time we had a DFL governor and DFL majorities in the House and Senate, we got a Senate Office Building for fat-cat politicians and skyrocketing health insurance premiums. Exploding health insurance premiums and a $90,000,000 building for fat-cat politicians isn’t taking us in the right direction. I’m betting people think that that’s taking Minnesota in the wrong direction.

Finally, Gov. Dayton, if things aren’t that bad, why are you, Rep. Thissen and Commissioner Rothman calling this a crisis?

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Republicans should willingly accept the fight that the Democrats have picked on defense spending. Democrats just picked the fight by filibustering the bill that would fund the military, including funding overseas operations against ISIS. If Democrats are willing to shut down the government over fulfilling the Democrats’ special interest allies’ wish list, Republicans should highlight that. If Democrats want to commit political suicide, then it’s Republicans’ responsibility to make them pay for that stupidity.

First, it’s important to know that “Senate Democrats Tuesday blocked for a third time a key defense spending bill, signaling they will not take up any spending legislation outside of an all-inclusive package that incorporates both military and domestic spending.” According to the article, Democrats blocked the bill because “Democratic leaders said they don’t trust the GOP to negotiate in good faith on the remaining domestic spending bills if they agree to the military spending separately.”

It’s time for Democrats to put on their big boy britches and negotiate in good faith. If they won’t fund the military unless they get everything they want for their special interest allies, then they aren’t fit to chair the Senate’s committees. Period. They aren’t fit for those responsibilities because they’re too beholden to the special interests to do what’s right for America.

Sen. Rubio issued this statement:

The federal government’s chief responsibility is to keep Americans safe and provide the resources our military needs to do its job, and it’s a shame Senate Democrats are refusing to do either by blocking this bill for the third time this year.

In addition to funding our military, this bill would also have made it crystal clear to the administration that dangerous terrorists must remain at the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay. In these last four months of President Obama’s term, we need to do everything possible to stop him from releasing dangerous terrorists to other countries, or bringing them into the U.S. This includes keeping the 18 “forever prisoners“, which an independent board has deemed too dangerous to ever release, right where they are.

This is a fight that Republicans should fight with Democrats. Let the people see that Democrats aren’t ready to chair the important committees that fund this nation’s national security operations. Let the people see that Democrats consistently put a higher priority on political gamesmanship than they put on doing what’s right for our troops.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

This article isn’t good news for Chuck Schumer. Sen. Schumer wants to be the Senate Majority Leader in January. At this point, that’s looking like an uphill fight. The worse news is that it’s looking like the Democrats’ fight is getting more uphill by the week.

The article’s second paragraph says “The Quinnipiac University poll of more than 1,000 Florida voters shows Rubio with a double-digit lead over each of the two likely Democratic nominees, Rep. Patrick Murphy (50%-37%) and Rep. Alan Grayson (50%-38%). The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.”

This is now a safe Republican seat. That poll takes this seat off the list of seats that the Democrats might potentially pick up.

That’s quite a difference from when Sen. Rubio initially announced that he’d seek re-election. At the time, the Cook Political Report said “Republican U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio has reversed his decision to retire from the Senate at the end of this Congress and will run for a second term. In doing so, he has breathed new life into the GOP’s chances of holding the seat, but that doesn’t mean that he has become anything more than the very slightest of favorites in November. The race will remain in the Toss Up column.” It will be interesting to see how Cook explains what tipped that race that quickly.

Remember that this poll happened before the terrorist attack in Nice, France. If I were a betting man, I’d bet the proverbial ranch that Rubio will have opened up a bigger lead next month, especially if the tempo of ISIS-inspired terrorist attacks keeps increasing.

Quinnipiac’s Swing State Poll isn’t good news for Ohio Democrats, either. Their poll says “Sen. Rob Portman [leads]former Gov. Ted Strickland 47–40%.” A couple months back, Portman trailed by 9 points. The next Quinnipiac Swing State Poll had them tied. Now, Portman has opened an outside-the-margin-of-error lead over Gov. Strickland. Clearly, it’s trending in Sen. Portman’s direction. What’s interesting about this is the fact that Gov. Strickland has higher name recognition than Sen. Portman.

Finally, it’s safe to say that Sen. Toomey is sitting in a strong position for re-election:

The man-woman matchup in the Pennsylvania Senate race produces only a small gender gap. Men back Toomey 53%-35%, while women are divided with 45 percent for Toomey and 42 percent for McGinty.

In the pure horse race poll, “Sen. Pat Toomey over Democrat Katie McGinty 49%-39%.” It’s probably too early to say this race is over but it isn’t too early to say that Sen. Toomey is in a solid position to win re-election.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Since the start of 2016 or earlier, pundits have predicted that Democrats would retake their majority in the US Senate. That’s been the conventional wisdom pretty much the entire year. According to this article, those predictions might be greatly exaggerated.

This article isn’t the only thing that points to a contrary outcome in November. The latest Quinnipiac Swing State Poll brought smiles to the NRSC leadership team. Quinnipiac’s poll starts by saying “Republican incumbent U.S. Senators in three critical swing states fare better today as Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida leads either of two Democratic challengers, while Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey outpoints his Democratic challenger and Ohio Sen. Rob Portman is in a dead heat with a well-known challenger, according to a Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll released today.”

It then highlights the fact that “Sen. Rubio leads U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy 47-40 percent and tops U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson 48-40 percent.” Amelia Chasse talked about the Florida race in a rather unflattering light towards Democrats:

Another DSCC primary pick, Florida’s Patrick Murphy, has had his inflated resume methodically torn apart by a series of investigative reports, to the point where Salon called him a “disaster candidate.”

Prior to that, Chasse spoke about Katie McGinty, the Democrats’ candidate in Pennsylvania in an unflattering light:

Establishment groups spent nearly $5 million to drag Katie McGinty, a bureaucrat with a revolving door problem, through another contentious primary, only to have her claim to be the first in her family to attend college immediately exposed as a lie.

According to Quinnipiac’s Swing State Poll, McGinty trails incumbent Pat Toomey “49%-40%.” That isn’t the type of margin that’s likely to produce a November nailbiter. In Ohio, pundits predicted Rob Portman’s demise. That might not happen:

Sen. Rob Portman is in a dead heat with former Gov. Ted Strickland in Ohio. But that is an improvement for Portman, who earlier in the campaign was down as much as 9 points.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to notice that Republicans are leading in the 2 biggest swing states and that they’re in much better shape in Ohio than they were a couple months ago.

Then there’s Ron Johnson. Though that race is tight, Wisconsin’s GOP GOTV operation is a powerful machine. Further, Feingold is running into difficulty explaining why he did nothing to fix the VA hospital in Tomah after getting notified about its difficulties.

That’s before talking about some potential GOP pickups. This video shows why Darryl Glenn has positioned himself well in Colorado:

Talking about a recent case of black-on-black violence in San Bernardino, CA, Glenn said that BLM wasn’t part of the solution before saying that what’s required is for policy leaders, community leaders and law enforcement to get together in a room and have a substantive conversation about the things that need to happen to end the distrust between law enforcement and minority communities. Couple the fact that he’s endorsed by Ted Cruz and that much of Cruz’s GOTV operation is now working for Glenn. That’s a powerful combination in Colorado.

Finally, don’t think that Harry Reid’s seat isn’t in play, too. If these things come together, it isn’t impossible to see Republicans holding a similar margin in 2017 as they have right now.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

According to this article, down-ticket Republicans might as well start writing their concession speeches. This is proof that a little paranoia goes a long way. According to the article, “New polls that came out yesterday showing Hillary Clinton with a double digit lead over Donald Trump in the race for the White House has to have many House and Senate Republicans that are up for re-election this year shaking in their boots and running for the hills. The Trump Train nightmare is set to wreak havoc on a GOP-controlled Congress, cutting political careers short and leaving many looking for jobs.”

That’s before the author gets into full panic mode.

Jason Taylor, the man who wrote the article, then said “You have Kelly Ayotte in New Hampshire, who is going to have a tough fight for re-election, along with Richard Burr in North Carolina, Marco Rubio in Florida, Mark Kirk in Illinois, Roy Blunt in Missouri, Patrick Toomey in Pennsylvania and Rob Portman in Ohio just to name a few. Don’t get me wrong, anything is possible. I just think far too much damage has been done to hold the Senate.”

Now that it’s established that Mr. Taylor sounds like he’s in full panic mode, let’s introduce some reality into the conversation. This article highlights last week’s Quinnipiac poll. It paints an entirely different picture:

Brown continues, saying “In general, this poll of the three major swing states, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, is good news for the GOP. Sen. Rob Portman is in a dead heat with former Gov. Ted Strickland in Ohio. But that is an improvement for Portman, who earlier in the campaign was down as much as 9 points. And in Pennsylvania, GOP Sen. Pat Toomey has a 9-point lead. It is far too early to say he’s a sure thing, but he is in good shape.”

Apparently, voters are smart enough to differentiate between the loudmouth at the top of the ticket and these senators. Who would’ve thunk it?

Prediction: Republicans will keep control of the House and Senate. Marco Rubio will score a strong victory in Florida. Ditto with Sen. Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania. Sen. Ron Johnson will defeat Russ Feingold in Wisconsin, thus ending Feingold’s anything-but-illustrious political career. Rob Portman has an uphill fight but he’s fought back into a tie with Ted Strickland after trailing by 9 points early. That’s before talking about Republicans flipping Harry Reid’s seat in Nevada and ousting Michael Benet in Colorado, both distinct possibilities.

Message to the Chicken Littles out there — the sky isn’t falling:

This Quinnipiac poll is the best news Mitch McConnell has seen in months. Peter Brown, the assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll, said “With Republican national leaders worried about keeping control of the U.S. Senate, Sen. Marco Rubio might ride to their rescue if he decides to reverse field and seek re-election. This Quinnipiac University poll finds Sen. Marco Rubio in good shape when matched against his two potential Democratic opponents.”

Brown continues, saying “In general, this poll of the three major swing states, Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, is good news for the GOP. Sen. Rob Portman is in a dead heat with former Gov. Ted Strickland in Ohio. But that is an improvement for Portman, who earlier in the campaign was down as much as 9 points. And in Pennsylvania, GOP Sen. Pat Toomey has a 9-point lead. It is far too early to say he’s a sure thing, but he is in good shape.”

This has to be considered good news for the GOP, too:


While the presidential matchup in Pennsylvania and the U.S. Senate race both feature a Democratic woman running against a Republican man, Sen. Pat Toomey has the advantage of incumbency. He leads 56 – 35 percent among men, while women are divided with 44 percent for Katie McGinty and 42 percent for Toomey.

If Republicans hold those 3 seats, they’ll hold their majority in the Senate. I expect them to hold Wisconsin, too, where Ron Johnson will benefit from the fact that he’s running 5+ points ahead of Trump in Wisconsin.

Something noteworthy is happening, too. Each of these candidates are running well ahead of Mr. Trump. While it’s still early, this suggests that voters are differentiating between Mr. Trump and mainstream Republicans. If that’s what’s happening, then that’s good news for those who’ve been worried about a major GOP thumping this upcoming November.

With Rubio now officially running for re-election, coupled with this news, the NRSC just got a major morale boost.

If I were a betting man, and I am from time to time, I’d bet that Sen. Rubio will run for re-election.

According to the article, “Politico reported Wednesday that López-Cantera had urged Rubio to jump in the race, saying he would back out if the senator ran for reelection.” I can’t see Sen. Rubio saying no at this point, especially considering the fact that his friend has a) urged him to run and b) promised to drop out if Sen. Rubio runs for re-election.

After the Orlando bombing, and considering the fact that Sen. Rubio would have a prominent role in crafting policies to prevent terrorist attacks, it’s difficult picturing Sen. Rubio declining this option.

Further, this is pretty much proof that Sen. Rubio isn’t on Trump’s short list of VP candidates. Either that or Sen. Rubio doesn’t want to be on Mr. Trump’s short list. Either way, if Sen. Rubio runs for re-election, that eliminates the possibility of the Democrats flipping that seat. It doesn’t hurt the Democrats’ chances of picking up Florida’s senate seat. It eliminates that possibility.

Technorati: , , , ,

Saying that Laura Ingraham isn’t honest isn’t easy for me to say. Still, it’s what I must do after reading her latest pro-Trump spin piece. It isn’t that I disagree with everything in her article. I’d be lying if I said she’s constantly dishonest. Still, I can’t sit silent after she said “I, too, would have preferred an ideal candidate who would unite us and cruise to an easy win over Hillary. Unfortunately, the conservative movement failed to field such a candidate. Much of this is due to the fact that many so-called conservatives, and their enablers in the donor class, wasted their time and money promoting the candidacies of Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio, two men who were, and are, utterly unacceptable to almost all actual voters in the Republican Party.”

While there’s no disputing the fact that large parts of the GOP rejected Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio, it’s equally true that they were significantly more qualified, and more honest, than the GOP’s presumptive nominee. Further, Trump has been rejected by a large percentage of “actual voters in the Republican Party.” He just wasn’t rejected by as many people as Bush or Rubio.

This paragraph can’t go unquestioned:

First, some NeverTrumpers (like the Bush family) violently disagree with Trump on issues relating to immigration, trade, and foreign policy. In each of these key issues, however, Trump represents the traditional views of conservatives like Ronald Reagan, while the supporters of Bushism are locked into an extremist ideology that makes no sense in theory, and has been a disaster in practice.

That’s breathtakingly dishonest. The only other explanation is that Ms. Ingraham is just stupid. Since she once clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas, it’s a safe bet that she isn’t stupid.

Saying that Trump’s foreign policy is identical to Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy is like saying that an arsonist’s goals are essentially the same as the firefighters’ goals. First, when did President Reagan ask President Gorbachev to squash America’s enemies? When did President Reagan think it was wise to give the Soviet Union free run in the Middle East? When did President Reagan insist that we were getting screwed by other countries? When did President Reagan insist that America couldn’t compete with the world if our taxes were low and our regulations were reasonable?

The answer to these questions is simple: never.

Further, saying that Trump’s foreign policy is virtually identical to President Reagan’s is saying that Trump has carefully thought through what he’d do. How does that square with Trump telling a rally that he’d “bomb the s—” out of ISIS, then telling a national audience during a debate that he’d get President Putin to take ISIS out?

The reality is that Ms. Ingraham isn’t being honest with her readers or with us. That’s a sad thing because she used to be a person of integrity. I wish that woman hadn’t disappeared.

If, God forbid, the general election pits Hillary against The Donald, the most important factor might be whether Hillary is better at playing the victim card or whether Trump is better at playing the whiner. At this point, it’s anyone’s guess on who wins that match-up.

What isn’t open for debate is whether Trump’s demographic troubles are too deep to dig out of. This graphic shows Trump underwater with Hispanics in a big way:

That’s a net -65 with Hispanics. By comparison, Romney lost Hispanics by 44 points in 2012. Trump performs worse than Romney. It’s interesting to note that Trump accuses Romney of running a terrible campaign and of losing an election he should’ve won. Then there’s Trump’s women problem.

I’m not talking specifically about Trump’s name-calling of women like Megyn Kelly and Carly Fiorina, although that’s contributing to his women problem. Trump’s rating with women is terrible:

The good news for Trump is that his net favorability with women is better than his net favorability with Hispanics. Trump is just a -47 with women compared with a -65 with Hispanics. The bad news is that women make up a majority of voters in the United States.

Which brings us to whether voters will vote for a whiner like Trump:

Trump: Honestly Kasich should not be allowed to run. And I’ll go opposite on you- he hurts Trump much more than he hurts Cruz. And, in New York, I have tremendous numbers in New York and I have tremendous numbers in Pennsylvania, those two numbers just came out from CBS, I guess you saw them…but Kasich shouldn’t be allowed to run.

Reporter: Under what grounds?

Trump: Under the grounds that Rand Paul could have stayed in, and he had nothing. Marco Rubio could have stayed in, Jeb Bush could have stayed in. They all could have stayed in. They could have just stayed in. That’s all he’s doing. He’s 1 for 29. And the one thing that he won barely, and if I spent one more day in Ohio, I would have beaten him because I came pretty close. The only thing Kasich won was Ohio, where he’s the governor and where he has the machine working. Which isn’t doing well, it’s in the middle of the pack of his neighbors. He’s only in the middle of his pack, he’s not doing well in Ohio. If you look at his neighboring states, he’s exactly in the middle of the pack. That’s not great. Kasich shouldn’t be allowed to continue, and the RNC shouldn’t allow him to continue. And Kasich has more of an impact on me than he does on Cruz.

Kasich shouldn’t be allowed to continue because he hurts Trump more than he hurts Cruz? What a whiner. A candidate’s supporters and family have the final say over who stays in and who needs to drop out, not King Donald.

According to this article, Donald Trump opted out of speaking at CPAC because he “will be in Witchita, Kanasas for a major rally on Saturday prior to Caucus.” Don’t criticize my spelling of Wichita, Kansas. I just copied/pasted the quote from Trump’s statement. Apparently, making America great again doesn’t mean you’ve passed a fifth grade spelling class.

The implication of the Trump campaign’s statement was that Trump simply had to cancel his CPAC speech to win in Kansas. So much for that myth:

Will Katrina Pierson, Trump’s mouthpiece, insist that Trump had to cancel his speech to preserve a resounding defeat? Surely, she can’t argue it was because Mr. Trump was competitive.

UPDATE: With 23% in, Sen. Cruz leads Mr. Trump 49.0%-26.0%. Trump has closed the gap from 25.8% to 23%.

Trump skipped CPAC because he anticipated getting booed frequently during the speech. That isn’t new for Trump. What’s new is that he can’t blame getting booed by lobbyists. Everyone knows that CPAC isn’t filled with lobbyists. It’s filled with activists, many of whom are young and idealistic. The truth is that Trump doesn’t like conservative principles.

Trump has frequently talked about making the federal government run better. That isn’t a conservative principle. Limited government conservatives want as many responsibilities and decisions dealt with at the state, local or family level. Conservatives don’t have faith in the federal government getting things right. They’d rather have local units of government make decisions than have the federal government put together a one-size-fits-all plan that isn’t a solution.

UPDATE II: With 61% in, Sen. Cruz leads Trump 51.1%-24%, with Sen. Rubio getting 14.5% and Kasich getting 9%. That pretty much verifies, not that there was much doubt, that Trump skipped CPAC because it would’ve looked bad for him to get loudly booed at the biggest conservative event before the convention.

UPDATE III: It’s official. Cruz wins the Kansas caucus.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,