New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's bridge scandal dominated the Sunday morning political talk shows, although much of the chatter also revolved around former defense secretary Robert Gates's new memoir in which he harshly criticizes President Obama's wartime leadership.
While Christie's scandal was the focus of most shows, lawmakers had little to say about the scandal in which a top aide orchestrated a traffic jam in an apparent act of political revenge.
A clear majority of Hispanics living in the United States say it’s important for their community to have a national leader. But they haven’t decided who should have that title.
The top two names mentioned in a new Pew Research Center survey of Hispanic adults in the U.S. were Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.). But each of them were named by only 5 percent of respondents when asked an open-ended question.
Out of 18 votes on Syria in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday, the most interesting was Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s “no” vote.
It was a striking and somewhat unexpected decision for a Republican who has long advocated more engagement with elements of the movement opposing the Syrian government. While Rubio’s “no” puts him in line with the crop of prospective 2016 GOP presidential candidates, most of whom either oppose a strike or have been silent, he is not joining the ranks of libertarian-leaning Republicans in the field who favor a more hands-off approach abroad.
At the behest of antiabortion groups, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is considering becoming a lead sponsor of legislation that would ban abortions 20 weeks after fertilization.
Why is Rubio, a possible 2016 presidential contender, wading into this political thicket? The fact that he is mulling it over 1) is a reflection of the growing scope of the abortion debate nationally and 2) could signal a desire to bolster his standing on the political right on the heels of a rough battle over immigration.
The Senate has passed a comprehensive immigration bill thanks, in large part, to the efforts of Florida Sen. Marco Rubio. Debate in Republican and conservative circles has already begun about whether Rubio helped or hurt his 2016 presidential prospects with the critical role he played in crafting the legislation and pushing it to passage.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) is a Dallas Cowboys fan in a New York Giants/Jets world. And Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is the guy with the off-the-mark NBA Finals prediction.
Those are both good things for them in the world of politics.
The fact that the two potential presidential contenders are avid sports fans has been on full display this week. And any time pols are knowledgeably talking sports, it's usually nothing but good news for their political brands, because it ups their relatability quotient.
A sweeping immigration bill months in the making is in the midst of its most crucial test yet, with the full Senate set to launch its second full week of debate over the matter and Majority Leader promising a vote on final passage by the July 4 recess.
In a terrific story out Monday (which you can read here) the New Yorker's Ryan Lizza takes a look at the genesis of the bill, which was crafted by a bipartisan "Gang of Eight" senators. Lizza looks at the unlikely alliances, near-breaking points, and complex web of interests that led to the present debate. It's about the immigration bill but it's also a window into how -- and why -- things do and don't get done in Washington.
For a little more than an hour Thursday afternoon, the second floor of the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C., was Iowa 2016.
And if it's any indication, Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) will give very different pitches to the Hawkeye State in one key area: foreign policy.
About an hour after Paul delivered a wonky address to the Faith and Freedom Conference, arguing against sending money to conflict-ridden nations like Egypt and Syria, Rubio took to the same podium to argue that the United States remains the one country uniquely able to provide a guiding hand for the world.
After months of defending immigration reform to conservatives, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said earlier this week that, as the bill stands, he won't vote for it. So, is Rubio's pronouncement a death knell for the legislation's chances?
Nope. Rubio's been saying for weeks that he can't support the bill in its current form. But that doesn't mean he's giving up (as one conservative radio host urged him just yesterday to do). What is worrisome for reformers is that Rubio might embrace a bill that's too conservative for them.
When the Internal Revenue Service scandal erupted exactly one week ago, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) released a statement calling the agency's behavior "reprehensible" and "deplorable."
That was only the appetizer.
In the days since the IRS admitted to targeting conservative groups for extra scrutiny, Rubio's criticism of the Obama administration and warnings about the larger implications of the incident have only intensified, suggesting the potential presidential contender wants badly to lead his party into battle on an issue that threatens to damage President Obama more than any other public embarrassment he's currently facing.
Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio has embarked on a high-risk, high-reward mission. His goal? Convince conservatives to support the bipartisan immigration reform measure he and his "Gang of Eight" colleagues have drafted. The success or failure of his effort will go a long way toward determining both whether reform passes, and where Rubio fits into the conservative movement going forward.
Every week when Congress is in session, congressional reporter Ed O'Keefe breaks down what you need to know for the week to come on Capitol Hill.
Most of this week's congressional action will originate in the Senate, where work continues on overhauling the nation's gun and immigration laws. Both issues are progressing as expected: Slowly, and seemingly always on the verge of potential collapse.
Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio's "water bottle" moment during his response to President Obama's State of the Union address has captured the attention of late-night talk show hosts this week, and CBS's David Letterman is no exception.
He unveiled his list Wednesday night of the top 10 things going through Rubio's mind at the moment he reached down for a drink of water during his address. Take number 9, for example: "Doctors say you should drink eight glasses of water every speech."
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) took his biggest step on to the national political stage on Tuesday, and it was hardly surprising to see him position himself as strongly opposed to President Obama's policies.
His best move, though, was in his effort to distance himself from the man he replaces as the de facto standard-bearer for the Republican Party: Mitt Romney.
It's Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) vs. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).
The two most likely 2016 presidential candidates in the Senate will go back-to-back tonight in consecutive rebuttals to President Obama's State of the Union address. First will be Rubio offering the official Republican response; then will come Paul delivering the tea party's take.
On Friday, The Fix debuted its list of the top 10 contenders for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination.
For most of these politicians, though, running for president in 2016 would be complicated -- specifically, it would be complicated by their day jobs. Just about all of them will either be up for reelection in 2016 or will be in the middle of their terms as governors, which is hardly ideal for launching a presidential campaign.
The first big vote of the 2016 presidential race was held Tuesday: the "fiscal cliff."
One major GOP contender, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), voted no on the package, while another, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), voted yes. And the votes may provide some insight into their potential 2016 strategies.
(We should also note that a third potential candidate, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, voted no with Rubio.)
The political world — up to and including this blog — is consumed at the moment with trying to divine the identity of Mitt Romney’s vice presidential pick. Travel schedules are pored over, public statements are parsed, Wikipedia is consulted.
Given that level of attention, you would think that the pick is of the utmost importance in the presidential race, that a look back at past picks reveals make or break moments centered on the identity of the presidential nominee’s ticketmate.
Not so much.
The simple reality is that the vice presidential pick — viewed through the lens of recent history — has almost no broad influence on the fate of the ticket and, to the extent the VP choice has mattered, it’s been in a negative way.
“VP picks can provide a temporary burst of excitement to a ticket, but pretty soon things settle down and the race is once again about the man at the top,” said Ari Fleischer, a former Bush Administration official. “With communications reaching everywhere for the last few decades, the race is about the presidency, not the vice-presidency.”
Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney said late Tuesday that Marco Rubio is being fully vetted as a potential vice presidential pick, directly rebutting reporting that the Florida Senator was not in the running.
What this episode reveals — for the umpteenth time in the history of the veepstakes — is that reporting on who will or won’t be the vice presidential pick is fraught with peril.
NOTE: Mitt Romney said late Tuesday that Marco Rubio is in fact being thoroughly vetted by his vice presidential selection team — contrary to previous report that said he was not.
The news that Florida Sen. Marco Rubio isn’t being seriously vetted by Mitt Romney’s vice presidential selection team is both surprising and enlightening.
Surprising because many people — the Fix included — had touted him early and often as a potential frontrunner to be Romney’s number two. (Heck, we compared him to Lionel Messi!)
Enlightening because it provides us a window into the sort of person that Romney (and Beth Myers, his head of vice presidential vetting) are looking for in a running mate.
That person? Someone whose credentials and readiness are beyond question. And, more than likely, someone who calls to mind “plain” more than “pizzazz”.
You can sum up Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s biggest impediment to being chosen vice president in two words: David Rivera.
Rivera is the very controversial Florida U.S. House member who remains under FBI and IRS investigation for a series of campaign finance irregularities that led Miami-Dade prosecutors to conclude recently that the Sunshine State Republican “essentially live[d] off” donations from campaign contributors for the better part of a decade. (Those prosecutors did not bring criminal charges against Rivera — though it’s worth reading the full 16-page memo on their findings here.)
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is trying a new tack when asked about the GOP vice presidential slot: the clam strategy.
During an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, Rubio said he will no longer engage in the veepstakes parlor game, in which he fields questions ad nauseam about whether he’s interested in the Republican vice presidential nomination.
Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Rob Portman (R-Ohio) have a leg up in the GOP veepstakes, the logic goes, because they come from extremely valuable swing states.
It’s certainly a fair argument; but it’s also over-sold.
If history has shown us anything, it’s that the home state of a potential vice presidential nominee shouldn’t be over-estimated as a factor in the process. In fact, it’s relatively rare that a presidential nominee picks a running mate from a swing state with an eye toward picking up that state’s electoral votes in November.
Over the last 40 years, only three vice presidential picks (out of 15) have come from legitimately competitive swing states, and the last one came in 1992 when Bill Clinton picked then-Sen.Al Gore and went on to carry Gore’s home state of Tennessee twice. (And Tennessee wasn’t really considered all that much of a swing state back then.)
Before that, the last two swing-state VP nominees were Rep. Geraldine Ferraro (D-N.Y.) in 1984 and Texan George H.W. Bush in 1980, when their states were more competitive than they are today.
South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, who has built a political brand for himself in recent years by searching out conservative GOP Senate candidates, is now sticking his nose in the GOP vice presidential search.
DeMint’s Senate Conservatives Fund is hosting a poll on its website asking supporters who they would like to see as the party’s No. 2 on the ticket this fall, using The Fix’s list of the 10 frontrunners in the so-called “veepstakes.”
And at least so far, the results aren’t close.
With 3,000 votes (and counting) in, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is the clear leader with more than 40 percent of the vote, and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) is second with 23 percent, according to results provided to The Fix.
In our Monday newspaper column, we speculated that former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney’s choices for vice president are actually far more limited than you might think.
While dozens of people are part of the great mentioning, the truth is that — if history is any guide — Romney’s only real option is to pick someone regarded by conservatives as one of them.
Mitt Romney landed one of the biggest fish left in the GOP endorsement pond on Wednesday in Jeb Bush , and the thinking among many in the GOP is that the party will begin publicly coalescing around the former Massachusetts governor soon.
But what would that look like? How will we know when that’s happening?
Below, we look at the endorsements Romney can get that would signal such a shift — followed by some endorsements that he probably can’t or won’t get (until the race is decided, at least).
What did we miss? The comments section awaits. (And be sure to check out the Post’s endorsement tracker for the latest on who’s backing who.)
ENDORSEMENTS ROMNEY CAN GET
* Rand Paul: This one makes too much sense. The Kentucky senator’s dad, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), of course is
still a candidate, so nothing’s happening while he’s still in the race. But Ron Paul and Romney have been friendly on the campaign trail for a long time, and now that the elder Paul’s campaign seems to have wound down in recent weeks, there are increasing rumors about Romney’s team cutting a deal with him.
What better way to cement the alliance than have Ron Paul drop out and Rand Paul endorse Romney? It would certainly help Romney with the tea party, but it might not sit well with Paul’s base.
The Justice Department blocks Texas’s Voter ID law; Rubio hits the campaign trail; Santorum urges an apology for Afghan massacre; and Mikulski prepares to set a record.
Make sure to sign up to get “Afternoon Fix” in your e-mail inbox every day by 5 (ish) p.m!
BuzzFeed broke the story Thursday morning — Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), an outspoken Catholic, was for a few short years of his life a Mormon.
Rubio was baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints at age eight, and his family was active in their local Nevada church community. His returned to the Catholic Church a few years later, by the time he was 12, and subsequently moved to Miami.*
While he mentions his Catholicism frequently, Rubio also attends a non-denominational church.
Despite his frequent protests, Rubio is on every vice-presidential short list. But would former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, a Mormon, be less willing to choose a running mate with Mormonism in his past? Probably not.
Political campaigns are getting started earlier than ever these days, so why should the vice presidential vetting process be any different?
All of the top early contenders for the Republican vice presidential nomination have seen their records put under a microscope in recent weeks.
National Public Radio has raised more questions about the biography of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who told a reporter two years ago a story of his family’s departure from Cuba that does not mesh with his current accounts.
The Post’s Manuel Roig-Franzia pointed out some discrepancies in Rubio’s version of his family history in a story last week. The senator has frequently stated that his parents came from Cuba in 1959 or after Fidel Castro took power. Castro took control of the island in January1959. Records show that his parents left in May 1956 — long before Castro took power and six months before Castro even invaded the island.
The news that Florida Sen. Marco Rubio had, at times over the years, wrongly recounted the timeline of his parents’ arrival in America is the first major test for the national Republican party’s fastest rising star.
The story, reported by the Post’s Manuel Roig-Franzia, makes clear that Rubio’s parents emigrated from Cuba before not after dictator Fidel Castro came to power.