Is Rubio really the most electable candidate?

· February 5, 2016  
    Font Size A A A
Republican presidential candidate, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla. speaks during a town hall meeting at the Saint Anselm Institute of Politics in Manchester, N.H., Thursday Feb. 4, 2016. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

It is a mantra that has been repeated so many times it has become de facto reality in the minds of those who watch Marco Rubio’s Super PAC, aka Fox News.  “Marco Rubio is the most electable candidate and we absolutely must defeat Hillary.  He’s the one!,” we are told incessantly by the smart “conservatives.”

Asserting one candidate is more electable than another is always a fool’s errand.  After all, this frantic concern of electability is what got us the nominations of Bob Dole, John McCain, and Mitt Romney.  Moreover, with the most radical and unappealing pair of Democrat candidates in modern history, it’s hard to claim that only the “most electable” Republican is capable of defeating them, even with 2016’s transformed demographics.

However, let’s tackle this particular truism – that Marco Rubio is the paragon of electability.  Rubio needs to come clean with the primary voters and answer the following vital question: how is he the most electable candidate if he will likely take the most potent weapon against the Democrats – the issue of immigration – off the table during the general election?

For far too long the electoral debate over immigration was centered around the false choice of agreeing with the Democrats on amnesty or being completely silent on the issue.  Conservatives have not yet had a candidate who actually went on offense and used the issue to bludgeon the Democrats and shout the truth about our infringed sovereignty from the rooftops every day of the campaign.  Both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are so unhinged on this issue they are attempting to outflank Obama in their support of illegal alien supremacy.

We need a candidate who will slam the eventual Democratic nominee daily on sanctuary cities, Islamic refugees, illegal immigration-related fiscal costs, public safety, and reduced wages.  Just yesterday a border patrol agent testified before the House Judiciary Committee on how they are instructed to turn a blind eye to those invading our border.

This issue alone completely demolishes their pseudo populist appeal of being for the little guy.  Nothing embodies government by and for the well-connected to the detriment of ordinary Americans more than the elitist open borders/amnesty agenda.  Illegal immigration and endless immigration from the third world has a devastating effect on American workers, taxpayers, healthcare, education, and welfare –enriching big corporations and lobbyists who want to use lawlessness to artificially drive down wages.

Perception is reality in politics, and whether you believe Donald Trump will actually be tough on immigration or not, it is quite evident that voters perceive him as the man who is against Islamic immigration, illegal immigration, birthright citizenship, and a border without a wall.  The D.C. intelligentsia would have you believe that these are toxic views that only appeal to the extreme right and the “racists.”  Yet, according to the Iowa entrance polls, Donald Trump’s largest base of support came from self-described moderates.

Again, whether you are supportive of Trump or not, believe he is sincere or not, is immaterial.  The point is the man who is most associated with strong support for national sovereignty is doing the best among moderates.

Which brings me back to Rubio.  Even if we can trust him not to flip back to amnesty on demand the minute he wins the primary, there is a broader problem with running him in the general election.  He will take the issue off the table and not actively pursue the Democrats on the broader immigration issue.  And if he miraculously attempted to do just that, he’d have a huge glass jaw problem, as Chuck Schumer would be trotted out every day to remind voters where Rubio stood.

Sure, Rubio will feign outrage and concern over national sovereignty when directly questioned about it during a debate in front of a conservative audience.  But the fact that he has been reluctant to bring up the issue on his own should raise a red flag about his ability to passionately litigate the case against the open borders carter later this year.  We need our nominee to run some of the ads Trump has been airing or Cruz’s epic TV spot, “Invasion,” depicting journalists and bankers flooding the border and driving down wages – a superlative general election attack on Democrats.

In 2012, we made a colossal mistake nominating the one man who invented Obamacare before Obama did, thereby taking the most important issue of the election off the table.  Now that the most consequential and powerful issue of our time is immigration, are we prepared to nominate someone who will take that issue off the table as well?

Want to keep up with what’s going on in Washington without the liberal media slant, establishment spin, and politician-ese?

Sign up to get CRTV’s Capitol Hill Brief in your inbox every evening! It’s free!

* indicates required

Author: Daniel Horowitz

Daniel Horowitz is a senior editor of Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @RMConservative.