Here are two items which should be considered in light of the National Review symposium on whether Donald Trump is a “true conservative”:
“It is now axiomatic that Marco Rubio is the “establishment” favorite in the 2016 Republican primaries, due for a collision with a conservative alternative such as Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, or Ben Carson. But if Rubio really represents the new GOP “establishment,” then the fight is over and the conservatives won. Despite infuriating many grassroots conservatives by pushing the failed Gang of Eight immigration-reform bill and advocating a path to legalization, Rubio has an indisputably conservative record as a senator. …
Across the board, Rubio’s stances, policy proposals, and rhetoric fall squarely within the bounds of traditional conservatism. …
He’s got the guts for entitlement reform, too. He wants to raise the retirement age for those under 55, change the benefit calculation for wealthy seniors who do not rely on Social Security, and eliminate the Social Security payroll tax after retirement age to encourage older Americans to stay in the workforce. He wants to open federal workers’ Thrift Savings Program to all Americans. Rubio opposes raising the minimum wage, contending it would only encourage employers to search for new technological solutions to replace American workers …
While conservatives disagree on how much military interventionism is needed in a dangerous world, Rubio’s foreign-policy stances are of a piece with the party’s recent history.”
Well, that’s reassuring.
Marco Rubio is a “true conservative” because he opposes raising the minimum wage, supports antagonizing Russia, and has “got the guts” to raise the retirement age for the working elderly. Oh, but what about the Gang of 8 amnesty? Rubio was one of Obama’s best-informed critics foreign policy critics on Ukraine.
“Rubio’s humble roots and modest circumstances may be his most powerful defense against Clinton. As the son of a bartender and hotel maid, Rubio, who has lived check to check, speaks from an economic position that is much more typical than Clinton’s. …
Unlike Trump, Rubio is vaccinated against the class-warfare virus that Democrats routinely deploy to infect and kill Republican presidential nominees. In fact, it would be hilarious for Hillary to paint Rubio as a coal-hearted plutocrat. Her $25 million household income for 2014 puts her in the top 0.1 percent of tax filers. Equally comical is the fact that some on the right denounce Rubio as the GOP establishment’s Plan B, now that Jeb Bush has fizzled. One Miami-based conservative activist dismisses Rubio as “white Republican Obama.” …
How soon we forget: Marco Rubio was a tea-party pinup in 2010 and was endorsed by the devoutly anti-establishment Club for Growth …
Rubio co-sponsored, with Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.), the Hezbollah International Financing Prevention Act of 2015. This new law limits the Iranian-backed terrorist group’s access to global financial markets and punishes banks that serve this band of anti-American, anti-Israeli killers. These radical Islamist murderers denounced Rubio’s law as “a new crime by American institutions against our people and nation.” …
On another key issue, Rubio’s tax plan cuts personal-income-tax rates, although the top bracket should be lower than 35 percent. If elected, Rubio should cut rates as deeply as possible and abandon his proposal for costly per-child tax credits and other pro-family social engineering. …
Rubio can and should make these modest improvements to his platform. He is a conservative leader on virtually everything else.”
Unfortunately, no candidate is perfect. Marco’s support for “sugar subsidies is inexcusable.” The sooner he jettisons this “destructive statist boondoogle, the better.”
Asked about National Review‘s condemnation of Donald Trump, Rubio had this to say:
“What he’s running as is someone who’s a populist, someone who’s upset at the direction of this country — as am I, as are millions of Americans,” Rubio continued. “But we also have to know what we’re going to do about it. So I would just say that one of the reasons I feel so strongly about my candidacy, is I offer the Republican party in this campaign someone who offers consistent conservatism — real conservatism — but also the ability to beat Hillary Clinton.”
Consistent conservatism … it is about amnesty for illegal aliens and open borders, globalist free-trade agreements, tax cuts for the wealthy, deregulation, busting unions and taking on sacred cows like Social Security. It is also about standing firm, defending, and restoring Ukraine’s sovereignty against Putin’s aggression.
Vote for the “real conservative” in this race, not the populist!
Note: Richard Spencer reacts to the National Review symposium with glee:
I don't think we should underestimate what just happened. We've just witnessed the end of "conservatism." #Trump2016
— Richard B. Spencer (@RichardBSpencer) January 22, 2016