By Tom Quiner
I received an e-mail from a friend who is concerned about the direction of our country.
At one point, she supported Marco Rubio in this campaign cycle, but has just switched her allegiance to Ted Cruz. She likes Cruz because he is a pro life Christian conservative.
For the record, so is Marco Rubio.
She opposes Trump, but now thinks Mr. Cruz is the best candidate. She asked what I thought. Here is how I replied:
Thanks for sharing your views on this critical, upcoming caucus.
I’m in total agreement on Trump. If he became president, I believe he would be a disaster, but I’m not too worried about it. His negatives are so high that I don’t think he could win the general election.
However, Cruz’s negatives are also high, so high in fact, that I don’t think he can win a general election, either. Republicans can only prevail if they win a significant majority of Independents who are the voters who determine presidents. There are way too many Independents who say they wouldn’t vote for Cruz, no matter what.
Cruz has a good, conservative record, but he has done more than his fair share of opportunistic flip-flopping, especially on the sensitive subject of immigration.
He has taken both sides of the birth right citizen debate.
He has spoken out of both sides of his mouth on green cards and path to citizenship.
He has flip flopped on less sexy issues such as trade authority and crop insurance.
Marco Rubio has been criticized for participating in a bi-partisan effort to solve our immigration problem. Rather than being criticized, he should be applauded for making the effort. Every single piece of important legislation in this country has required some level of bipartisanship (other than Obamacare).
Immigration can’t be decided by one party alone. In the vacuum created by gridlock, Obama stepped in and made things worse by executive fiat.
So here’s my take on Rubio’s participation in immigration reform: it needed to be done, but it began to go off the rails as liberals were more interested in establishing a path to citizenship first, and securing borders second. Even more, it became apparent that the president couldn’t be trusted to enforce the law as written (see Obamacare).
Rubio backed away, modifying his position in honorable ways. First, he acknowledges we need to secure the border first before anything else happens. Secondly, that the issue needs to be handled by a number of pieces of legislation that fix various components of the problem … as opposed to a complex piece of “comprehensive” legislation. He does not support a path to citizenship.
If Rubio gets the nomination, he WILL win the general election. Hillary’s negatives are a loser UNLESS she runs against Trump or Cruz.
That’s how I see it. I don’t know if I’m right, but like you, I’m praying hard for our country.
Thanks again for sharing your views.