Marco Rubio: Winner

Marco Rubio showed real grace and kindness in the face of a very hostile crowd.

I cannot tip my hat enough for Marco Rubio. The CNN townhall on guns was going to be a nightmare for any conservative. The reality is that the kids and parents who do not favor gun control are not going to be there by and large. Nobody wants to be the skunk in the living room and it was clear going into this that being opposed to a gun grab would not get you praised.

Rubio went anyway. He showed he was willing to compromise. While I disagree on raising the age for long barrel guns to 21 and restricting magazine size, he was for it and showed himself willing to compromise. But he also showed himself unwilling to be bullied by a mob of varying hostility. He was gracious and kind throughout, even when it wasn't reciprocated.

This is how Americans used to expect all their political leaders to behave. It is how our political leaders should behave.

Marco Rubio should be commended. He won the night with a graceful performance in a setting most of his Republican colleagues would avoid like the plague.

This is one reason Marco Rubio got my primary vote. BUT and could I BOLD that BUT I would. 2016 called for “something different”. Frankly the “usual Republican” would have been chewed up and spit out a la Mitt Romney and HRC would be #45. That would be intolerable to me personally and I believe it would have done further damage to our republic, especially now seeing the depths to which “they” stooped and will stoop. I think EE would have been fine with that. DJT was not my primary vote. He wasn’t my second, third, fourth, fifth choice.... But American politics - perhaps world politics - needed a real Reset, a Disruptor, to expose the left, the establishment elites, and bias/corruption in our institutions including the media. It’s not pretty and but I’ve come to understand that it was more necessary than even I knew. I enjoy reading EE and regularly visited Red State. In every piece about Trump, I also remember that EE was a never-Trumper. I think some part of him still is. I get the objections. I have them too. But HRC #45 was a deal-breaker for me. In the end, it was a binary choice.

There was no binary choice for president in 2016. That is just an excuse people like yourself use to try and make those of us who didn't vote for either Trump or Hillary, feel guilty. I chose to vote for neither and your guilt trip wont' work. I am always and forever #NeverTrump. Every day Trump makes it more clear that I was right not to vote for him.

I also did not vote for either. My write in vote allowed me to walk out of the voting booth feeling good about taking a stand and very, very sad about the awful choice I had. I left the republican party last year after many years. I am and always will be Never Trump. He is an ugly, hateful, incompetent, dishonest man.

In response to Lahli, napleslover and JaneZ: I do think another candidate could have beaten Hillary and that was Ted Cruz and a couple others. The problem with the entire 2016 primary debacle was lack of vetting. What we did get was a type of Oprah-esque discussion. There were no debates! And, not one candidate articulated actual conservatism (because some on stage were not conservative). If you don't hear it is it there? I don't feel guilty for placing my vote for Trump because it was either him or Hillary.

I was NeverTrump and never voted for him (Cruz in primary and write-in on ballot). BUT, I can acknowledge when he does something right, and while I do have many concern, many things have gone right during his 1st year.


Rubio has come out against teachers being armed. I don't know if that extends to no guns on the grounds. Gun free zones have been a major area fir the mass shootings. How many can be killed if the response time is as much as seven minutes? Teachers would have to choose to carry after training.


Sorry, once the nominations were finished either Hillary or Donald J. Trump were going to be president. That was set in stone as much as anything in this universe can be. And by not choosing you still have made a choice. Which I think you understand considering how sensitive to the topic you appear to be. If you feel guilty that's not our fault but your own.


@Jack_Krevin I agree that not voting for Hillary or Trump is a choice. It was a choice to tell both candidates and both parties than neither of these people were acceptable. Yes, that was a protest vote because we all knew by the time the election got here that one of them was going to be President. Sitting at home was worthless because it puts you in the same category with people that just didn't care. However, it was a choice to make our voice heard in the rejection of both.

I understand that sentiment, but all data indicators point to it being wrong. What in Hillary makes you think she could chew up and spit out anyone, even Mitt Romney? Obama did it to Romney, after Romney failed to stay on the offensive like he did in the first debate. However, Hillary is not Obama in terms of political skill. There is a reason a largely unknown, inexperienced Marxist was able to defeat the massive Clinton political machine. She is a terrible candidate and always has been. Had any decent candidate (decent in terms of political skill, not policy), like Joe Biden, ran, they would have beaten her like a rented mule. She was so bad, almost anyone the GOP ran could have beaten her. Like likely will not be true in the future because most candidates that are as bad as Hillary would never get in a position to be a major party nominee. Without Bill, Hillary never would have sniffed a Presidential nomination. Considering the relative closeness that Romney ran to Obama, the odds are that he would have beaten Hillary handily. (For the record, I wouldn't have voted for a Romney or Jeb Bush because they aren't going to change anything in D.C., which we desperately need. It doesn't mean that they wouldn't have won.) I like Rubio, but he is more like Mitt Romney than he is Ted Cruz. I wish he were the guy the ran as a Tea Party candidate in 2010 against Charlie Crist, but he is not. He is still one of the 12 most conservative Senators, but he isn't a guy that is going to shake up the system. Trump isn't either. Trump shakes up the surface and puts a bright coat of paint on it, but the skeleton is the same. Trump spouts off and attacks the media, but he isn't turning the system on its head. He is just playing his game. That doesn't mean he isn't going to have some good policy, he has. It does mean that when his time is over, either in 3 years or 7 years, the system is still going to be the same as before. I don't know that anyone could. Cruz was the best possibility for that in 2016. Maybe Scott Walker, if he was Gov. Walker and not the Presidential candidate that we saw. Even those guys I think would have failed to overturn the system.


In hind sight two or three of the other candidates might have beaten Hillary. In the Republican primary the other candidates killed each other off. Walker, Perry, Cruz and Trump were a block fighting over the same people. Rubio was a little more establishment Kasuch Bush, Christy and Graham were pure establishment... The system will not change until we get rid of the establishment and or RINOs. This years elections could be our last hope. If Trump dug his heels in, and the 60 vote remained,we could have no government for two more years.

I have to disagree. Every vote for someone other than Trump was a vote that could have helped in getting Hillary elected. If Hillary was elected President that would have been the end of our Country as we know it. We could not have withstood another four years of an extreme liberal especially one like Obama or Hillary. I was very much anti Trump. I even devoted a page on my WEB site showing why Trump should not be the GOP nominee, but when it came down to Trump or Hillary voting for him was a no-brainer. Trump still has his liberal tendencies, but overall he has done a good job. We needed a fighter and at least he is that.

Then you should be happy to live with the consequences of that action. But you can't betray your side, revel in your supposed moral superiority then act all heartbroken when you get called out on it. Nevertrumpers made their choice and as far as I am concerned they can wear that around their necks till doomsday.

As for the 2016 election, I find your appraisal to be long on wishful thinking just like last time with little supporting evidence to back up your supposition. Needlessly to say I am far from convinced "almost any" Republican could beat her and I have high doubts Cruz would be the man who could. Due to, among other things, his rather limited appeal of deeply conservative/Evangelical, his weakness in general elections as opposed to lower turn-out Caucuses, as well Hillary having a complicit media every bit if not more so than Trump enjoyed.


I also think you are seriously under estimating Bernie Sanders who seemed to generate an almost Obama like following with Millennials. In contrast Joe Biden would just be "generic democrat" vs Hillary's First Woman presidency which coupled with her snapping up all the superdelegates which would likely cause his campaign to sputter out.

But can we trust every teacher? I had one once in high school who some kids made fun of behind his back and on at least one occasion that I recall, to his face. Not all kids participated, but everyone laughed with those who did. Now consider this scenario: His wife leaves him or he suffers some other life altering setback, and he decides he doesn't want to live anymore. Then he remembers all the disrespect he suffered at the hands of those (we) kids. So one morning, along with the gun that he is completely authorized to carry on campus, he brings a silencer, takes a position between his students and the door and tries to send each and every one of them to that big classroom in the sky . . . .

I don't believe the ordinary citizen should be able to buy any weapon that is not authorized and made available for our military and police personnel to use.