I don’t see much in the way of major flaws with Rubio. He’s young, handsome, intelligent, understands the issues, has experience, comes from a Hispanic background, and comes from a critical swing state.
With every other major Republican candidate, I can identify at least one major flaw. Rubio seems like a solid all-around choice. What am I missing that discounts him as a legitimate threat?
His Cuba stance will now be a net liability, not an asset.
Also, this heap of ridiculous horsepuckey won’t soon be forgotten.
There is controversy about the last two there.
Considering that the China emissions deal will depend a lot on what is done in congress, not understanding this issue is really a very bad thing.
And I’m also an Hispanic and I do agree with what Peremensoe said.
Amnesty
And anyway, most Hispanics are not white Cuban-descendants.
Still, he’s not as much of an ass as another white Cuban-descendant who actually seems to believe he’s presidential.
“He’s not as bad as Ted Cruz” is very, VERY faint praise.
He’s done nothing but pander to conservatives, exposing his dishonesty and hypocrisy. He’s a GOP token Hispanic and he’d be unknown otherwise. At this point I doubt he could even win a primary in Florida.
How was his moderate stance on immigration reform pandering?
It was, in fact, the exact opposite. A principled stand on an issue near to his heart.
Regarding Cuba, just because a second-term Democratic president wants to reset relations all of a sudden means Americans turn pro-Cuban? Just like we all turned pro-Russia in Obama’s first term?
You’ll have to do better people…
He does not have a moderate stance on immigration reform. Not taking the most extreme conservative view doesn’t make him a moderate. You’ll have to do better at pointing out any positive characteristic of Rubio.
The polling indicates this was a very solid political move by Obama (in addition to being the right thing to do, IMO) – big majorities support normalizing relations with Cuba, and even more so among Hispanics and in Florida.
Rubio is a serious contender for 2016, but he’ll probably fall short. He’s more of a VP contender or a future President. As young as he is, I’d really like to see him be the next governor of Florida, THEN run for President.
So all of a sudden one term as a US senator is enough experience to be president? Or only as long as your name isn’t Barack Obama? Just trying to discern a consistent principle here.
I’m also interested in hearing a response to this. OP, come back.
As a Miami boy, may I weigh in for a moment on why Marco Rubio isn’t a meaningful contender in 2016?
Because he’s a fucking clod. And everyone knows it.
Rubio is nowhere near ready to be President and it would be foolish to nominate him given the far more qualified choices.
Even three term Senators shouldn’t be President unless they have foreign policy experience or have been major leaders in getting things done, preferably outside of official leadership. Joe Biden would qualify even if he wasn’t VP. So would John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Ron Wyden. That’s my opinion, of course, but one thing that has struck be about the last two administrations has been a high level of government failures. We need someone with a proven record of competence, or at least courage to fight the bureaucry and/or work with the other side to get things done. The federal bureaucracy is so unaccountable, so far removed from the people these days, that it may take both parties being united to rein it in and get it serving the public rather than itself.
…
By which you mean Bobby Jindal? 
Yes, but remember, the Republicans need to nominate someone, too.
Yeah, that last post left me pretty speechless, too.