Image 01 Image 03

Marco Rubio Eats Jeb Bush’s Lunch

Marco Rubio Eats Jeb Bush’s Lunch

“He has got such great vision.”

Jeb Bush may be a decent man, but when it comes to fundraising, conservative donors are putting their eggs in another candidate’s basket.

Matea Gold and Sean Sullivan of the Washington Post:

With some donors doubting Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio seizes an opening

Marco Rubio is benefiting from pockets of discontent in Jeb Bush’s sprawling money network, winning over donors who believe the 44-year-old freshman senator from Florida offers a more compelling persona and sharper generational contrast against Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Rubio is working to seize the moment by making an all-out push to lock down financial backers in the coming month, hopscotching the country in a nonstop series of fundraisers that are limiting his presence on the campaign trail.

While he faces stiff competition in the money race from Bush and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, in particular, Rubio’s in-person courting sessions are starting to pay off. Longtime Bush loyalists and other big-money players on the right have emerged from the meetings raving about his abilities, according to people familiar with private gatherings he has had across the country.

“After meeting Marco and listening to him — he is almost astounding, he is so articulate and he has got such great vision,” said Anthony Gioia, a top GOP fundraiser in Buffalo. Gioia raised more than $500,000 for George W. Bush and then served as his ambassador to Malta, but he is supporting Rubio this time. “I hate to overuse the word ‘transformational,’ but I really feel he is,” Gioia said.

The only people who are excited about the 2016 candidacy of Jeb Bush are (mostly liberal) talking heads on cable news. Let’s hope their enthusiasm continues:

As Kurt Schlichter noted in a column for Townhall back in December:

Who on earth who isn’t a Bush wants Jeb to run for president, much less actually be president?

On a final note, can you guess who’s leading the Republican field against Hillary Clinton?

Jennifer Agiesta of CNN:

Poll: New speed bumps for Clinton

More people have an unfavorable view of Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton now than at any time since 2001, according to a new CNN/ORC poll on the 2016 race.

While Clinton remains strikingly dominant in the Democratic field, the poll shows that her numbers have dropped significantly across several key indicators since she launched her campaign in April…

In head-to-head match-ups against top Republicans, her margin is tighter than it has been at any point in CNN/ORC’s polling on the contest.

On the Republican side, though, no candidate has successfully broken out of the pack.

The group of seven that have come to dominate most polling on the race hold the top of the charts in this poll, Sen. Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush leading the pack with Mike Huckabee, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Sen. Ted Cruz, Ben Carson and Sen. Rand Paul all in the hunt.

Is everyone looking forward to the GOP primary debates as much as I am?


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


PLEASE!!!! No more Bush! No more Professional Politicians!

Not to slam Marco, but a tree sloth could eat Jeb Bush’s lunch (although Jeb certainly does not look like he has missed too many lunches).

healthguyfsu | June 4, 2015 at 11:16 am

This site is amusing with its back and forth from different writers for their favorite candidates.

I am so pleased to see that the Repubs have such a good class of candidates.

I have watched both of these men answer questions, and find them both impressive. Further, their plans for the country are reasonably calculated to lead us to a happier, more prosperous and stronger future.

My ONLY objection to Jeb Bush is that we have already had two members of his family as President during my lifetime, and I distrust political dynasties. This is the same objection I have to Mrs. Clinton as a candidate, although she has the added disadvantage of seeming to me to be likely to continue too many of the failed policies of the Obama administration.

Marco has ‘Got It’!! Solid conservative muscles and very active, sharp brain. Also, principled, nimble, experienced, young, wonderful family and ‘story’ and could make Hillary look Old-Tired-Shrill-Silly-Loaded Down-Hard Left and waaaaay outta her League. He can spank her plump fanny and remain a gentleman doing it.

    He can spank her plump fanny…

    I can’t imagine where this stereotype of Republicans as sexist pigs comes from…

      Ragspierre in reply to Amy in FL. | June 4, 2015 at 2:56 pm

      I can’t imagine you seriously writing that. Can’t a conservative spank the plump butt of a Collectivist man OR a woman?

        Meh. I thought it was ugly when Democrats were saying that sort of thing (and worse, of course) about Sarah Palin; it’s not really any less ugly just because it’s being directed at Hillary Clinton. YMMV.

          JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Amy in FL. | June 4, 2015 at 4:53 pm

          It was ugly when it was said about Sarah because she’s pretty. It’s fine when it’s said about Hillary because she’s ugly. She’s not ugly because she’s older. She’s ugly INSIDE – downright evil, in fact.


      NeoConScum in reply to Amy in FL. | June 4, 2015 at 5:24 pm

      GAWD…!! I hate, loathe and despise PC-Police, Diversity Police and (GASP!!)Gender Police vapidity and the strangle hold they now have on our culture. Speaking the blunt, unvarnished, insensitive facts just can’t be done. So, in that spirit I’d like to correct my ‘ooopsie’ that got poor Amy’s nose in a disappr5oving wrinkle: “..spank her FAT, LYING AZZ and remain a gentleman doing it.” There, this 35-year neoconservative who was an active anti-Vietnam liberal “mugged by reality”.

      Refugee From the Peoples Republic of Calif and happy
      transplant to lovely Winter Park, Fl.

        God Bless you and all like you!

        The Facists, Socialists, and all those collective types want to stifle anyone who doesn’t agree with their pronouncements and dictates. They put down everyone they can and in the most harsh manner. Yet, when one of us decries the tactics and actions of one of them, it’s “hate speech!” In an a word, “f’em” all, including the short, ugly, and hateful too!

        JackRussellTerrierist in reply to NeoConScum. | June 4, 2015 at 5:44 pm

        Post Of The Week!!!!!

        Go, Scum! You rock!! 🙂

Marco has always been a compelling candidate. If not for his immigration SNAFU, we might be having a Rubio coronation. Who am I kidding? We only have coronations when incumbents run.

As for Marco Rubio’s integrity, “Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice….

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to McAllister. | June 4, 2015 at 4:57 pm

    I agree. He’s not trustworthy. There’s something a little slimy – as in TOO polished – about him. I get bad vibes from the dude.

“After meeting Marco and listening to him — he is almost astounding, he is so articulate and he has got such great vision. […] I hate to overuse the word ‘transformational,’ but I really feel he is”

This is boilerplate Obama-worship language straight from 2008.

What next, tingles up his leg?

Don’t get me wrong, I supported Rubio in his Senate campaign, and although I wouldn’t vote for him in the primary, I would vote for him against any Dem should he become the GOP candidate. But the “astounding… articulate… great vision… transformational! thing, the feel the feelz! thing, is soooooo 2008.

“Please, who’s going to be the GOP’s sacrificial lamb this time, going up against the strongest candidate the Dems have every had?”

At least that’s the impression the LSM has been promoting for months now.

Somehow the LSM couldn’t find their collective ass if they tried, without a cheat sheet to guide them. Of course, Hillary has got Sid Vicious and his equally vicious son, who didn’t fall far from his poppy.

So, maybe even far in advance, the voter fraud fix is in. Can anyone spell Motor Voter?

“Is everyone looking forward to the GOP primary debates as much as I am?”


1) We’re still going to have more than ten candidates, including Christie, Graham, Bush, Huckabee, Pataki, Santorum, Paul, and so on. These guys will each get equal time with the serious candidates we’re hoping to hear good things from. Several will have reached the desperation point of violently attacking our real frontrunners by then.

2) We’re still going to have moderators from the other side who will have more speaking time than *any* one of our candidates and who will be doing their best to make our top candidates look bad in public and nudge them to attack each other. (i.e. to “generate sound bites”)

3) Every issue will be chosen by liberal commentators and be framed from the liberal narrative and our guys will get a tiny amount of time to counter that narrative and present their position. I have no need to know the slightly different nuances of Walker, Cruz, and Rubio when it comes to gay marriage, transsexual rights, campus rape, and the like. If they ever get a question on the 2nd amendment it will be, “How will you as President do more to stem the scourge of gun violence?” If we ever get a question on the Constitution it will be, “Do you agree that big evil corporations have civil rights and poor hispanic kids don’t?” And on and on.

Now, if we could get Walker, Jindal, Cruz, Rubio, Fiorina, and Carlson at a roundtable with George Will, Charles Krauthammer, and Thomas Sowell discussing conservative solutions to America’s problems together… that I would desperately love to see.

Instead we’re going to get the “Isn’t that other candidate an evil moron?” circus sideshow again.

Heck. This is the Internet age. Why are they physically meeting and having an MSM moderator at all? Each candidate should release a series of You-tube videos discussing the issues that are important to him. Then release video responses interesting points made by other candidates. The real world doesn’t have moderators, time limits, and canned drama.

    clintack in reply to clintack. | June 4, 2015 at 6:40 pm

    I forgot: “If you had it to do all over again, would you invade Iraq in 2003 and create ISIS?”

    Try unpacking all the stupid in that one in 180 seconds without saying anything that can be twisted into a soundbite and, Go!

      NeoConScum in reply to clintack. | June 4, 2015 at 8:14 pm

      Answer: “BWHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaa..!! You insufferable MSM-Network Lapdog Twit: The horrific events in Iraq in recent times are a direct result of the Obama policies of Retreat, Abandonment and Timidity. ISIS didn’t exist before the peaceful, stabilized, growing republic of Iraq was very quickly left on its own without the stabilizing American presence following its huge and hard fought Victory. That was done by this administration. Not the previous one which liberated it and introduced democracy where there had been mass butchery. Millions of purple Fingers, anyone?”

But not Charles Schumers’.

Do we want a President who can toss off snarky sound bites, or one who can actually run the government?

Sorry, but we’ve had two Senators in the White House in my lifetime, and they were not good at it. Give me a fellow with a record of success running a large operation like a state or a big company or an army. At least he won’t be dependent on his on-the-job trainers.

As a good Republican conservative, of course I will vote for our nominee because I respect the process. But I won’t vote for any inexperienced candidate in the primary.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to Estragon. | June 5, 2015 at 11:24 am

    Yes, we need governors only, like Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, George W Bush, etc. They perform so much better.

    This ‘senators can’t be good presidents’ thing is bullshit, and when it comes from a Republican establishment supporter, it’s just a clumsy rhetorical way to undermine hated conservative senators like Rubio, Cruz, Paul, et al, in favor of the lead balloon called Jeb Bush.

      Hey, you forgot to mention those other semi-great (Really? Are you kidding me?) presidents: Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and FDR! Must be something about governors from states starting with “New!”

      Another factoid is that the three you mentioned were either “progressives” or a compassionate conservative.

      Actually, the point is to always avoid Progressive (Socialists in mufti! Aka: Communists!) candidates, or those who are wobbly on important issues.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to Doug Wright Old Grouchy. | June 5, 2015 at 1:36 pm

        ‘Compassionate Conservatism’ was a purpsefully designed euphemism for progressivism, a term that a GOP RINO knows to avoid.

        Besides Reagan, you have to go back to FDR to find another governor/president, so here is Estrogen basically lying to protect Jeb Bush again.

        He and the GOP think people are stupid.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Henry Hawkins. | June 5, 2015 at 2:48 pm

      That’s right. You tell ’em, Henry. Senator Obama is your proof!

Eastwood Ravine | June 5, 2015 at 11:06 pm

Rubio is far from being a perfect candidate, but he is still miles better than electing another Clinton or Bush into the White House. Would I vote for him. Yeah… but they are vastly more preferable candidates for conservatives to rally around and support for 2016.