Marco Rubio Should Be Democrats' Worst Nightmare

 

If Marco Rubio wins the Republican nomination, he’ll probably be the next President.

But wait! you say. Democrats have a demographic lock on the electoral college. Republicans are seen as a party of racist old white men. That’ll never work in a high-turnout election. It won’t be easy, but the Clinton Machine will roll to victory no matter who the opponent is.

If only.

64% of Americans are unhappy with the direction of the country, and Hillary offers voters the same policy buffet and ideological temperament as the man she hopes to succeed. All while trying to be the first Democrat to succeed a two-term president of the same party since Martin Van Buren. If she is going to summit this mountain, she’ll need to make voting for a Republican out of the question for most people who don’t watch Fox News regularly, AKA those who are OK with the US becoming a majority-minority country, think the minimum wage is too low, and use the Internet regularly.

Barack Obama did this to Mitt Romney in 2012. in his early summer ad blitz, he defined Mitt Romney as a rich guy who fires people for a living. Through early voting and on Election Day, Obama used his popular persona and an army of field soldiers to turn out the famous “Obama coalition” of young, nonwhite, infrequent voters. The way they had painted Mitt Romney made sure these low-propensity votes wouldn’t cast ballots for anyone else. Romney didn’t do himself any favors to combat the impression Obama’s people created of him — refusing to release his tax returns, the 47% video, etc. Most voters were unhappy with the direction of the country, and the Obama slogan was merely “Forward,” but Obama won anyway.

Fortunately for Hillary, almost all Republican candidates would happily play the culturally out-of-touch role she needs him or her to play. They almost universally oppose providing a path to citizenship for undocumented families, oppose raising the minimum wage, and have spent the primary debates staking one early-90s era position (on marijuana, crime, equality) after another.

But unfortunately for Hillary, and for the country, the “it” pick to win the nomination, and candidate I have predicted will be among the last two Republicans standing, has a record and personal qualities that shield him from Hilary’s attempts to define him on cultural issues, and the ability to deliver his message with humor and aplomb, even under difficult questioning in front of millions of people (what is commonly referred to as “candidate skill”) to make her look petty and small if she attacks him.

If nominated, Rubio will likely be remembered as the first pro-immigration Republican nominee. In 2013, he was the chief Republican sponsor and public face of a bill that would have provided a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. This bill passed the Senate. It’s true that he abandoned leadership on this issue once it became clear that the base wouldn’t budge from their nativism, and has gone back on his position somewhat in the primaries, emphasizing the “long and winding” nature of this path to citizenship. But the fact remains that this bill passed the Senate, and he made it happen. How many members of Congress have a record of legislative success anymore? In a general election campaign, this will overshadow his rhetorical shifts from the last two years and render any attempts to portray him as a Know-Nothing as not credible.

Rubio has the personal qualities to peel away some of the highly infrequent voters that were so important to Obama’s repeat victories. A lot of data lately has shown that “swing” voters comprise a tiny proportion of the electorate, and that voters rarely change their minds between presidential elections. I don’t disagree with these findings, but I think that this overestimates the extent to which many low-propensity voters identify politically because of deeply-held policy beliefs. I think these voters identify politically based on cultural perceptions — perceptions that will help Rubio in a contrast with Hillary, who has been in national politics since 1992.

The most obvious factor in a discussion of cultural resonance Rubio’s race. He would potentially be the first Hispanic president. It’s hard to evaluate how significant this is. I don’t necessarily think that, upon his nomination, all Hispanic Democrats will suddenly renounce their values on health care, labor unions and other core liberal issues just because they want to see someone else with brown skin and Spanish-speaking ancestry in the White House.

At the same time, having someone of your shared cultural or ethnic identity can represent a victory for that community in terms of its place in American society. John Kennedy’s ascension to the White House was meaningful for Irish and Catholics; Barack Obama’s victory held special meaning for African Americans who had fought for civil rights. I’ve heard some Mexican Americans say that Rubio’s Cuban ancestry will not help him with Mexican American voters; I’ve heard other Mexican Americans say that this matters less than the possibility of having someone whose name is “Marco Rubio” in the Oval Office.

But Rubio won’t win on his ethnicity; his message will appeal to low-propensity voters too. Most Republicans’ core messages have something to do with how terrible everything is in the country right now because of Barack Obama, but voters don’t want to believe a message based entirely on negativity. Rubio takes a step beyond criticizing Obama to talk about the need for leadership from a new generation in the 21st century. It’s a message that even a liberal like me tends to agree with at a high level — that’s why it’s dangerous. Voters who aren’t steeped in ideology will find it appealing. I can foresee friends of mine who pay only causal attention to politics coming up to me in the fall and being like, “so what about this Rubio guy? He’s not so bad, is he?"

Finally, Hillary will have a hard time drawing sharp contrasts with Rubio. He doesn’t rattle, and you can’t get under his skin. He’s really good at taking tough questions and pivoting to his personal story with seriousness and good humor at the same time. I laughed out loud in the same debate when the moderator questioned him on why he went through personal financial problems despite his book deal. His response: a huge grin, and a plug: “It’s available paperback, if you’re interested in buying my book.” Given that Hillary is already seen as calculating and opportunistic, I don’t see attacks on Rubio going well for her. Every time she or her husband tried to get harsh with Barack Obama in 2008, it blew up in their faces. Meanwhile, Hillary hasn’t usually been able to take public criticism with a smile. This contrast will not look good one-on-one with Rubio.

Democrats do have an advantage in demographics, policy, and messaging in presidential elections. Marco Rubio's profile, record, and political skills largely negate these advantages and position him to co-opt some of the voters Democrats are counting on. Hillary’s attempts to disqualify him will likely backfire. If’s he’s the nominee, the odds of a third straight Democratic term, and a continuation of Obama Administration policies, will be slim. Republicans will own every level of government.

Go, Ted, Go!