Republicans Pay Attention, Go Constitutional-Nationalist with Trump

The Weekly Standard thought that they had published a perfect hit piece going after Marco Rubio for taking on more of President Trump's talking points and policy goals.

On the contrary, Rubio is getting in line with the political and moral proposals that will Make America Great Again and Keep America Great!

Rubio Goes Nationalist

Meet the new Marco . . .

In June 2016, Marco Rubio changed his mind and announced that he would not be retiring from the Senate as he had planned. A major reason he was seeking a second term, Rubio said, was to help the Senate exercise what “could end up being its most important [role] in the years to come: the constitutional power to act as a check and balance on the excesses of a president”—whether that would be President Clinton or President Trump.

Yes indeed. If Rubio had not run for re-election, a Democrat would have very likely scooped up the US Senate seat, and we would be in an even worse position today than we are now. Can anyone imagine the United States Senate reduced to another 50-50 split just like in 2001?

Let's not forget that there are two waffly RINOs who have derailed crucial nominations and confirmations in the past.

After rattling off his concerns about Hillary Clinton, Rubio said: “The prospect of a Trump presidency is also worrisome to me. It is no secret that I have significant disagreements with Donald Trump. His positions on many key issues are still unknown. And some of his statements, especially about women and minorities, I find not just offensive but unacceptable. If he is elected, we will need senators willing to encourage him in the right direction, and if necessary, stand up to him. I’ve proven a willingness to do both.”

Rubio, like many politicos, needed to distance himself from President Trump for whatever reason. Not sure what to make of that, but at least Rubio won the seat and has voted to confirm President Trump's excellent nominees to the Supreme Court and other agencies.

Rubio then defeated a populist, Trumpian primary challenger that August by 54 percentage points. He went on to win by 8 points in the general election that November, while Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in Florida by 1 point. Other conservative GOP senators outperformed Trump in the key battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. And Trump’s approval rating today is mired in the 40s despite a roaring economy. Yet the lesson of 2016 for many Republicans is that they need to be more like Trump.

What's happening much of the time is that legislative candidates, whether state or federal, will do better when they focus on serving, doing the best for their states and their constituents. That's what matters the most.

And yes, Republicans need to be more like Trump, in that they must embrace his pro-American, pro-worker, anti-globalist policies. They need to listen to the voters, not the donors. What is the problem with any of this?

One of those Republicans appears to be Marco Rubio. The Florida senator fully backs Trump’s trade war with China. “The most catastrophic thing that could happen is not a trade war, but that we lose one, or that we back down from one,” Rubio tells me in an interview.

Exactly. The tariff schemes forced on the United States need to go away, or the United States should fight back to protect our industries and workers. These are new concepts to me, in the sense that I had always believed that tariffs are bad, but doing nothing has not worked for us.

Earlier this summer, Rubio delivered a speech in Washington calling for a “new nationalism” in which he decried an “economic elitism that has replaced a commitment to the dignity of work with a blind faith in financial markets and that views America simply as an economy instead of a nation.”

That statement is one of the best I have heard, and coming out of the mouth of a former Presidential competitor, that is even better news. Indeed, a country is more than an economy. This should not be a noteworthy revelation. Even Milton Friedman declared that economic freedom is a necessary but not sufficient condition for freedom.

A free, constitutional republic is more than a corporate interest.

“I saw the devastating impact of this kind of thinking firsthand during my campaign for president,” Rubio told the Faith and Freedom Conference. “I saw it in the factory towns hollowed out by the companies who shipped those jobs overseas to turn a bigger profit—and where the dignity of work has been replaced by food stamps and disability checks and opioids.” You just might say that Rubio painted a picture of “American carnage,” to borrow a phrase from the Trump inaugural address.

Yes, and I am on the Trump train with Marco Rubio. Good for him. Of course, the Weekly Standard will go to every length possible to denounce anyone gets off the Bill Kristol-backed globalist plantation.

Whereas big tech companies were once featured in his speeches as examples of American innovation, Rubio now warns of a lack of corporate morality and patriotism: “When right and wrong is based entirely and solely on profitability, then there is nothing immoral about shipping jobs overseas or surrendering key American technology and innovation to China.” He singled out Google for refusing to work with the Department of Defense but contemplating a return to China.

Rubio had every right to slam Google for blowing off President Trump's request. Shame on them. I can't wait for the future to pass Google by!

Asked how Trump has changed the Republican party, for good or ill, Rubio has only positive things to say. “One of the things the president was able to do through his election is reconnect the Republican party to working Americans. It was probably a needed correction. It was the party that was heavily focused on the employer’s side, which is still very important, but not enough on the employee’s side,” Rubio tells me. “The early inklings of that were the Huckabee campaign and Santorum in 2012. All of them sort of nibbled at the edges of it. The president was able to truly embrace it, and I think that’s a very positive thing.”

YES INDEED!

Rubio now speaks with President Trump “I would say twice, three times a month.” He worked closely with Ivanka Trump on developing a paid-family-leave bill that would give Americans the option of taking some of their Social Security for family leave in exchange for delaying retirement by three to six months. “Ivanka views her role as sort of the host of a competition of ideas,” Rubio says. “She’s trying to encourage people to come forward, so we’re going to be the first entrant into this competition on the Republican side.” After Rubio unveiled his bill, Utah senator Mike Lee announced he intends to introduce his own paid-family-leave bill soon with Iowa senator Joni Ernst. Welcome to “Celebrity Apprentice: Paid Family Leave Edition.”

What's not too like? More elected officials in Washington DC want to work with the President and go along with his ideas that put American interests and American citizens first.

While Rubio called for a “new nationalism” in June, the speech focused heavily on the need to strengthen families and civil society. It was the kind of nationalism admired more by David Brooks than Steve Bannon. (“This is one of the best and most unifying Republican speeches in years,” the New York Times columnist tweeted.) Rubio steeped his new nationalism in the language of the Declaration of Independence. “Nothing is more American than the belief that all men are created equal. Nothing is more American than the belief that every human being is endowed by God with the inalienable right to life and liberty and to pursue happiness,” Rubio said. “This is the kind of new nationalism we need. And this is the kind of new nationalism we should insist new immigrants embrace.” After the speech, Rubio told me he doesn’t see a distinction between the kind of nationalism he was calling for and patriotism. He acknowledged the nationalist label is “often used to describe people who believe that they should only do things that are good for their country and at the expense of other countries” but said he rejects that view.

I LOVE THIS!

But let's not forget that the Weekly Standard is very, very angry with "Little Marco" going along with Trump.

Let's also not forget that fewer people are reading the Weekly Standard, and more likely than not the editors, including Bill Kristol but also Fred Barnes, are simply not interested in recognizing that their perverse push for their ivory tower conservatism simply isn't a winner with anyone!