This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/28/opinion/rubio-march-for-life.html
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Marco Rubio Must Be Destroyed | Marco Rubio Must Be Destroyed |
| (about 5 hours later) | |
| Since the Parkland shootings in Florida, Senator Marco Rubio has done many of the things liberals say they are desperate, desperate for decent Republicans to do. He has changed his position on gun control, expressing support for new restrictions: age limits on gun purchases, new background check rules, possibly magazine restrictions. He has co-sponsored legislation encouraging states to issue restraining orders that temporarily would strip people deemed dangerous of their guns. Some of these measures have conservative support, but in other cases the Florida Republican has effectively bucked the N.R.A. | Since the Parkland shootings in Florida, Senator Marco Rubio has done many of the things liberals say they are desperate, desperate for decent Republicans to do. He has changed his position on gun control, expressing support for new restrictions: age limits on gun purchases, new background check rules, possibly magazine restrictions. He has co-sponsored legislation encouraging states to issue restraining orders that temporarily would strip people deemed dangerous of their guns. Some of these measures have conservative support, but in other cases the Florida Republican has effectively bucked the N.R.A. |
| But over the same period Rubio, more than any other prominent Republican, has been vigorously and sometimes virulently attacked by the student-led movement that filled D.C. with protesters last weekend. When he showed up for the CNN town hall he met boos and heckles; one of the shooting survivors told him that just looking at him was like staring down the barrel of an assault rifle. Notwithstanding his subsequent policy concessions, at the March for Our Lives the students wore price tags around their neck, $1.05 each — the amount of money Rubio’s campaigns have received from the N.R.A. divided by the number of students in Florida schools. David Hogg, one of their leaders, began his speech with the price tag line, and told a CNN interviewer that if anything he feels that their attacks on the Florida senator haven’t been provocative enough. | But over the same period Rubio, more than any other prominent Republican, has been vigorously and sometimes virulently attacked by the student-led movement that filled D.C. with protesters last weekend. When he showed up for the CNN town hall he met boos and heckles; one of the shooting survivors told him that just looking at him was like staring down the barrel of an assault rifle. Notwithstanding his subsequent policy concessions, at the March for Our Lives the students wore price tags around their neck, $1.05 each — the amount of money Rubio’s campaigns have received from the N.R.A. divided by the number of students in Florida schools. David Hogg, one of their leaders, began his speech with the price tag line, and told a CNN interviewer that if anything he feels that their attacks on the Florida senator haven’t been provocative enough. |
| There was a time, not so many years ago, when Rubio was attacked and his efforts at bipartisanship regarded skeptically because liberals perceived him as a threat — a plausible and eloquent leader for a less bunkered G.O.P., a bridge between the party’s old white base and a more multicultural America. That time has passed, at least for now: After Rubio was defeated and partially undone by Donald Trump, and especially after he turned in his #NeverTrump card and filmed a hostage-video endorsement, the official media consensus on the Florida senator flipped from “Great Republican Hope” to “Liddle Marco,” and anti-Rubio sentiment became dominated less by anxiety than by contempt. | There was a time, not so many years ago, when Rubio was attacked and his efforts at bipartisanship regarded skeptically because liberals perceived him as a threat — a plausible and eloquent leader for a less bunkered G.O.P., a bridge between the party’s old white base and a more multicultural America. That time has passed, at least for now: After Rubio was defeated and partially undone by Donald Trump, and especially after he turned in his #NeverTrump card and filmed a hostage-video endorsement, the official media consensus on the Florida senator flipped from “Great Republican Hope” to “Liddle Marco,” and anti-Rubio sentiment became dominated less by anxiety than by contempt. |
| That contempt seems to inform some of the reaction to his every public utterance since Parkland. But I think that in their anti-Rubio zeal the student activists are also picking up on a general approach to politics that the Trump era has encouraged among liberals — a view that since the current Republican majorities were forged by anger and a kind of smash-mouth politics, it’s incumbent upon liberals to give no quarter in return, and to treat any sudden conciliation from a prominent figure like the Florida senator not as an opportunity for deal making but as a welcome sign of weakness that should inspire further fierce attack. | That contempt seems to inform some of the reaction to his every public utterance since Parkland. But I think that in their anti-Rubio zeal the student activists are also picking up on a general approach to politics that the Trump era has encouraged among liberals — a view that since the current Republican majorities were forged by anger and a kind of smash-mouth politics, it’s incumbent upon liberals to give no quarter in return, and to treat any sudden conciliation from a prominent figure like the Florida senator not as an opportunity for deal making but as a welcome sign of weakness that should inspire further fierce attack. |
| This theory has a certain logic to it. Yes, if anti-gun activists spent less time screaming at him, Rubio’s efforts might open up a little more common ground on gun policy. But Rubio is only one senator, previous pushes for gun regulation have had Republican senatorial sponsors before dying by filibuster, and in 2013, when liberals were broadly favorable to his efforts, Rubio couldn’t deliver immigration reform because the Republican House wasn’t having it. | This theory has a certain logic to it. Yes, if anti-gun activists spent less time screaming at him, Rubio’s efforts might open up a little more common ground on gun policy. But Rubio is only one senator, previous pushes for gun regulation have had Republican senatorial sponsors before dying by filibuster, and in 2013, when liberals were broadly favorable to his efforts, Rubio couldn’t deliver immigration reform because the Republican House wasn’t having it. |
| The problem, then, is relying on the bipartisan impulses of few Republican politicians when what you need is a broader climate change. The path to that change requires first putting the fear of God (or, if you prefer, the fear of the Arc of History) into vulnerable Republican lawmakers, and then making them unpopular enough that you can simply beat them. | The problem, then, is relying on the bipartisan impulses of few Republican politicians when what you need is a broader climate change. The path to that change requires first putting the fear of God (or, if you prefer, the fear of the Arc of History) into vulnerable Republican lawmakers, and then making them unpopular enough that you can simply beat them. |
| And the rage against Rubio, it could be argued, is a good example of how the two approaches reinforce each other. So far the experience of being screamed at hasn’t made him repudiate his support for new gun measures; perhaps, indeed, it has helped concentrate his mind on the political reasons that he should support them, while providing an example for activists in other states to use to shame their own Republican representatives for their ties to the N.R.A. | And the rage against Rubio, it could be argued, is a good example of how the two approaches reinforce each other. So far the experience of being screamed at hasn’t made him repudiate his support for new gun measures; perhaps, indeed, it has helped concentrate his mind on the political reasons that he should support them, while providing an example for activists in other states to use to shame their own Republican representatives for their ties to the N.R.A. |
| Meanwhile Rubio’s approval rating in Florida is not exactly great, and while his next election is a long way off, he’s precisely the kind of Republican who needs to be defeated to build a Democratic supermajority. So the chance to make him the face of G.O.P. intransigence on gun control, even when he isn’t actually the face of intransigence at the moment, is an opportunity too important to be missed. | Meanwhile Rubio’s approval rating in Florida is not exactly great, and while his next election is a long way off, he’s precisely the kind of Republican who needs to be defeated to build a Democratic supermajority. So the chance to make him the face of G.O.P. intransigence on gun control, even when he isn’t actually the face of intransigence at the moment, is an opportunity too important to be missed. |
| The deeper logic here is that the only plausible mission for Democrats after the Trumpian takeover of the G.O.P. is a kind of Carthaginian peace: Delenda est the Grand Old Party. In a different world maybe you could make deals with a Republican like Rubio; in this world with this G.O.P., you can work with him only if you’re clearly the one forcing him to the table, and ultimately that’s just a means to the real goal of his eventual defeat. | The deeper logic here is that the only plausible mission for Democrats after the Trumpian takeover of the G.O.P. is a kind of Carthaginian peace: Delenda est the Grand Old Party. In a different world maybe you could make deals with a Republican like Rubio; in this world with this G.O.P., you can work with him only if you’re clearly the one forcing him to the table, and ultimately that’s just a means to the real goal of his eventual defeat. |
| I don’t want to wring my hands about this attitude’s corrosive effect on our politics, because it seems to me that once conservatism surrendered to Donald Trump, arguments about corrosion became a bit irrelevant. Rubio shouldn’t be in politics if he can’t handle vehement attacks, and the president that the Florida senator endorsed is as consistently ad hominem as the young school shooting survivors with rather less excuse. | I don’t want to wring my hands about this attitude’s corrosive effect on our politics, because it seems to me that once conservatism surrendered to Donald Trump, arguments about corrosion became a bit irrelevant. Rubio shouldn’t be in politics if he can’t handle vehement attacks, and the president that the Florida senator endorsed is as consistently ad hominem as the young school shooting survivors with rather less excuse. |
| But there are things that you can risk or lose when you fight the way Rubio’s critics seem to want to fight. For instance, one reason that the Dreamer amnesty was an executive decision that Donald Trump could simply reverse, landing us in our current immigration stalemate, was that the Obama White House deliberately chose to make it one, pre-empting an effort by, yes, Marco Rubio to craft bipartisan legislation. That was a good example of smash-mouth liberalism, albeit substantive in that case rather than just rhetorical and driven by fear of Rubio rather than the current spirit of contempt: Don’t let a Republican politician make nice with Latino voters, don’t let Republicans disguise their anti-immigrant views with modest bipartisan maneuvers, create a clear contrast so that voters will reward you even if doing so requires pushing certain constitutional limits on your power. | |
| And it didn’t work out particularly well. Indeed if anything Obama’s executive action contributed to Trump’s victory by helping to radicalize conservative voters, and now several years later the Dreamer cohort is back in limbo because the executive move lacked bipartisan support and legislative form. Maybe in the longer run the whole debate will help smash the G.O.P. as liberals believe it deserves to be smashed — but not just yet. | And it didn’t work out particularly well. Indeed if anything Obama’s executive action contributed to Trump’s victory by helping to radicalize conservative voters, and now several years later the Dreamer cohort is back in limbo because the executive move lacked bipartisan support and legislative form. Maybe in the longer run the whole debate will help smash the G.O.P. as liberals believe it deserves to be smashed — but not just yet. |
| Or another example, this one in the Trump era itself: During the debate over the Republican tax bill it was, again, Marco Rubio who made an extended effort to move the bill in a more middle-class-friendly direction by adding and then enlarging a child tax credit. The push was opposed by many of his Republican colleagues, but for a time Rubio thought that he could get an amendment in with Senate Democrat support. But in the end, presumably on the grounds that modestly improving a Republican bill makes it harder to attack it later, only nine Senate Democrats voted for the Rubio proposal, and it went down to an easy defeat. | Or another example, this one in the Trump era itself: During the debate over the Republican tax bill it was, again, Marco Rubio who made an extended effort to move the bill in a more middle-class-friendly direction by adding and then enlarging a child tax credit. The push was opposed by many of his Republican colleagues, but for a time Rubio thought that he could get an amendment in with Senate Democrat support. But in the end, presumably on the grounds that modestly improving a Republican bill makes it harder to attack it later, only nine Senate Democrats voted for the Rubio proposal, and it went down to an easy defeat. |
| Again, maybe this was an example of tough liberals brilliantly playing hardball: Don’t let Rubio have any kind of victory for his slightly more popular flavor of Republicanism, so that he and his party will be easier to crush in 2018 and beyond. But in the interim it meant that Senate Democrats gave up a chance to move real world public policy in a direction many of them support, in order to pursue an as-yet-hypothetical larger victory that may not, like the Hillary Clinton presidency before it, actually materialize. | Again, maybe this was an example of tough liberals brilliantly playing hardball: Don’t let Rubio have any kind of victory for his slightly more popular flavor of Republicanism, so that he and his party will be easier to crush in 2018 and beyond. But in the interim it meant that Senate Democrats gave up a chance to move real world public policy in a direction many of them support, in order to pursue an as-yet-hypothetical larger victory that may not, like the Hillary Clinton presidency before it, actually materialize. |
| It’s too soon to say whether this dynamic will repeat itself with the post-Parkland gun control debate. Again, the activists’ anti-Rubio zeal might actually help the progress of legislation, by holding him to his newfound promises. Or there might be no point in making a deal unless he’s willing to accept something closer to the full list of activist demands. Or no bargain of any sort might be possible so long as Republicans hold the Senate, or even so long as they hold seats in states like Florida — in which case the hate for the senator is just a necessary path to his eventual retirement. | It’s too soon to say whether this dynamic will repeat itself with the post-Parkland gun control debate. Again, the activists’ anti-Rubio zeal might actually help the progress of legislation, by holding him to his newfound promises. Or there might be no point in making a deal unless he’s willing to accept something closer to the full list of activist demands. Or no bargain of any sort might be possible so long as Republicans hold the Senate, or even so long as they hold seats in states like Florida — in which case the hate for the senator is just a necessary path to his eventual retirement. |
| I am personally agnostic on all of these points. For all his various bipartisan efforts, it’s true that Rubio has not proven that he can actually deliver the votes for major compromises. And having watched the Trump G.O.P. hold power with a largely negative agenda and an ugly rhetorical style, I can certainly believe that a no-quarter liberalism will gain power eventually in its turn. | I am personally agnostic on all of these points. For all his various bipartisan efforts, it’s true that Rubio has not proven that he can actually deliver the votes for major compromises. And having watched the Trump G.O.P. hold power with a largely negative agenda and an ugly rhetorical style, I can certainly believe that a no-quarter liberalism will gain power eventually in its turn. |
| But I can also believe that the obvious pleasure to be found in demonizing the Republican most likely to do outreach could deliver liberalism more of what it has already been earning for itself these last few years: the satisfaction of self-righteousness as a compensation for the absence of political or policy success. | But I can also believe that the obvious pleasure to be found in demonizing the Republican most likely to do outreach could deliver liberalism more of what it has already been earning for itself these last few years: the satisfaction of self-righteousness as a compensation for the absence of political or policy success. |
Previous version
1
Next version