Rubio and Vance: Showdown in 2028?
Would a mano a mano match help or hurt the Republican Party?
Those who watched the speech by Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the Munich Security Conference over the weekend were undoubtedly struck by his impressive statesmanship and the unexpected standing ovation he received from European leaders. But one might draw another conclusion from the most important address ever delivered on the world stage by the man in charge of implementing President Donald Trump’s foreign policy: It looked like someone planning to run for president. Or if he isn’t, perhaps he should reconsider.
There have been rave reviews of the speech all around, and, as arguably the most effective Republican politician in the nation not named Trump, Rubio is well aware of it. But, of course, there is a problem. The man Rubio calls his best friend in the administration, Vice President JD Vance, has done little or nothing to deny speculation that he will run for the top spot. Rubio has said that if Vance is running, he will stay out of the race and support his friend. Not to imply that Rubio was necessarily being disingenuous, but politicians are famously prone to changing their minds.
Blind speculation and the reading of tea leaves are already underway about the ultimate motive(s) behind Rubio’s speech. Was this merely a successful attempt to still the rough waters stirred up by the president in Europe? Was his statesmanlike tone and message designed to set him apart from Vance, who famously dressed down Europeans at the same conference in 2025, particularly on their wokeness and criminalization of speech?
Or was this meant to be the first blush of a second run for the White House?
Almost a First: Trump Has No Opinion
President Trump says either Vance and Rubio, or Rubio and Vance, would make a dream ticket in 2028, conveniently avoiding an endorsement of one over the other. Of course, this is the only legitimate position for the president to take, given that both men will continue to play critical roles for the remainder of his administration. But it is entertaining to watch Trump, who has an opinion on everything from the future of the world to UFC’s Fight Night, essentially dodge a question for the first time in recent memory. The only other time that springs (pun intended) to mind was on the question of whether or not we should get rid of daylight saving time and follow the same clock all year round. Trump, spoiled by taking the 80% position on every available 80-20 issue, said this one was 50-50 and admitted he could not decide.
The most pressing concern of all in Trump’s vision for 2028 is which one of these powerhouses would be willing to relinquish the top spot. Vance will have already served as the presidential understudy, and it is hard to envision him ceding the top spot to Rubio. But Rubio, on the other hand, surely knows by now that he was mowed down by a force of nature named Trump in 2016, largely through no fault of his own. In fact, he could make a legitimate argument that if the future 45th and 47th president had not jumped headfirst into the GOP primary and single-handedly changed the entire political landscape, the then-senator from Florida might well have made it to the White House. But he was overwhelmed and driven out amid Trump’s depiction of him as “Little Marco.” One suspects, though, that the legitimate narrative of what might have been if Trump had never entered the race, and the two men’s incredibly productive partnership since, will allow Rubio and the voters to easily put 2016 behind them.
Vance and Rubio or Rubio and Vance?
Make no mistake. The difference between the power of the president and vice president is akin to that of alpha and omega. The president has all the power, the vice president none — other than in assignments handed to him by his boss. Yes, the VP can engage in the pro forma act of breaking the occasional tie in the Senate, but that is the pitiable sum total of the constitutional duties of a position once described by a former VP as “a bucket of warm spit.”
But more importantly, if you add it up, it is hard to believe that Rubio, a highly ambitious politician who was one of the frontrunners in a previous run for the White House, and whose career has blossomed on the world stage, has lost his ambition to be president. Or that he would willingly play second fiddle and look for things to do for four or eight years. Sure, he could run in 2032 or beyond, but politics is all about seizing your moment. The question is whether this is Rubio’s moment or Vance’s? The vice president has consistently lapped the field in preference polls over the last several months, with the latest I&I/TIPP survey showing 43% support for the VP, and just 5% for the secretary of state.
It is not hard to envision how support for the two men would be likely to line up in a theoretical head-to-head race. MAGA world would mostly support Vance, while the more mainstream Republicans and neoconservatives who hate Trump would get behind Rubio. The secretary of state was a darling of movement conservatives in 2016, and he represents something of a path back for Republicans who bolted and aligned with the left in their common hatred of Trump.
The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Vance transformed from Trump hater to Trump apostle, the man trusted to articulate and carry out the MAGA agenda. Rubio already ran for president and has been at the center of Trump’s international strategy. Both are young, ambitious, and one step removed from the highest office in the land. Rubio is 54, Vance 41, so both have many years ahead of them. Would Rubio endanger Republican unity if he challenges Vance? Or would he ultimately be a superior candidate in the general election by appealing to a wider audience? He is greatly respected among his former Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle, winning all but two Democratic votes for confirmation as secretary of state in a bitter partisan atmosphere.
Do these two men represent, on one hand, an embarrassment of riches for a party already holding the trifecta with three more years of the Trump presidency? Or, on the other hand, do the inevitable divisions that would form with a mano a mano primary between the two hurt the party? The answer will start to present itself as soon as the upcoming midterm elections are in the rearview mirror.
Original Here
|
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐