Shiny S. Patel
General Sections Editor
The debate on Oct. 28 was the second GOP debate hosted at the University of Colorado Boulder. The moderators started off by describing the debate as a job interview with the American people. After doing an analysis of Marco Rubio on the last debate, I thought it would be interesting to stick focus on him again. I thought he did an excellent job in the debate, I still do not agree with a lot of his policies but his passion to help the middle class and immigrants in the nation shows me that we have some common ground.
The interview started off by asking all the candidates their biggest weakness. Rubio did not really state a weakness but instead talked about how he had a shared sense of optimism for the future of America. I think what he was trying to imply with that was that he was very stubborn, and very rarely willing to give up. He seemed as though he was trying to portray his weakness as a strength. It was a classic politician answer because no smart candidate would actually admit to having a weakness because that would imply that it would hinder his performance in office.
Rubio talked about how there are people in the world who are living paycheck to paycheck and he wants to help reduce their problems. He talked down about the president by saying that making the military weaker is a terrible idea and how the Democrats get the media as a Super PAC which is not fair to Republicans. I personally disagreed with that because the different media sources have preferences in their political leanings and not all media sources are liberal, take FOX news for an example.
Bush went on to say that instead of running for president, Rubio should be focusing on finishing what he has started in his own state and claims that he needs to mature a bit more. Rubio countered him by saying that he had no intention on attacking Bush back and he wants to run for President only, not to run against his fellow Republicans. By showing his disinterest in not wanting to slammer Bush, I think he drew in many Americans because it shows his capability of acting professional.
Unsurprisingly, the moderators attacked Rubio and his bookkeeping records, and based on those, why the American people should allow him to fix a $17 trillion economy. He stands up for himself by saying that he did not inherit any money and how his successes came from his hard work. He talked about how his tax plan is pro family because he strongly believes in the importance of family and how he is aware that his income is larger than the average American and he wants to do what he can to help.
As far as the topics of businesses and foreign policy is concerned, Rubio then started talking about outsourcing and discussed how companies should not be allowed to hire foreign workers without making an active effort of putting up advertisements for the job here in the U.S. for 180 days first. He wants to modernize education and train Americans so we don’t need to go overseas to get the job done. After a few more questions, Rubio spoke again about how Democrats talk a lot about how they do not like Super PACs, but Rubio would argue that the Super PAC of the Democrats is actually the mass media.
Rubio’s closing speech was empowering because he talked about how America doesn’t owe him anything, but how he himself is in debt to America. He said that as president he would do his best in saving and expanding the American dream for everyone. I believe that his performance in this debate was not as strong in the last only because though he defended himself and his values, he got less speaking time in this debate. He was able to get more words in in the last which was the reason why he did better.