Marco Rubio took a break from quoting Bible verses and mocking the military to set the record straight on his 2016 presidential campaign. Rubio, of course, did not win that election, although boy, the world would be a different place if he had done so. Let’s not waste time on what didn’t happen, though.
Instead, we’re talking about how the GOP senator is not pleased because, as a result of disgraced former New Jersey governor Chris Christie announcing his 2024 bid, people are now remembering their messiest debate clash. And although Rubio could let the noise die down and let Christie take himself down and subsequently make another “hostage face” behind an opponent, Rubio is pushing back.
To refresh, Aaron Rupar recently posted a video clip of CNN reminding people of the time “when Chris Christie murdered Marco Rubio during a debate.” This was not an unfounded description, and Christie was (to be fair) in rare “on fire” mode while trouncing his opponent’s “canned” rhetoric on display during the debate. In response, Rubio sputtered and responded, very robotically, with the very “canned” language being criticized.
Rubio, however, would like to revisit the moment, too, by tweeting, “Any political reporter/commentator claiming Christie ‘ended’ my campaign in 2016 is lazy or dumb.” The “debate sucked,” he explained, because he wasn’t “hitting back when attacked like I wanted to” and refusing the “punching down” routine. Still, this “didn’t end my campaign.”
Any political reporter/commentator claiming Christie “ended” my campaign in 2016 is lazy or dumb
NH debate sucked because instead of hitting back when attacked like I wanted to, I listened to advice about “pivoting” & not “punching down” on a CC who was at 7% & about to drop…
— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) June 6, 2023
Rubio continued to insist that he performed well in his campaign, and one wonders why he’s bothering to go there. Instead, as mentioned, he could simply let Christie receive credit for that one-time “decapitation” because surely, a governor with a stunningly low approval rating will inevitably stumble again at some point soon. Let’s revisit after a few debates, shall we?