Jump to content

Talk:Marco Rubio/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Rubio's position on Donald J Trump for President

I see that there's been a something of an edit war about this. My 2 cents: I agree with BringthePaine that Rubio's views on Trump do not belong in the intro. It's been front page news all across the continent, but... doesn't really warrant being in Sen. Rubio's intro. I do think that one's stance on Trump has become one of the most discussed positions a candidate can have in 2016 (and likely for some years hence). Many Republicans are torn between supporting and disowning him, as they weigh the risks of alienating voters/supporters whichever choice they make. One's stance on Trump, i.e., is perhaps more politically significant that, say, one's position on health care. Furthermore, it's all the more significant for those Republicans who, like Rubio, exchanged harsh criticism with Trump during what were perhaps the most personally heated Republican Presidential primaries ever. So I think it's imperative to keep a solid review of Mr. Rubio's changing positions on Trump. Having said that, I don't particularly like the way it's worded right now. The "reversed" overtone sets up the reader to judge Rubio as a hypocrite. I think the content and citations could remain, without leading the witness, as it were.--Smilo Don (talk) 16:48, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I agree that is not lead worthy, but that it should be covered in the article. I don't really agree that "reversed" portrays Rubio as a hypocrite, but I have no objection to using more nuanced wording.- MrX 17:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
I reworked the section a bit. It was important to point out that the criticism mentioned in the article was made when Trump & Rubio were actively running against each other in a political campaign. The endorsement was made only after Trump became the nominee. And it didn't make sense to say that "Rubio didn't withdraw his endorsement" after Access Hollywood tapes--we have in the article that he endorsed him, so it's implicit that the endorsement remains active unless it is explicitly withdrawn, which it hasn't been. Champaign Supernova (talk) 19:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Champaign Supernova. That section looks much better now. The only glitch I see is that it ends ambiguously, with Rubio's criticism of the groping scandal. That moment was the breaking point for so many Republicans; one that begs the question: "So does he still support Trump or not?" I think Rubio's continued endorsement of Trump belongs as the conclusion to that paragraph.Smilo Don (talk) 13:19, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
I disagree. Stating that he hasn't changed his stance on Trump sounds like the writer is trying to make a point.BringthePaine (talk) 15:47, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marco Rubio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:54, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marco Rubio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:34, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marco Rubio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Marco Rubio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:30, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Marco Rubio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:18, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Town Hall with Teens

As there has been no discussion then maybe it should be discussed if recent events deserve to be mentioned in the lede. Rubio's national profile has been relatively low the CNN town hall is at least noteworthy, as is mentioning his hypocrisy in taking NRA money then pretending to be in favour of gun laws, especially as the last Florida mass shooting was cited by him as a reason to run. Darrenhusted (talk) 17:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Not sure if this belongs in the lead. --Malerooster (talk) 20:08, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Not sure about the lead but should definitely be somewhere.--MainlyTwelve (talk) 20:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

If not in the lede, then where Malerooster? You reverted, defend your revert. Darrenhusted (talk) 21:27, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

If we don't include it, and I think we should, then by the same logic "announced a campaign for reelection citing the 2016 Orlando nightclub shooting" should also go from there. Ceoil (talk) 13:16, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Restored. Ceoil (talk) 13:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
The lead should only be 4 paragraphs and should NOT be a news style lead per WP:LEAD. This "material" and certainly the name of the survivor, belongs in the body of the article, not in the lead, that's all. I have no problem taking out the reelection part as well. --Malerooster (talk) 14:20, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Done. Darrenhusted, can you add a modified version further down the page. Ceoil (talk) 15:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
The lead still has 5 paragraphs, but the first one is very short, so this version is better. I still would not include the name of the survivor in the body of the article since this does not add to our understanding of the subject.--Malerooster (talk) 15:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
I merged a few paragraphs. Yes agree re the name of the survivor, however that he was booed should be added in. It was indicative in a watershed of public openion. Ceoil (talk) 15:44, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm happy with the resulting edits. Darrenhusted (talk) 18:47, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

3 million plus from the NRA

An IP is questioning this number per this source, thoughts? --Malerooster (talk) 22:26, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

No. This is not the source used in the article. this is https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/21/politics/rubio-nra-money-cameron-kasky/index.html and it does not say 3 million.103.231.90.213 (talk) 22:28, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Please read citation #226. Also, indent your comments, please. --Malerooster (talk) 22:36, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

From the article:

"In February 2018 he attracted controversy over his gun control stance, following the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting at a town hall event held by CNN when he was questioned by a survivor of the shooting about the $3,303,355 he had received in donations from the NRA [231]" 

231 is CNN!

And the NYT opinion piece is not just about donations but about donations AND "spending to benefit the candidate". Inside the CNN source is a link to actual donations: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/19/politics/nra-pvf-contributions-florida-politicians/index.html and it says $9,900. Time to source and adjust the article.103.231.90.213 (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Typo in last paragraph

Hi folks,

Referring to the last paragraph of this article: 'On December 19, he announced on Twitter and Instagram that he had revived the COVID-19 vaccine'

I believe it should read 'received' and not 'revived'.

85.211.86.140 (talk) 20:47, 28 December 2020 (UTC)Nick

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2021

Marco Rubio is an American lawyer and politician serving as the senior United States Senator from Florida since 2011. SC12244500 (talk) 23:26, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kirstinguidi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Subsections

Why aren’t the Professorship, U.S. Senate, and 2016 presidential campaign sections nestled under the ‘Career’ section? They’re all a part of his career, and the ‘Professorship’ section is quite small. They should be wrapped up under ‘Career’. —2601:8C0:380:35C0:9C71:84FA:BABD:1934 (talk) 19:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2024

Change:

Rubio condemned Hamas's October 2023 attack on Israel and expressed his support for Israel and its right to self-defense.[264] When asked specifically about avoiding civilian casualties in Gaza, Rubio said Israel cannot coexist "with these savages…. They have to be eradicated."[265]

To:

Rubio condemned Hamas's October 2023 attack on Israel and expressed his support for Israel and its right to self-defense.[264] Dally87 (talk) 18:15, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done -- why on earth should we? Nomoskedasticity (talk) 18:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
I think that with the way it is now it can be implied that by "savages" Rubio means civilians, which obviously he didn't mean, he meant Hamas. It's just half a quote, no context. Dally87 (talk) 19:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
How do you know if Rubio did not mean civilians? Juyenxo (talk) 23:02, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
It's even worse than I thought- they don't even mention the actual question that Tapper asked Rubio. They just wrote "On CNN, Marco Rubio responded to a question from Jake Tapper about civilian casualties in Gaza". Really, how can you prove what he meant like this? That's terrible journalism etiquette on behalf of The Nation magazine.
So I went ahead and found the full interview, here is the part that touches on Rubio's opinion on Hamas and whether Israel can co-exist with this terrorist organization:
“I don’t think there’s any way Israel can be expected to coexist or find some diplomatic off-ramp with these savages. These are people who deliberately targeted teenage girls, women, children, and the elderly, not just for rape and murder, but for then dumping their bodies off in the streets of Gaza, where the crowds can defile their lifeless bodies. These are just horrifying things, and I don’t think we know the full extent of it yet. There’s more to come in the days and weeks ahead.
“You can’t coexist [with Hamas]. They have to be eradicated. This is going to be incredibly painful. It’s going to be incredibly difficult, and it’s going to be horrifying, the price to pay. But even more horrifying is allowing a group like this to continue to be a viable group operating from a space that they control. I don’t see any other option. It’s a terrible option, but it remains the only option.
“I think the blame will squarely be on Hamas for using people, human beings, as they have for a long time, the way Hezbollah does, as shields. They deliberately put their missile launchers and their headquarters near places they know where civilians are going to be. Israel is in a very difficult spot here with no great options, but only one option that actually serves their national interest. I just don’t see any other way forward. I hate to say it, but that’s just the case.”
Here is the link to the interview on YouTube, this part starts at around 2:18 minutes.
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bojsMTipN2M Dally87 (talk) 15:02, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Also, this is from the Wiki guidelines:
"Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous."
I would say that this part is very poorly sourced and definitely potentially libelous. So can we adhere to the guidelines and remove it? Dally87 (talk) 15:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Marco_Rubio/Archive_6&oldid=1262905025"