Iowa is Rubio Country

[kyc0705]

These ads describe Los Angeles as a city of promise and opportunity where the impossible becomes possible, which the narrator of these ads considers as a reason why the city is nicknamed the City of the Angels.

Maybe La La Land actually won Best Picture in this TL

[kyc0705]

Marco Rubio would absolutely not have a 72% approval rating with political, cultural, and social polarization this high. And he would certainly not win Minnesota and Jersey either.

And yet Bush already had a 90 % job approval rating and maintained it above 80 % for months.

That was because of 9/11. Before then, he was about even.

I do like this story, but the approval ratings have always felt weirdly inflated to me. My guess is that given everything we know, Rubio would be in the low sixties, not the low seventies.

[kyc0705]

This timeline is incredibly unrealistic, having the president's party gain 11 seats in the Senate does not happen, no matter what. Also, Rubio wouldn't be so popular and be the beloved Washington/Lincoln you portray him as.

Rubio was labelled as the 2nd Ronald Reagan so why wouldn't he be that popular?

This Timeline is actually very close to the original Ronald Reagan Presidency and that is what UWS probably wants.

Ok, UWS sockpuppet, did Reagan ever gain 11 seats in the Senate in his midteem? No

Besides, Rubio is a slime and a boring, lying politician. He would actually lose to Hillary.

Actually Rubio wins because he does better among Hispanics than Trump, which helps him to win Colorado and Nevada. And the reason how he won Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Pennsylvania is that promised to promote free trade while cutting taxes on manufacturing industry in order to avoid job losses and to make free trade fairer for American workers. Rubio also won Pennsylvania by promising to end the War on Coal and to promote clean coal technology since Pennsylvania's is, for an important part, based on coal.

So this scenario is quite realistic.

THE PRESIDENT'S PARTY DOES NOT GAIN 11 SEATS IN THE SENATE IN A MIDTERM, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.

And yet the Democrats had so many seats to defend in deeply conservative states like Montana, North Dakota, Missouri, Indiana and West Virginia. And the Republicans recruited several strong candidates in the toss-ups states like John Kasich in Ohio, Rick Scott in Florida, Susana Martinez in New Mexico, etc.

So don't lecture me about being realistic.

THE MAP DOES NOT MATTER, 11-SEAT PICKUP IN A PRESIDENT'S MIDTERM NEVER HAPPENS!!!

2-3 maybe, BUT NOT 11!!!

And yet Obama lost 8 Senate Seats in the 2014 MidTerms...

Yet that was the Republicans, not the Democrats, gaining seats. Would the Democrats gain 8 seats in 2014? No, unless Obama was worshipped as a deity.

Honestly, this timeline is utter nonsense, complete with tedious convention speeches and Rubio worship.

I am sick and tired of the diffamation of Marco Rubio by the far-left. This is a good man.

Obama was a 'good man', did his party gain 11 seats in the Senate in his first term? Did he single-handedly fix the economy and defeat the terrorists? No.

Obama no, but Rubio yes. You know why? Because defeating terrorism requires a strong military and Obama has gut the military which gave us ISIS. Rubio rebuilt the military and that's how he's defeating ISIS. Obama gave us the slowest economic recovery in history because of big government. But President Rubio reduced the size of government and reduced taxes, which strengthened the economy.

There is no way the president's party gains that many seats in the Senate, regardless of what happens. Actually, ISIS formed out of the vacuum in Iraq caused by the Iraq War. And Obama strengthened the economy far more than Bush ever did, or Trump is doing.

This is liberal bias.

You know I can denounce you to the moderators for any form of agression, including timeline pollution.

'Liberal Bias' LOL.

This thread is incredible. 2 commenters, 1 sock, total hilarity.