Voters should consider other Republican party candidates

Sen. Marco Rubio is the latest in the Republican Party to declare intent to run for president in 2016, joining Sens. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, among others. During his announcement on April 13, Rubio claimed he was the best option to lead the United States into “another American century.” Though Rubio promises to better American lives, his platforms suggest he will stagnate American prosperity.

Rubio has already begun to express his position on a number of issues to differentiate himself from other candidates. On Sunday, while on CBS News’ “Face the Nation,” Rubio said that he didn’t believe being gay was a choice. Despite this assertion that deviates from the common right-wing mentality, Rubio qualified himself by saying he still believed the definition of marriage is strictly confined to a union between a man and a woman. Rubio then falsely explained that being against same-sex marriage does not mean that he is anti-gay. But by denying the right of millions of people to get married, Rubio is, in fact, turning his back on the LGBT community in the United States. Holding clashing views in this matter highlights Rubio’s incompetency to fight for human rights, which had been furthered so much by President Barack Obama’s administration. Rubio would only obliterate these achievements as president.

Rubio is also a proponent of using military force and scare tactics to fight American enemies such as Iran, Russia and North Korea. On “Face the Nation,” Rubio said that the United States should take any measures necessary to halt Iran’s emergence as a nuclear power, including going to war. Rubio further stated, “[Iran is] an oil-rich country. The only reason why they want enrichment, and reprocessing capability is they want to one day be able to be a nuclear threshold, or nuclear possessed.” As president, if Rubio were to make Iran, or any country for that matter, an antagonist of the United States, he would ruin any chance of civil discourse between the two nations. That’s why war would be inevitable — Rubio would instigate unnecessary conflict.

Finally, it’s impossible to talk about Marco Rubio without acknowledging his participation in the 2013 bipartisan immigration bill, which sailed through the Senate but died in the House. The bill introduced a 1,200-page approach on how to achieve citizenship status for illegal immigrants and was supported by policymakers of both parties,- Rubio being one of the drafters. But when the House of Representatives, dominated by Republicans, criticized Rubio for his participation, Rubio walked away from the bill altogether. Now, Rubio has a new plan: first, lock down our borders and then refine the immigration system. It’s obvious here that Rubio is acting on the basis of what appeases his own party and not by what he believes. By folding on his own stance, Rubio doesn’t represent the change our generation needs to move forward.

Marco Rubio might be charming. He might have the credentials and titles lined up and down the block. He might have the sensationalized backstory to touch the hearts of millions. But one thing’s for sure — Rubio’s confused, feeble stance on many issues proves that Hillary Clinton’s got nothing to fear.

Danni Wang is a sophomore majoring in psychology. She is also the editorial director of the Daily Trojan. “Point/Counterpoint” runs Tuesdays.