Donald J. Trump came under sustained attack from Jeb Bush and other Republican presidential candidates on Tuesday night as they united against his plan to bar Muslims from entering the United States while tussling over who would be toughest in protecting Americans from terrorist threats.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida also faced his toughest moments of the race during the latest Republican debate as a top rival, Senator Ted Cruz
of Texas, repeatedly questioned his conservative credentials and his
judgment on national security and immigration. Though Mr. Rubio at times
seemed to gain the upper hand, he looked and sounded rattled as Mr.
Cruz portrayed him as lining up with liberals like Senator Chuck Schumer
of New York in favoring “amnesty” for immigrants who are in the country
illegally.
Mr. Bush, the former Florida governor who is struggling in the polls,
was withering as he assailed Mr. Trump’s harsh words and ominous
warnings about Muslims and mosques since the mass shootings in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif.
While Mr. Trump has managed to channel and stoke the fears of many
Americans, Mr. Bush led his rivals in portraying him as a fearmonger
more interested in scaring voters than in planning an effective war
against the Islamic State.
“Donald,
you’re not going to be able to insult your way to the presidency —
that’s not going to happen,” Mr. Bush said. “Leadership is not about
attacking people and disparaging people. Leadership is about creating a
serious strategy.”
Mr.
Trump, who has belittled Mr. Bush’s energy and strength since entering
the race in June, suggested that his rival was simply pretending to be
tough. But his counterattack seemed to backfire, drawing a rebuke from
the audience.
“With
Jeb’s attitude, we will never be great again, that I can tell you — we
will never be great again,” Mr. Trump said, to loud boos.
In
the evening’s other major subplot, Mr. Rubio, who has increased his
attacks on the surging Mr. Cruz over the last month, engaged his
colleague in their most pointed face-to-face confrontation yet. Trying
to defuse criticism over his leading role in the 2013 legislation to
offer unauthorized immigrants a path to citizenship, Mr. Rubio asserted
that Mr. Cruz also wanted to offer legal status to those immigrants.
Mr.
Cruz said Mr. Rubio was trying to “muddy the waters” and “raise
confusion,” and linked Mr. Rubio to Mr. Schumer and President Obama on
the issue.
“I
led the fight against his legalization and amnesty” bill, Mr. Cruz
said, arguing that to claim his and Mr. Rubio’s records on the issue
were the same was “like suggesting the fireman and the arsonist have the
same record because they were both at the scene of the fire.”
But
when pressed by Mr. Rubio and a moderator on whether he would rule out
legalizing undocumented immigrants, Mr. Cruz appeared to leave himself a
measure of space.
“I have never supported legalization, and I do not intend to support legalization,” he said.
The
exchanges between Mr. Rubio and Mr. Cruz, who have emerged as leading
candidates recently, highlighted the party’s most glaring divisions: on
immigration, intelligence gathering and foreign intervention.
Mr.
Rubio has positioned himself as a Republican who would have been at
home in the George W. Bush administration, a hawk on national security
but a pragmatist on immigration. (He has, though, backed off his support
for a comprehensive immigration overhaul in the face of scathing
criticism from the right.)
Mr.
Cruz, by contrast, has tried to run as a post-Bush Republican, taking a
hard line on immigration while seeking a middle ground between the
party’s interventionists and libertarians on defense issues.
After
Mr. Rubio tried to portray him as soft on national security, Mr. Cruz
linked him to Democratic foreign policy on crises like Libya.
“One
of the problems with Marco’s foreign policy is he has far too often
supported Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama undermining governments in
the Middle East that have helped radical Islamic terrorists,” Mr. Cruz
said. “We need to focus on killing the bad guys, not getting stuck in
Middle Eastern civil wars that don’t keep America safe.”
Mr.
Rubio shot back that while Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton wanted to “lead
from behind,” Mr. Cruz was suggesting “not to lead at all.”
Safety
and fear have not loomed so powerfully over a debate, or an electorate,
since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. But if the threat of terrorism has
become the defining issue in the race, Republicans are sharply divided
on the toughest and smartest strategies to prevent more attacks.
The
candidates used words like “angry” and “betrayed” as they described an
America besieged by terrorist threats and exposed and vulnerable after
seven years of Mr. Obama’s leadership, which they argued Mrs. Clinton,
who polls show is leading the Democratic race, would only continue.
The
campaign’s new focus on terrorism was on display when Mr. Cruz was
questioned about his vote to halt the National Security Agency’s ability
to collect bulk phone data. He framed the measure, which ended elements
of the Patriot Act, as a “reform of how we target bad guys” and argued that it had actually helped fight terrorism.
Mr.
Rubio, though, kept the focus on ending the bulk data collection,
arguing that Mr. Cruz had given away “a valuable tool” against
terrorism.
“I
promise you, the next time there is an attack on this country, the
first thing people are going to want to know is, why didn’t we know
about it and why didn’t we stop it?” Mr. Rubio said. “And the answer
better not be, ‘Because we didn’t have access to records or information
that would have allowed us to identify these killers before they
attack.’ ”
Senator Rand Paul
of Kentucky, though, came to Mr. Cruz’s defense with a fierce attack on
Mr. Rubio. Mr. Paul, who has sought to revive his languishing campaign
by reasserting his libertarianism, mocked Mr. Rubio for proclaiming
himself “great and strong on national defense” when, Mr. Paul said, he
was “the weakest of all the candidates on immigration.”
“He
has more of an allegiance to Chuck Schumer and the liberals than he
does on conservative policy,” Mr. Paul said, referring to Mr. Rubio’s
work with Mr. Schumer on an immigration overhaul.
Nema komentara:
Objavi komentar