Rubio's missed votes will be no issue for Hillary (or Obama) to exploit

Marco Rubio is taking a lot of flak over his terrible attendance record for Senate votes – from Donald Trump and Jeb Bush on the campaign trail and a large number of conservative commentators as well, including Claire Hawks today on these pages.  Paul Mirengoff of Powerline conjures up a damaging scenario should Rubio win the nomination:

Democrats will have a field day attacking him over his attendance record. They will point out that the people of Florida sent him to the Senate to do the work of a Senator. This work includes showing up and voting, whether things are going your way or not. They will suggest that to do otherwise is to behave like a spoiled brat.

They will be right. (snip)

By failing to show up in the Senate, Rubio is handing the Democrats a club with which to assault him. He should clean this up. He should do his job.

But I am not so sure.  Mirengoff’s Powerline colleague John Hinderaker points to a Daily Mail examination of Hillary’s (and Obama’s) glass house from which stones will not be successfully thrown:

A DailyMail.com analysis of Senate roll call records found that Rubio has missed 44.6 per cent of his votes since April, the month when he launched his Oval Office bid. That includes a 53.8 per cent absence rate in the third quarter of 2015, from July to September.

In the same quarter of 2007, as he frequently left Washington, D.C. for the Democratic primary’s early voting states, Obama missed 56.3 of his votes.

The final quarter of 2007, leading up to the Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire Primary, saw the future president post even more dismal numbers – missing 89.4 per cent of his opportunities to shout ‘aye’ or ‘nay.’

Clinton, in hot pursuit of Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination, missed 83.5 per cent that quarter.

Throughout the months he was running for president in 2008, Obama skipped 64.3 per cent of his votes as an Illinois U.S. Senator. Clinton’s record was worse still in 2008 – a 68.4 per cent absence rate – through her withdrawal from the race on June 8 of that year.

Hinderaker also correctly points out:

There is little reason for any senator to vote on everything. On the other hand, when a vote is important, Rubio has canceled campaign stops to be on the Senate floor. I know this from experience, as Marco canceled a fundraiser in Minneapolis in which I was participating to cast an important vote on Iran.

I have some issues with Rubio, but his attendance record is not one of them.

Marco Rubio is taking a lot of flak over his terrible attendance record for Senate votes – from Donald Trump and Jeb Bush on the campaign trail and a large number of conservative commentators as well, including Claire Hawks today on these pages.  Paul Mirengoff of Powerline conjures up a damaging scenario should Rubio win the nomination:

Democrats will have a field day attacking him over his attendance record. They will point out that the people of Florida sent him to the Senate to do the work of a Senator. This work includes showing up and voting, whether things are going your way or not. They will suggest that to do otherwise is to behave like a spoiled brat.

They will be right. (snip)

By failing to show up in the Senate, Rubio is handing the Democrats a club with which to assault him. He should clean this up. He should do his job.

But I am not so sure.  Mirengoff’s Powerline colleague John Hinderaker points to a Daily Mail examination of Hillary’s (and Obama’s) glass house from which stones will not be successfully thrown:

A DailyMail.com analysis of Senate roll call records found that Rubio has missed 44.6 per cent of his votes since April, the month when he launched his Oval Office bid. That includes a 53.8 per cent absence rate in the third quarter of 2015, from July to September.

In the same quarter of 2007, as he frequently left Washington, D.C. for the Democratic primary’s early voting states, Obama missed 56.3 of his votes.

The final quarter of 2007, leading up to the Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire Primary, saw the future president post even more dismal numbers – missing 89.4 per cent of his opportunities to shout ‘aye’ or ‘nay.’

Clinton, in hot pursuit of Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination, missed 83.5 per cent that quarter.

Throughout the months he was running for president in 2008, Obama skipped 64.3 per cent of his votes as an Illinois U.S. Senator. Clinton’s record was worse still in 2008 – a 68.4 per cent absence rate – through her withdrawal from the race on June 8 of that year.

Hinderaker also correctly points out:

There is little reason for any senator to vote on everything. On the other hand, when a vote is important, Rubio has canceled campaign stops to be on the Senate floor. I know this from experience, as Marco canceled a fundraiser in Minneapolis in which I was participating to cast an important vote on Iran.

I have some issues with Rubio, but his attendance record is not one of them.