One of the phenomena I like to talk about in life and international politics is something I have dubbed the Bad Boyfriend Benefit.1 It works something like this: a bad boyfriend dramatically lowers overall boyfriend expectations of whomever they are dating. This means that, after the inevitable breakup, the next boyfriend — even if he is perfectly average — looks great by comparison. The Bad Boyfriend Benefit fades with time — but the honeymoon period can last for a spell.
It is worth thinking about the Bad Boyfriend Benefit when pondering Marco Rubio’s mushrooming fortunes within the MAGAverse. In an administration that can do nothing right, the current national security adviser and secretary of state is having a moment.
Sarah Longwell’s Trump voter focus groups reveal that Rubio’s star is on the rise:
I run weekly focus groups, and the moderators regularly ask Trump voters whom they would like to see inherit the party in 2028 and beyond. More and more, what we’re hearing in response is a strange new respect for Rubio. Although Vance might seem like a more natural MAGA heir, many Trump voters see Rubio as a stabilizing force who comes off a lot better than many of his peers inside the administration, including the vice president….
The first line of thinking among Rubio’s fans goes something like this: Because he has so many different jobs, he must be competent. Rubio currently serves as secretary of state and national security adviser, and until recently he served as acting USAID administrator and acting archivist of the United States. Voters see the memes tweaking Rubio for having such a laughable number of important titles and think he must be doing something right.
“He’s wearing multiple hats right now,” said Dave, a two-time Trump voter from West Virginia. “I think he’s doing a good job in his role. I think he speaks well.” He went on: “I’d prefer to see him continue to stay in one of these State Department roles. Or if Trump makes him the new ayatollah or something, maybe he can do that as well.”
Another reason voters seem to like Rubio: They see him as the “adult in the room.” This is understandable. Looking smart and sober is relatively easy when you’re surrounded by the likes of Pete Hegseth, Kash Patel, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Or, as she said on a Pod Saves America podcast about Rubio’s multiple appointments: "I think what people are taking away from that is like, there is one person in this administration who’s not a total clown.”
In this administration, “not a total clown” is akin to the “adult in the room” line — superficially appealing but damning with faint praise. Nonetheless, White House insiders totally not named Marco Rubio are speaking highly of Rubio as well, according to Politico’s Sophia Cai and Megan Messerly:
Some of President Donald Trump’s closest confidantes increasingly see Marco Rubio as a serious 2028 contender — an acknowledgement of the Floridian’s savvy handling of foreign conflicts and his ability to avoid political land mines….
Rubio has said he would not challenge Vance for the nomination and it remains to be seen whether his conversion to MAGA politics could win a majority of Trump’s base if he did run. For now, his growing number of admirers in the president’s inner circle describe Rubio’s belated embrace to Trumpism as a selling point. Trump loves the zeal of a convert and it’s a welcome contrast to some old-school Republican elites who shunned the party or avoided Washington rather than reconcile with the president….
A CPAC straw poll last month showed Rubio with a huge spike, to 35 percent up from 3 percent since last year. Vance, meanwhile, is down from last year’s 61 percent – though he still holds a commanding lead at 53 percent. YouGov polling shows a similar dynamic – a survey in April put Vance at the top of the list for potential Republican nominees at 63 percent, with Rubio at 42 percent – compared to a September poll that showed 65 percent for Vance and 33 percent for Rubio.
Rubio hasn’t displaced Vance on Trump’s shortlist, but conversations inside the West Wing include the secretary of state as a viable option to succeed Trump, according to two senior White House officials and five others close to the administration.
The hard-working staff here at Drezner’s World thinks the best way to interpret Rubio’s rise is through the dynamic of the Bad Boyfriend Benefit. No doubt, compared to Pete Hegseth, Kash Patel, Howard Lutnick, Steve Witkoff, and the rest of Trump’s D-list crew, the fact that Rubio knows something about international relations and can speak with confidence about U.S. foreign policy on camera is a plus.
The thing is, the moment one begins to pay any attention to Rubio’s actual foreign policy role, the more his acts of omission come into focus — particularly with respect to the decision to prosecute a war with Iran. As I explained last month:
It’s not obvious at all that Rubio has provided any value-added over any other lapdog who would have occupied his position in his stead. Like everyone else, he has functioned as a yes man for Trump. Indeed, he has failed in both of his foreign policy roles. As national security advisor, he has administered no real policymaking process. As Secretary of State, he has failed to persuade any one about the wisdom of U.S. military action….
Marco Rubio is not the architect of the Iran clusterfuck. But he is most definitely the author of the conditions that make the clusterfuck possible. At some point, the reckoning for his negligence will come back to haunt him.
This is not just my opinion. Here’s Lawrence Freedman from last month as well:
It is hard to convey the gloom that has overtaken Washington. All the structures that are vital to crisis management have either been attenuated or disbanded. There is hardly anyone left on the National Security Council staff. A friend described an empty State Department where you could hear your own foot steps. Marco Rubio is involved in the decision-making but he has neglected to acquire the professional staff assessments that should inform such decisions.
This past week there have been multiple pieces observing Rubio’s studied absence from the Iran portfolio. The Dispatch’s Nick Catoggio asks the obvious question: “The Iran war is the most serious foreign policy crisis that Donald Trump will ever have to manage, God willing. So why hasn’t his most serious deputy—who, as it happens, is in charge of foreign policy—taken a lead role in solving it?”
And here is the New York Times’ Michael Crowley:
Mr. Rubio did not attend the last U.S. meeting with Iran earlier this month. Nor did he join several meetings held over the past year in Geneva and Doha. Mr. Rubio has also been absent from U.S. delegations abroad working to settle the war in Ukraine and Israel’s war in Gaza. Despite a long period of crisis and war in the region, he has not visited the Middle East since a brief stop in Israel last October.
In recent months, Mr. Rubio — consumed with his second role, as Mr. Trump’s national security adviser — has not traveled much at all….
As Mr. Witkoff, Mr. Kushner and Vice President JD Vance met with Iranian officials in Pakistan earlier this month, Mr. Rubio was at Mr. Trump’s side at an Ultimate Fighting Championship event, noted Emma Ashford, an analyst of U.S. diplomacy at the nonpartisan Stimson Center in Washington. “Rubio clearly prefers to stay close to Trump,” Ms. Ashford said….
She echoed the complaints by many current and former diplomats that Mr. Rubio seems less like someone performing both jobs than a national security adviser who sometimes shows up at the State Department. “I do think it’s to the detriment of the whole department of State and to America’s ability to conduct diplomacy in general that we effectively have the secretary of state position sitting vacant,” she said….
Mr. Rubio divides his time between the State Department and the White House, often spending time at both in the same day. In an interview with Politico last June, Mr. Rubio said he visited the State Department “almost every day.”
I did laugh at the “almost every day” line.
The Financial Times’ Amy Mackinnon, Abigail Hauslohner and Ian Hodgson raises similar issues in their Rubio piece:
With two of Washington’s most powerful jobs, the secretary of state and national security adviser has been conspicuously absent from Donald Trump’s biggest international crisis: the war in Iran….
“Rubio may already sense that Iran is a complete loser, and the less he is associated with it, the better,” said Stephen Walt, a professor of international relations at Harvard University.
As Vance emerged this month from 21 hours of negotiations with Iranian officials in Islamabad with no breakthrough to show for it, Rubio was with Trump in Miami attending an Ultimate Fighting Championship match.
The paradox of Rubio’s dual responsibilities, coupled with his low profile on big issues, has been the source of both mockery and confusion….
Compared to his recent predecessors, Rubio is also spending less time overseas, according to an FT analysis of his travel schedule. During his first 15 months in office, Rubio has spent 71 days travelling — fewer than any other secretary of state this century over the same period.
One question is whether any of this will come up in a GOP primary when the other candidates — like JD Vance — manage to come across as more bumbling than Rubio. Of course, as TNR’s Greg Sargent points out, Rubio’s star is rising within a political movement that, “keeps purging itself down to its ever-more-molten core.” The real question is whether he can appeal to Trump’s broader 2024 electoral coalition — and one should be skeptical that anyone can replace Trump’s uniqueness in that way.
In some ways, the reward of running in 2028 is a poisoned chalice at best. At this point it seems highly unlikely that any Republican with strong Trump credentials will do well in the general election. Probably best for Rubio if JD Vance imploded in two years, clearing the field for him in 2032.
But if he is around in 2032, the hard-working staff here at Drezner’s World hopes that he is forced to address two important questions:
Why didn’t Rubio act like the grown-up in the room when it came to bombing Iran; and
When will Rubio admit that when it comes to his position on the deportation of international students, he is a lying liar who lies?
Until then, I will treat these trial balloons stories about Rubio as evidence that he is the least bad boyfriend in Trump’s cabinet. And boy is that not saying much.
What is possible is to praise Rubio's mediocrity. It is remarkable when placed in the context of the El Trumposo administration. He is a prime example of the Peter Principle squared. Held in some regard for his previous roles, he left no mark and ultimately has one concern: regime change in Cuba.The latter is noble, but he lacks principles and experience and is not trustworthy. He may not snort cocaine from a toilet, but he is one of the principal gravediggers of USAID.
Observers quickly forget that he has no history of genuine service to the nation to fall back on, no moral or ethical backbone, and does not have the national interest in mind.
He was and is disposable. High praise for him is an indication of the depths to which the Trumposo government has fallen, staffed as it by the cream of the crap,
It is easy to criticize Rubio but maybe the more important question is whether he is better than Vance? Also remember the parable of two friends and a bear 🐻. You don’t have to outrun the bear 🐻. Just your buddy.