He is a religious nut job that is why nobody cares and not even a very good one since he gives less then 1% of his income to charity. The only candidate still running that is nuttier when it comes to religion is Ben Carson.

He's not Hispanic he's Canadian

He can be both Hispanic and Canadian. One is a race the other a nationality. 

Hispanic is a derogatory term to most people you would call Hispanic. If you want a culturally correct catch all term use "Latino" or "Latina", as in "of Latin American origin".

I'm not entirely sure anyone should be congratulating anyone on winning a primary caucus in Iowa. I guess it's an historical first, but in terms of being an achievement for the status of Latino people in the USA it would probably be of no more note than if Obama had won the Iowa caucus but not gone on to win the nomination. A footnote in history nothing more. No one cares, or probably even remembers, that Hilary was the first woman to win the Iowa caucus. That's because she failed to become the nominated presidential candidate.

Also in terms of notable "non-wins" for African Americans I think Jesse Jackson will probably still go down as being the most successful African American non-winner in presidential primaries. He got 3rd over all in the 1984 primary race, and he won the primaries in Virginia, South Carolina, and Louisiana, and split Mississippi. So Ben Carson isn't, at this stage, the best performing African American to lose a primary. Not that that is an achievement of any great note. And of course there have been a few African Americans who have tried for the Republican nomination in the past, so him even being in the race is not something special.

Still I think Rubio has a very good chance at being the presidential candidate, which will be a big deal, and I'm sure people will make a thing of it when it actually becomes a thing of historical importance. Post Iowa there's really nothing of historical importance to see.

Hispanic my left nut. That bloated balloon doesn't represent anything Hispanic other than the last name.

No, I wouldn't. I think there are different kinds of racists in both camps.

Of course not. But you can't paint a whole party or ideology of people as being racist, when 60% of voters* support a minority.

*Obviously, just in Iowa. But considering the demographics of the Iowan Republican party (older, whiter, more Conservative than the national Republican party), that just enhances my point.

Breaking all kinds of glass ceilings!

Fair point, but it doesn't relate to the thread. He's religious, which appeals to the base in Iowa. Clearly, to Iowans, the content of his character was more important than his genetics.

It is somewhat significant. I'm not saying we need to celebrate and declare this date as a national holiday. I'm just saying that, you know, some acknowledgements in the mainstream media wouldn't go amiss, but, of course, that would go against their agenda.

I agree with your comments on Rubio.