The 2016 notebook includes notes, quotes, and newsworthy tidbits of what potential presidential candidates are doing and have done that could be significant to 2016. It will run occasionally on Fridays on First Read between now and when candidates actually start declaring.

Former First Lady and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is more popular than almost any political figure in Washington over the past four years. And that's exactly why Democrats think Republicans are going so hard after Benghazi.

"It's obvious it's an attempt to embarrass President Obama and embarrass Hillary Clinton," Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) told Capitol Hill reporters. He added, “I mean, most everyone knows, if she wants to run for president, she's going to get that nomination.”

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) made a similar point on CBS's Face the Nation Sunday. "This has been caught up in the 2016 presidential campaign, this effort to go after Hillary Clinton," Durbin said.

Former Obama adviser David Axelrod told MSNBC’s Morning Joe also went there. "I really view the Benghazi flare-up right now as throwing a high hard one at Hillary Clinton to try and dissuade her from running for president," he said.

For his part, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa insisted on Meet the Press Sunday that simply was not the case. "Hillary Clinton's not a target,” Issa said of his committee's investigation.

Still, there was plenty of criticism of the Clinton, the likely 2016 Democratic front-runner if she runs, from others, as First Read noted May 9. Lindsey Graham also this week said if Clinton were “in the military, she wouldn’t be promoted.” And opponents are readying a scandal-filled movie about her life.

Rand Paul, another likely 2016 candidate who told Clinton she should have been fired during questioning, said this on FOX: "It sounds like Hillary Clinton’s fingerprints are all over these talking points. And really her resignation was a beginning, but she never really accepted culpability, and I think she really needs to accept culpability for this disaster.”

Yet Clinton continues to lead in 2016 hypothetical polls. A New England College poll showed her winning a New Hampshire Democratic primary 65%-10% over Vice President Joe Biden.

In that same poll, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and Paul were all in a statistical dead heat.

Clinton also beats Rubio in Virginia, 51%-38%.

Clinton is a linchpin in many ways for 2016. Democrats know they have few other choices. Biden cannot be dismissed, but it's not helpful to his cause that he continues to be a punchline for late-night comics.

“Remember in the old days when President Obama's biggest embarrassment was Joe Biden?" quipped Tonight Show host Jay Leno.

Clinton not only leads, but is up by sizable margins over potential GOP rivals. Republicans have to take notice. 

Other 2016 notes:

Speaking of Clinton, by the way, former Michigan Gov.-turned-TV-personality Jennifer Granholm lent her name to a draft Hillary group fundraising email.

Paul hit the op-ed circuit this week, going after President Obama. He went after the president in an one, calling the firing of the IRS acting commissioner “not enough. The executive branch has been aware of this scandal for nearly two years and now, only as a result of massive public pressure, the administration has found a scapegoat.”

He wrote another op-ed Thursday, in which he said, “Lincoln wrote that nearly any man can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man, give him power. I think Mr. Obama has failed that test of power. From the cover-up in Benghazi to letting the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) target the Tea Party to First and Fourth Amendment violations in obtaining records from the press, Mr. Obama has shown disregard for the Bill of Rights and his responsibilities as commander in chief.”

Paul, by the way, is going to New Hampshire Monday, headlining the first-ever -- and sold-out -- Liberty Dinner in Concord, N.H. with RNC Chairman Reince Priebus. It’s designed to merge factions of the GOP.

McClatchy looked at the preparations Biden has made to run in 2016. His 2012 financial disclosure was released. It showed that he took out a second home loan in two years, this one valued between $100,000 and $250,000. Biden’s net worth is between $239,000 and $867,000. He could have needed the home-equity line for his daughter’s June wedding reception which he hosted at his Delaware home.

And it showed he made virtually nothing -- $0 to $201 -- in book royalties.

Joked Biden during his commencement address at the University of Pennsylvania Monday: “When I did my financial disclosure as Vice President the first time, the Washington Post said ‘It’s probable: no man has assumed the office of Vice President with fewer assets than Joe Biden,’ I hope they were talking financial assets. Then there was all this discussion why I had no money. I’ll tell you why I had no money: four years at Penn, three years of Syracuse, four years at Georgetown, three years at Yale, two years at Tulane, two years at Penn, and now a granddaughter at Penn. … This is a much cheaper way to get a degree.”

Speaking of that commencement speech at Penn, FactCheck.org says he flubbed some details: “Vice President Joe Biden falsely claimed that U.S. workers ‘are three times as productive as any worker in the world.’ He’s not even close. By the standard measure for productivity, American workers ranked third in the world behind Norway and Ireland in 2011.Biden also stated that the U.S. economy is ‘two and a half times bigger than any other in the world.’ That’s close, but still wrong. Last year the U.S. economy was not quite double the size of China’s economy, which is the second largest in the world.” 

And there was the hand-written note Biden sent to a 7-year-old in Wisconsin about guns being able to shoot chocolate: “Dear Myles, I am sorry it took so very long to respond to your letter. I really like your idea. If we had guns that shot chocolate, not only would our country be safer, it would be happier. People love chocolate. You are a good boy, Joe Biden.”

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal’s financial disclosure was also filed (but it doesn’t show a net worth). The main source of his income was his $128,000 a year salary with some dividends from stocks.

Jindal, as chairman of the Republican Governors Association, is calling on President Obama to appoint a special prosecutor in the IRS controversy. Jindal was also in New Hampshire last weekend. "We don't need to be focused on 2016 right now,” he said. “Let's focus on the debate. Let's win the debate.”

Martin O’Malley, who got 0% in the New Hampshire poll, “signed a gun-control bill that is among the country's most sweeping legislative responses to the December mass shooting in Newtown, Conn,” the Baltimore Sun writes. “The law bans the sale of assault-style rifles, including the AR-15 used in the Newtown killing of six educators and 20 first- and second-graders. The law limits gun ownership for people with mental illness, outlaws the sale of high-capacity magazines and establishes the nation's first new handgun licensing scheme in two decades. Maryland will join five other states in requiring such licenses, a move that O'Malley said "will substantially lower gun deaths."

He also signed into law “Maryland's first gas tax increase in 20 years into law on Thursday and announced $1.2 billion in highway and transit projects,” NBC Washington reports. So if you live in Maryland, that means it’ll cost you about 4 cents a gallon more to fill up your tank.

If Clinton doesn’t run, some have floated Kirsten Gillibrand as a potential candidate. She’s taken the lead on a host of family related issues and been out front on military sexual assault cases.

Or could it be Elizabeth Warren, who proposed legislation reducing student-loan rates and she wants the Obama Justice Department to take the big banks to court.

Marco Rubio accused the White House of creating a “culture of intimidation” on MSNBC’s The Daily Rundown with Chuck Todd. He echoed that on FOX: “The president doesn’t have clean hands in this because, as I said yesterday on the floor of the Senate … this administration has created a culture of intimidation.” He added, “These are things you typically see in the Third World from unestablished republics and other places.”

Some conservatives are still hammering him for his pursuit of comprehensive immigration.

Chris Christie was showing Prince Harry around the Jersey Shore. He also went negative despite huge leads in his bid for reelection this year.

Bob McDonnell’s approval “dipped to his lowest job-approval rating in two years,” AP wrote of his 49% rating in Quinnipiac. But “few voters are aware” of the FBI inquiry into his accepting of money from a major donor for his daughter’s wedding.

Meanwhile, Jeb Bush was honored as a “Friend of Armenians.”

Rick Santorum has an op-ed with another heart-tugging story of a child who died.

Sen. Marco Rubio's political action committee is going up with a TV ad defending New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte's votes on gun control.

"Safety, security, family - no one understands these things like a mom, and no one works harder for them than this one," the ad says, showing a photo of Ayotte. "A former prosecutor, Kelly Ayotte knows how to reduce gun violence."

The ad, being run by Reclaim America PAC, represents the first time the PAC has gone on air for a specific candidate. Reclaim will spend six figures on the ad, a source familiar with the buy said, in New Hampshire markets. The ad will start airing on Tuesday.

Ayotte, who is not up for reelection until 2016, has been the focus of gun-control advocates after she voted against the compromise bill on stricter background checks proposed by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) last month. Ayotte got into a back-and-forth with a Newtown family member victim at a town hall earlier this month during a congressional recess in New Hampshire.

A Dartmouth poll out Monday showed Ayotte's favorability rating slipping in the Granite State, a place Barack Obama won twice. Ayotte's negative rating ticked up seven points in the poll, going from 36 percent favorable, 24 percent negative before the gun debate to 37 percent positive, 31 percent negative afterward.

This story was originally published on Mon May 13, 2013 1:27 PM EDT

In his Sunday blitz hitting seven different morning news programs, Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., not only discussed immigration reform.

He also talked about his opposition to gun control -- especially after voting against last week's effort to begin debate on the Democratic-backed Senate gun legislation. (The Senate voted, 68-31, to begin debate.)

On "Meet the Press," Rubio told NBC's David Gregory that he voted against the effort because he has concerns about any potential new gun law infringing on 2nd Amendment rights.

“I didn't write that into the Constitution,” he said. “That's in there. And any time that you're going to do anything that impacts a constitutional right, the scrutiny should be very, very high.”

Rubio also defended his opposition to the bipartisan compromise – drafted by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) – establishing background checks on firearm sales by arguing that such laws won't deter criminals. 

“My skepticism about gun laws is that criminals don’t follow the law,” he said. “They don’t care what the law is. You can pass any law you want, criminals will ignore it.”

But that's a straw-man argument, gun-control advocates counter. Testifying in February before the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights, Daniel Webster, the director of John Hopkins' gun policy center, contended that such logic would prevent laws against drunk driving -- because criminals don't follow the law.

Top Republican immigration reform negotiator and potential 2016 presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio said Sunday that he has not considered the 'political calculus' of pushing legislation that will be a magnet for criticism from some within his own party. 

"I, quite frankly, have avoided making the political calculus on this issue," the Florida senator said during an interview on NBC's Meet the Press. 

"What we have now isn't good for anybody," he added. "What we have in place today, the status quo, is horrible for America."

Seeking to assuage conservative concerns about the soon-to-be-unveiled immigration reform bill drafted by the bipartisan Gang of Eight, Rubio said the legislation, which would offer undocumented immigrants the opportunity to pursue legal status and eventually apply for a visa, does not "reward" those who broke the law.

"It doesn't reward or doesn't award them anything," he said. "But it does give them access to our legal immigration system through a process that will not encourage people to come here illegally in the future, and then through a process that isn't unfair for people that have done it the right way." 

Rubio, a conservative affiliated with the Tea Party and one of just three Latinos in the Senate, added that the bill will not allow undocumented immigrants to achieve citizenship faster than those waiting to come to the country legally. 

"If you're waiting to come legally to the United States now, no one who has done it the wrong way will get it before you.  In fact, it will be much cheaper, faster, easier and less bureaucratic if you're doing it the right way," he said. 

The interview with NBC's David Gregory was part of a weekend media blitz for Rubio, who appeared on all network Sunday shows as well as on Spanish-language programs to sell the immigration bill. The measure, which is expected to be unveiled on Tuesday, is sure to face fierce opposition from conservatives who oppose any legal status for undocumented immigrants.

While the full details of the path to citizenship have not been formally released by the Gang of Eight, reports have indicated that undocumented immigrants will be required to pay fines and back taxes and wait 10 years in a "probationary" status before becoming eligible to apply for a merit-based visa.

Asked if his shepherding of the immigration measure would help him in a potential matchup against a top Democrat like former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016, Rubio again demurred. 

"This is not about improving anyone's poll number numbers," he said. "This is very simple. I'm a Senator. I get paid not to just give speeches. I get paid to solve problems."

In the early jockeying for the 2016 presidential race, one of Sen. Marco Rubio’s, R-Fla., major selling points is that he brings diversity and can expand the party’s influence with Hispanic voters, especially after the shellacking the GOP took with the demographic group in 2012.

Unlike other Republicans, Hispanics view Rubio more positively than negatively -- 23 percent viewed him favorably while 12 percent viewed him negatively, according to an oversample of 300 Latinos in the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Telemundo poll. Another 40 percent either did not know him or had no opinion.

Of course, elections are choices, and a potential major obstacle for Rubio in 2016 could be Hillary Clinton, if she decides to run. The former secretary of state, New York senator, and first lady of a popular former Democratic president, was the most popular politician among Hispanics in the poll.

Barack Obama is still very popular with the group -- he has a 62 percent job approval, for example, when Americans at large gave him just a 47 percent rating. And he has a sky-high 64 percent positive, 19 percent negative rating with Hispanics.

But Clinton is even more popular. She’s viewed positively by 65 percent of Hispanics with just 13 percent giving her a negative rating.

In the Sept. 2012 NBC/WSJ poll, Mitt Romney was also viewed positively by 23 percent of Hispanics, but he had a 53 percent negative rating. He wound up losing 71 percent of Hispanics, one of the fastest-growing groups in the country who made up 10 percent of the electorate in 2012.

That was the worst showing by a Republican presidential candidate since Bob Dole in 1996 -- and Hispanics were half the size of the electorate than they were last year.

Hispanics are largely undecided about Rubio, but he starts off positive, and there’s room to for him to grow.

“Senator Rubio has impressive name identification for a first-term U.S. Senator with roughly six out of ten Hispanic/Latinos who recognize his name and a solid 23% positive versus 12% negative rating,” said Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted the survey with Democrat Peter D. Hart. “Among Hispanics 40-years-old and older, his positive/negative numbers improve to 32%/13%. Compellingly, he maintains a modest net positive even among Hispanic Democrats (18% positive/15% negative).”

Still, the conservative Florida senator who speaks Spanish fluently and is a son of Cuban immigrants, faces some obvious challenges.

Hispanics, though somewhat socially conservative, tend to be economically liberal, view the Republican Party negatively, and largely line up with Democrats on a range of issues, from guns to immigration.

On immigration, Rubio faces a tricky test in the next few months. He is helping to shepherd comprehensive legislation through Congress with a principal task of selling it to conservatives, especially when it comes to a path for citizenship for immigrants in the United States illegally.

Many conservatives, especially in the House and in the grassroots rank and file, are staunchly opposed to a path for citizenship.

Four-in-five Hispanics, on the other hand, are in favor of one. So, as Rubio tries to make the sell to conservatives and get something through they can support, he’s also going to have to convince Latinos, who are closely watching the immigration debate, that what he pushes for will be strong enough.

It’s also not clear how Rubio’s Cuban heritage would play or if it would matter – 51 percent of Hispanics in the poll said they were of Mexican descent versus just 4 percent who said they had Cuban roots. Another 16 percent said their families hail from Central and South America, and 8 percent were from Puerto Rico.

By the way, former President George W. Bush’s time away from the spotlight has done him some good with Hispanics. But he is still overwhelmingly viewed negatively (44 percent negative versus 29 percent positive). But both numbers are improvements from 2008 at the tail end of his presidency. In September 2008, just 21 percent of Hispanics had a positive impression of him versus 68 percent, who had a negative one.

On the issues, Hispanics continue to be more in line with Democrats than Republicans -- 56 percent identified as Democrats and just 20 percent identified as Republicans.

On gun restrictions, Hispanics are more liberal than other Americans with 70 percent believing laws on guns sales should be stricter. Just 55 percent of all adults believed the same.

On the budget, about half of Hispanics -- 49 percent -- think the sequester will have no impact on them or their families, lower than the 58 percent of all Americans who said so.

More Hispanics -- 41 percent -- said they believe the sequester cuts will hurt the economy rather than help. But, interestingly, three-in-10 think the spending cuts are a good thing and would help the economy. That’s nearly double that of all adults who said the same -- 16 percent.

Some interesting demographic notes:

- 56 percent of Hispanics identified as Democrats and just 20 percent identified as Republicans.
- Yet, just 23 percent identify themselves as liberal and 38 percent identify as conservatives, which is similar to the split among all Americans – 25 percent liberal, 26 percent conservative.
- Of all Americans, 44 percent identified as Democrats, 35 percent as Republicans.
- 51 percent of Hispanics say they have at least some college education versus 72 percent of the rest of Americans.

The oversample of 300 Hispanics or Latinos was conducted as part of the larger NBC/WSJ poll from April 5-8. It has a margin of error is +/- 5.7%.

They both were elected in 2010 under the Tea Party banner after beating primary opponents favored by the Republican establishment. They’re both rising stars in the modern GOP, and, last weekend, they finished first and second place in a straw poll of conservatives’ pick of a presidential nominee for 2016.

And as they both maneuver to mount their own campaigns that year – or, at least, preserve the option of doing so – Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Marco Rubio, R-Fla., must share the spotlight. Intentionally or not, they’re already jockeying to do so.

Both senators have carefully worked to build their national profiles following the 2012 election, using high-profile opportunities to plot slightly different paths toward the same goal.

On no issue is that more apparent than immigration.

Rubio had joined with three other Senate Republicans and four Senate Democrats in recent months to forge a bipartisan framework on a comprehensive overhaul to immigration laws that would provide undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship. The Florida senator embarked on a media tour in the weeks following the framework’s unveiling to sell the plan to skeptical conservatives, doing the legwork to build political cover for the plan (and gain valuable exposure to the Republican base in the meanwhile).

Paul made clear with a speech on Tuesday – in which he unveiled his own plan creating an eventual pathway to citizenship – that Rubio isn’t the only GOP player on the issue. 

“Immigration reform will not occur until conservative Republicans, like myself, become part of the solution,” Paul told the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. “I am here today to begin that conversation.” 

Both Paul and Rubio might support the broader goal of immigration reform; they both took strides to carve out public roles for themselves in the process. 

For her part, Rubio ally Ana Navarro said the notion of a rivalry between the two men was “overblown by the media.” 

“Rand Paul is a leader in the Republican Party, and he should add his voice to the debate on immigration. His voice can and does make a difference,” she said. “The bottom line is, this is not an issue Marco or any one senator individually can or should carry alone on his shoulders. The more people helping to carry the ball, the more likely we will cross the finish line.” 

But while the two senators might not share a formal rivalry, they are undoubtedly two of the GOP’s biggest stars right now whose utterances alone command attention.

Look no further than last week’s Conservative Political Action Conference, where Paul and Rubio finished first and second, respectively, in the gathering’s closely-watched straw poll. A quarter of straw poll participants supported Paul and 23 percent threw their support behind Rubio. (The two gave back-to-back speeches on Thursday at CPAC.) The next closest finisher in the straw poll checked in at 7 percent.

The close finish between the two senators reflects all the work beyond immigration they’ve each done to burnish their profiles in 2013.

Republican leaders, of course, tapped Rubio to deliver their official response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address – a speech that was generally well received for its content, if ridiculed for the Florida senator’s awkward pause for a swig of bottled water.

Delivering the official Tea Party response to the State of the Union that very evening? None other than Paul.

Rubio has also built up his foreign policy credentials by taking a trip in February to Israel and Jordan, and delivering major policy addresses (including one about that trip abroad).

Paul, meanwhile, drew considerable attention for his filibuster of Obama’s nominee to head the CIA on March 6, a 13-hour affair that won him praise from fellow Republicans. (Rubio at one point appeared on the Senate floor to deliver his own remarks in favor of Paul’s efforts.)

"Rand has made progress with the filibuster," said Dave Carney, the chief strategist for Texas Gov. Rick Perry's presidential campaign and a political consultant based in the influential primary state of New Hampshire. "Neither one has huge advantage here as of now."

Both senators are undeniably positioning themselves with 2016 in mind. Paul is at least open about that, acknowledging his potential interest in seeking the Republican nomination (like his father, former Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas) in several interviews. The Iowa GOP on Tuesday announced that Paul would headline their Lincoln Day dinner, further stoking speculation.

Rubio’s team is quicker to downplay the Florida senator’s ambitions, dismissing any talk of a presidential campaign as far too premature, just a few months removed from the last campaign.

But as each of them jockey for pole position heading into 2016, it may fall to the differences between Rubio and Paul to distinguish themselves from each other. For starters, Paul tends to emphasize a more libertarian and cautious foreign policy, while Rubio has generally been more willing to strike hawkish tones.

Both senators’ CPAC speeches are also instructive in parsing out how they make their pitch to conservatives.

Paul made a firm appeal, for instance, to revolutionize the Republican Party, and return the GOP to its small-government, libertarian roots.

“They want leaders that won't feed them a line of crap or sell them short. They aren't afraid of individual liberty,” he said of the new generation of young conservatives, calling the current GOP establishment “stale and moss-covered.”

Rubio, by contrast, emphasized his own biography as the son of immigrants, and stressed aspirational tone in his speech to CPAC.

“We don’t need a new idea, the idea is America, and it still works,” the Florida senator said.

It was split personality Thursday at the first day of the Conservative Political Action Conference, where panelists who favored immigration reform shared the same stage with conservatives who continued to question the Obama administration's explanation for Benghazi.

The conservative movement's reformists got their time in the spotlight, but so did figures who continue to hew to Republican orthodoxy — a display of the identity crisis that has plagued the GOP following successive losses in two presidential elections.

Take, for instance, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio's speech early this afternoon, in which he said conservative principles "still work."

"Our challenge is to create an agenda," he said, "applying our time-tested principles to the challenges of today."

The speaker immediately following him, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (who, like Rubio, is thought of as a contender for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016), struck a different note.

He told conference attendees that "the GOP of old has grown stale and moss-covered," suggesting that the party was ripe for re-invention. (It's new direction, Paul said, involved "going forward to the classical and timeless ideas.")

Nonetheless, their speeches were symptomatic of the identity crisis from which the conservative movement is currently suffering.

The same conference that hosted a panel on offering undocumented immigrants a pathway to citizenship — regarded as a politically forward-thinking proposal for Republicans — featured another rehashing the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks on a U.S. diplomatic post in Libya, dwelling on conspiracy theories about the Obama administration's response to those attacks.

The CPAC scene was no less full of its knocks on the media, or vendors peddling radio shows or magazines for conference attendees.

The first day of CPAC saw a movement being beckoned toward the future, but with its heels dragging firmly in the past.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, R, served up a familiar portion of conservative red meat to CPAC attendees on Thursday, endearing himself to activists who could help propel him to a higher political office in the future. 

Rubio received a rock star's welcome before speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference, where he used his 15-some-minute slot to extol traditional conservative positions on taxes, education, abortion, same-sex marriage and trade with China. 

"We don't need a new idea. The idea's America, and it still works," said Rubio, to major applause, anticipating that liberals would criticize his remarks for offering no new ideas.

But the Florida senator declined to ruffle any feathers, too. He didn't even mention the immigration overhaul on which he's worked, which would provide a pathway to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented residents currently in the United States.

Rather, Rubio argued to conservatives that there is no need to abandon their bedrock principles amid a bout of soul-searching within the GOP about how to broaden the party's appeal. The Florida senator repeatedly noted that the world has changed, but made the case for why standby Republican policies should stay the same. 

"Just because I believe that states should have the right to define marriage in a traditional way does not make me a bigot," he said. 

"The people who are actually close-minded in American politics are the people that love to preach about the certainty of science in regards to our climate, but ignore the absolute fact that science has proven that life begins at conception," Rubio added.

Providing his prescription for the GOP as it searches for a winning path forward, Rubio said: "Our challenge is to create an agenda applying our principles — our principles, they still work — applying our time-tested principles to the challenges of today."

In essence, Rubio firmly staked himself in the camp of Republicans who argue that the party's makeover is more cosmetic than policy-based. 

And the one issue on which Rubio has been willing to defy party orthodoxy — immigration — went unmentioned.

The Republican Party’s internal struggle over how to expand its reach will play out in stark relief at this week’s Conservative Political Action Conference, with activists locked in a near-civil war over the basic question of who should be part of the movement – and who should not.

This year’s meeting has already made news with its exclusion of notable names from the invite list: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. 

There will be plenty of conservative stars, like Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Rand Paul of Kentucky, along with 2012 vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan (among other potential 2016 presidential candidates). And attendees will have a chance to reacquaint themselves with familiar names and faces from the not-so-distant past such as Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin and the ubiquitous Donald Trump.

But the annual conservative confab comes at a serious and crucial moment for the Republican Party: Its last two presidential nominees lost decisively to President Barack Obama, and its lone instrument of power -- the GOP majority in the House -- has been constantly plagued by infighting between conservative insurgents and its establishment-minded leadership.

And the American right seems as divided as ever over the path forward.

“I think, increasingly, we as Republicans have come across as intolerant and unfocused on the needs of the underserved,” said Fred Malek, a fixture of GOP politics for decades.

“And we need to speak much more to the aspirational needs of people, and not speak about the dependence of the ‘47 percent,’” he added, referencing 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s infamous comments, “but rather how the ‘47 percent’ become part of the 25 percent or 10 percent or 1 percent.”

Ideological fealty to marginalize GOP?
That internal struggle threatens to spill into the open at CPAC, a gathering that has been established as an important gathering for official Republicans, yet still attracts the kind of stalwart conservative activists who have helped to ignite this GOP family feud. 

“I thought it was a mistake to exclude Christie,” said Vin Weber, a former Republican congressman who remains active in the party’s political leadership. “It reinforces this narrow, closed stereotype of Republicans.”

Christie angered conservatives by agreeing to implement insurance exchanges under Obama’s health care reform law, and for praising the president’s handling of Hurricane Sandy just days before the election. McDonnell upset conservatives with his new transportation law, which includes some new taxes.

“I would argue that they do not have too much to offer up in terms of the future of the conservative movement,” Jeff Bell, of the American Principles Project, said of the two governors.

Those warring views cut to the heart of the modern GOP’s internal rift. On one side are conservatives who are eager to excommunicate Republicans who commit the slightest act of ideological heresy. The other faction is composed of Republicans who worry that the party’s insistence on ideological fealty will continue to marginalize the GOP amid a changing electorate.

Though no immediate resolution is in sight, the Republican National Committee will weigh in following its own autopsy of the party’s shortcomings during last fall’s elections. It will recommend improved digital operations and a more robust outreach, but is also expected to emphasize the need for some candidates to speak in less shrill terms about sensitive issues.

“We can’t run the same campaigns. For some, it means that boneheaded comments about rape and women – that’s just not going to fly,” said a source familiar with the report, referencing GOP Senate candidates in Indiana and Missouri who lost winnable races last fall due to their controversial comments about rape.

Romney's first remarks since election
The forthcoming RNC report and this week’s CPAC gathering add up to a potentially pivotal week for the future of the party.

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters file photo

Sen. Marco Rubio addresses the American Conservative Union's annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, February 9, 2012.

And though McDonnell and Christie were excluded from the gathering, other corners of the GOP will be well-represented. Tea Party darlings like Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. and Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, will each speak.

Also on display will be conservatives who may hope to unify the GOP as the party’s presidential nominee in 2016. Along with Rubio, Paul and Ryan, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker will also address attendees.

The influential conference concludes with an oft-hyped, closely watched straw poll of attendees’ preference in a presidential nominee.

A past winner of two such straw polls, Romney, will make his first public speech since the election on Friday. And former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, whose national star power has waxed and waned in the scope of a single presidential election cycle, will speak on Saturday.

“There’s going to be a lot of heat, but not much light,” on the presidential front said Craig Shirley, a Reagan biographer and conservative PR guru. “It’s not going to resolve itself until the first stirrings of the 2014 midterm elections.”

Related:

On eve of CPAC, GOP searches for identity, policy principles

Obama's meeting with GOP: Cordial, but no consensus

This story was originally published on Thu Mar 14, 2013 4:31 AM EDT

It is polls like this that supporters of Hillary Clinton hope will drag the popular former secretary of state into the 2016 presidential race.

In a Quinnipiac poll out Thursday, the ex-New York senator beats all comers in the 2016 presidential field in hypothetical match ups against several top rivals.

The poll tested Democrats Clinton, Vice President Joe Biden, and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo individually against Republicans -- New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, and Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan, who ran as Mitt Romney’s vice-presidential pick in 2012 against President Barack Obama.

Clinton was the only Democrat to beat all three Republicans, and Christie, who was not invited to next week’s conservative confab CPAC, showed the most strength for the GOP.

Clinton beats Christie, 45-37 percent, Ryan 50-38 percent, and Rubio by an even wider 50-34 percent.

By contrast, Biden would lose narrowly to Christie 43-40 percent. Biden, however, defeats Rubio 45-38 percent and Ryan 45-42 percent.

Cuomo -- son of ex-Gov. Mario Cuomo, who had been urged to run for president in 1988 and 1992 -- loses badly to neighboring state governor Christie, 45-28 percent. He also loses to Ryan, 42-37 percent and would tie with Rubio at 37 percent.

Clinton left her job as Obama’s secretary of state with sky-high favorability ratings -- 56 percent viewed her positively, while just 25 percent viewed her negatively.

Of course, if she were to throw her hat into the presidential arena, her image would likely take a hit, as partisans retreat to their corners. During the height of the Democratic primary in March 2008, for example, Clinton’s favorability was just 37 percent positive, 48 percent negative.

But as the primary campaign ended, and she was able to take on the statesman role of secretary of state, her image has been rehabilitated. 

This story was originally published on Thu Mar 7, 2013 8:57 AM EST

As Marco Rubio works to build his profile nationally, Americans who do have an opinion of the Florida senator have a slightly net-negative toward him.

A Pew Research Center poll released Wednesdayfound that 26 percent of U.S. adults have a favorable opinion of the Florida Republican, versus 29 percent who have an unfavorable opinion of Rubio. Thirty-one percent of the poll’s respondents said they hadn’t heard of Rubio; 15 percent said they couldn’t rate him.

The poll was conducted Feb. 14-17, following Rubio’s nationally-televised response to President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address.

The results suggest that Rubio has some work ahead of him to build his profile, and move voters’ opinion of him into net-positive territory, especially if he chooses to pursue the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.

In addition to delivering the State of the Union response, Rubio has participated in bipartisan negotiations to craft a comprehensive immigration reform bill. He’s worked in recent weeks to sell that legislation to conservatives in particular. Rubio also took a high-profile, official trip to Israel and Jordan this week.

The poll found that independents held mixed views – 25 percent favorable, 24 percent unfavorable – toward Rubio.

The Florida senator fares much better among Republicans and Americans who agree with the Tea Party.

Forty-nine percent of Republicans say they have a favorable opinion toward Rubio, versus 18 percent who have an unfavorable opinion of him; nearly a third of Republicans, 32 percent, could not offer a rating of Rubio in the Pew poll. Those who agree with the Tea Party more broadly favor Rubio, 70 to 7 percent.

The Pew poll has a 3.7 percent margin of error for its total sample of all Americans. The subsample of Republicans has a 7.3 percent margin of error, and the subsample of independents has a 6.6 percent margin of error.

Sen. Marco Rubio really wants nothing to do with President Barack Obama's immigration backup plan.

Rubio's office on Tuesday released a statement insisting that the plan the Florida Republican is working on has "major differences" from the White House blueprint that was leaked to USA Today over the weekend. Spokesman Alex Conant pointed to a number of measures they say are missing from the White House plan: tying the a path to citizenship to border security, a new visa exit system and a plan to deal with future immigrants.

And Conant said no one in Rubio's office has met with the White House to talk immigration.

"President Obama and the White House staff are not working with Republicans on immigration reform. Senator Rubio’s office has never discussed immigration policy with anyone in the White House," Conant said.

On Tuesday, the White House insisted it was in fact working with lawmakers on the issue. Obama has said he wants the Senate to write a bipartisan immigration proposal, but that he'll release his own plan if that process drags.

"We have been in contact with everyone involved in this effort on Capitol Hill," White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.

Asked to clarify, Rubio's spokesman said the administration had sent agency officials to brief Senate staffers for the bipartisan group of eight senators who are working on immigration reform -- but insisted policy was not discussed.

Gary Cameron / Reuters

Senator Marco Rubio, R-Fla.

"They've never asked for our input. (And, frankly, we've never asked for theirs.)," Conant wrote in an email.
Senior administration officials said that staffers from the White House had attended at least 5 briefings with congressional staffers working on bipartisan reform. At different points, officials from relevant government agencies also briefed the staff group.

Some Republicans have suggested the White House's separate plan could help GOP supporters distance themselves from the president and highlight the compromises in a Senate plan. Rubio's office rejected that analysis.

"The White House has injected additional partisanship into an already difficult process, and raised fresh questions about the president’s seriousness about passing reform," Conant said.