Will Marco Rubio survive his mauling by Chris Christie?

One of the prime questions to be answered by today’s New Hampshire primary is whether Marco Rubio was seriously damaged by Chris Christie’s verbal assault during Saturday’s debate between the rivals for the Republican presidential nomination.

Bizarrely, Rubio returned to the same talking point four times during the debate, even after Christie mocked him for running a campaign built on 25-second sound bites. Florida’s freshman senator obviously wanted to drill into voters’ minds his argument that President Obama, far from being a clueless neophyte as Donald Trump and other GOP candidates contend, knew exeactly what he wanted to do in office. Rubio’s goal was to make two points: one, that Obama was intent on remaking America in the image of the more socialistic countries of Europe and, two, that a freshman senator can be effective for good or ill in the White House.

The main attack on Rubio, of course, is that he lacks experience. It was a smart line of thought to inject into the debate, but, once Rubio had slipped the verbiage into the conversation pretty much word for word more than once, Christie saw his chance to pounce. “There it is, there it is, the memorized 25-second speech,” Christie mocked. “There it is, everybody.”

Post-debate conventional wisdom said Rubio had really screwed up and may have squandered the bump he got from placing a strong third place in last week’s Iowa caucuses. Headlines in Politico said “Rubio chokes” and “Marco Rubio crashed and burned.” The Washington Post analyzed “How Chris Christie owned Marco Rubio in Saturday’s GOP debate.” Christie himself told CNN that “the whole race changed” after his smack-down and that the “anointment” of Rubio as the establishment alternative to the insurgent candidacies of Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz had been halted.

For his part, Rubio doubled down and defended his reiteration of the same point. And he did it repeatedly, if not robotically.

There is nothing new about a candidate sticking to the script developed by his managers and consultants. And Trump notoriously repeats the same lines about building a border wall and making America great again in an endless loop. Even Christie’s attack on Rubio was probably a preplanned tactic readied for the right moment. But Rubio had already been identified as the most closely managed candidate of the bunch, a guy who gives a good speech but struggles without a script, so the repetition reinforced a negative perception.

It is entirely possible Rubio blew it and Christie’s hammering has burst the Rubio boomlet. Still, in a campaign season where the wisdom of insiders and know-it-all pundits has proved to be wrong almost all the time, I would not bet on it. (The premature prognostications include my recent prediction that Rubio is the last, best hope for the Republican establishment.)

This year, there are no sure bets. When the votes from New Hampshire are reported tonight, look for more surprises.