Marco Rubio looked like a winner last night–like a candidate who can win in 2016, I mean. Yet he’ll want to sort through a discrepancy that CNN cites:

Fact check: Marco Rubio on allowing abortions in certain instances.
Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida disagreed with debate moderator Megyn Kelly for suggesting that he supports exceptions to an abortion ban in cases of rape and incest.
But the record shows otherwise.
Although Rubio has said he personally believes life begins at conception and that all human life is worthy of protection, Rubio cosponsored S. 1670, the Senate’s Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act of 2013. The legislation would have prohibited abortion except in certain circumstances, including if “the pregnancy is the result of rape, or the result of incest against a minor.”
We find Rubio’s claim False.

If we parse Rubio’s actual words, we may find that what he said gives him a bit of wiggle room. In the future, though, he’s going to want to be clearer on this point. The risk is not so much in the content of what he says–I suspect that reasonable pro-lifers will accept differences on the question of incest–but in failing to speak with the precision that is one of his strengths.

UPDATE: Ramesh has an excellent comment on this topic.