Evidently that's what the election might be as Jeb Bush has basically declared himself a candidate today.
"On the same day that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) announced that "actively" exploring running for president in 2016, a new Washington Post-ABC News poll of Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents said that Bush leads the potential Republican primary field if Mitt Romney doesn't run.The poll found that, without Romney, Bush gets 15 percent followed by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) with 10 percent each."
"On the same day that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) announced that "actively" exploring running for president in 2016, a new Washington Post-ABC News poll of Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents said that Bush leads the potential Republican primary field if Mitt Romney doesn't run.The poll found that, without Romney, Bush gets 15 percent followed by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) with 10 percent each."
"But in a field in which Romney did run, Bush is in second. The poll found Romney with 20 percent followed by Bush with 10 percent, Paul with 9, then Ryan with 8, and then Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) with 7 percent. Not a single name left on the list gets more than 6 percent. See the full poll results here."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jeb-bush-mitt-romney-republican-voters-2016-primary-field
Everyone seems to think this leaves out Romney. I don't really get why as he still leads Bush. The feeling seems to be that many will now vacate the GOP primary field with him in and according to at least some I saw on CNN, his being yet another Bush won't hurt him at all.
If it is Bush vs. Clinton many will grouse about the 'dynastic election' as we have yet another round of Clinton and Bushes going head to head. Many people apparently think that elections must be about 'change'-change being first and foremost new faces. Anyone who thinks that won't be happy with this match up.
I don't necessarily have this fetish for 'newness.' I do wonder though about a third Bush. George W. Bush remains very unpopular and one of the most controversial of his policies have been in the news in the last few weeks. I don't know I buy those people who say that this won't be a problem for Jeb: either he repudiates his brother's torture policies or basically says that this is just going to be the third term of George W. Bush.
Yes I know there are those who will say the same thing about Hillary. I don't necessarily think that's a bad choice: which decade would you rather turn back to, the Clinton 90s or the Bush 2000s? To be sure, Hillary could just as soon be read as the third term for Obama.
I think that Jeb will not have that easy a time no matter how some are spinning it today. His views on immigration are both a double-edged sword. I for one have said that the Bush family has a pretty decent legacy on immigration-the father was for amnesty as was Bush W. I was never a W fan but immigration was one area that he was ahead of the rest of his party on. He also has a decent legacy in education and to an extent you might give him credit on the prescription drug benefit-although he also did seek to privatize Social Security. On Africa and Aids, W also has a commendable record.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2014/12/immigration-shows-gop-rule-party-always.html
The fact I'm praising Jeb on immigration doesn't necessarily bode well for him in a Republican primary. I appreciate that Jeb has stated he won't run on self-deport like Romney did-actually now the GOP has moved beyond self-deport to maximizing deportations; will the GOP primary voters do the same?
Yet despite all the praise I have given to the Bush family, Jeb's position here is problematic. He's against what the President did not on substance but on process.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2014/12/immigration-shows-gop-rule-party-always.html
I'm not so sure that Jeb's position here won't be the worst of all worlds-why would the Tea Partiers who hate the idea of any kind of amnesty or anything regarding reform other than building a fence on the border? Yet, I don't know why liberals or Latinos should vote for Jeb because he supports immigration reform as his party doesn't and he claims that Obama was somehow evil in opposing his party-even though he agrees with Obama on reform and not with his party.
This has always been the trouble with the Bushes on immigration. They support reform but their party doesn't and they are never willing to push it against the party's will. If that's the case why would you vote for him if you want reform?
Again, I don't see how Jeb hurts Romney as Romney beats him head to head but maybe the point is the donors are all going to save their powder for Jeb-who they agree with on immigration anyway. Rush Limbaugh thinks that Jeb is the establishment pick to make sure there isn't a Tea Party candidate.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/12/16/how-conservative-media-responded-to-jeb-bushs-2/201910
Media Matters seems to be criticizing the conservative media for floating conspiracy theories about Jeb. I for one thinking strategically as a liberal Democrat hope the GOP base does turn against him which could happen-remember what happened to 2008's establishment pick-Rudy Guiliani.
A Jeb candidacy in the general election would be tricky as he would claim that Latinos could vote for him ad he's for reform and amnesty which is misleading as he opposes Obama's executive action and his party opposes reform.
I am not a liberal rooting for a Jeb Bush candidacy-though I do think he's imminently beatable. The one conservative Media Matters quotes that I think might be on to something is Donald Trump who declared that the last thing we need is another Bush. Amen. I think that's a slogan that can catch on.
The Wall Street Journal-who Rush is right in that they really don't want a Tea party candidate tells us that Bush is a real conservative:
"Some conservatives say Jeb Bush isn’t one of them, citing a handful of positions that cut against Republican orthodoxy. A look at his record as governor of Florida suggests that’s not quite accurate.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jeb-bush-mitt-romney-republican-voters-2016-primary-field
Everyone seems to think this leaves out Romney. I don't really get why as he still leads Bush. The feeling seems to be that many will now vacate the GOP primary field with him in and according to at least some I saw on CNN, his being yet another Bush won't hurt him at all.
If it is Bush vs. Clinton many will grouse about the 'dynastic election' as we have yet another round of Clinton and Bushes going head to head. Many people apparently think that elections must be about 'change'-change being first and foremost new faces. Anyone who thinks that won't be happy with this match up.
I don't necessarily have this fetish for 'newness.' I do wonder though about a third Bush. George W. Bush remains very unpopular and one of the most controversial of his policies have been in the news in the last few weeks. I don't know I buy those people who say that this won't be a problem for Jeb: either he repudiates his brother's torture policies or basically says that this is just going to be the third term of George W. Bush.
Yes I know there are those who will say the same thing about Hillary. I don't necessarily think that's a bad choice: which decade would you rather turn back to, the Clinton 90s or the Bush 2000s? To be sure, Hillary could just as soon be read as the third term for Obama.
I think that Jeb will not have that easy a time no matter how some are spinning it today. His views on immigration are both a double-edged sword. I for one have said that the Bush family has a pretty decent legacy on immigration-the father was for amnesty as was Bush W. I was never a W fan but immigration was one area that he was ahead of the rest of his party on. He also has a decent legacy in education and to an extent you might give him credit on the prescription drug benefit-although he also did seek to privatize Social Security. On Africa and Aids, W also has a commendable record.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2014/12/immigration-shows-gop-rule-party-always.html
The fact I'm praising Jeb on immigration doesn't necessarily bode well for him in a Republican primary. I appreciate that Jeb has stated he won't run on self-deport like Romney did-actually now the GOP has moved beyond self-deport to maximizing deportations; will the GOP primary voters do the same?
Yet despite all the praise I have given to the Bush family, Jeb's position here is problematic. He's against what the President did not on substance but on process.
http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2014/12/immigration-shows-gop-rule-party-always.html
I'm not so sure that Jeb's position here won't be the worst of all worlds-why would the Tea Partiers who hate the idea of any kind of amnesty or anything regarding reform other than building a fence on the border? Yet, I don't know why liberals or Latinos should vote for Jeb because he supports immigration reform as his party doesn't and he claims that Obama was somehow evil in opposing his party-even though he agrees with Obama on reform and not with his party.
This has always been the trouble with the Bushes on immigration. They support reform but their party doesn't and they are never willing to push it against the party's will. If that's the case why would you vote for him if you want reform?
Again, I don't see how Jeb hurts Romney as Romney beats him head to head but maybe the point is the donors are all going to save their powder for Jeb-who they agree with on immigration anyway. Rush Limbaugh thinks that Jeb is the establishment pick to make sure there isn't a Tea Party candidate.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2014/12/16/how-conservative-media-responded-to-jeb-bushs-2/201910
Media Matters seems to be criticizing the conservative media for floating conspiracy theories about Jeb. I for one thinking strategically as a liberal Democrat hope the GOP base does turn against him which could happen-remember what happened to 2008's establishment pick-Rudy Guiliani.
A Jeb candidacy in the general election would be tricky as he would claim that Latinos could vote for him ad he's for reform and amnesty which is misleading as he opposes Obama's executive action and his party opposes reform.
I am not a liberal rooting for a Jeb Bush candidacy-though I do think he's imminently beatable. The one conservative Media Matters quotes that I think might be on to something is Donald Trump who declared that the last thing we need is another Bush. Amen. I think that's a slogan that can catch on.
The Wall Street Journal-who Rush is right in that they really don't want a Tea party candidate tells us that Bush is a real conservative:
"Some conservatives say Jeb Bush isn’t one of them, citing a handful of positions that cut against Republican orthodoxy. A look at his record as governor of Florida suggests that’s not quite accurate.
Mr. Bush championed tax cuts, privatized state jobs, fought for school vouchers, won power over the judiciary and labored to prolong the life of a brain-damaged woman, Terry Schiavo."
"Well before earmarks became a dirty word in Washington, he campaigned against such pet projects in Tallahassee, promising to veto spending items not approved by his administration. He wound up vetoing some $2 billion in spending over eight years."
"If Mr. Bush runs for president, his two terms as governor between 1999 and 2007, and the related question about his conservatism would likely be an issue."
“Honestly I don’t think I ever came across one person who told me he wasn’t being conservative enough,” said Al Cardenas, who was chairman of the Florida Republican Party during the Bush gubernatorial years
"Over his tenure, Mr. Bush cut taxes by some $19 billion, much of it benefiting businesses and investors, such as the repeal of a tax on investments. He created the first school-voucher program in the country, allowing students in failing schools to use public money for private-school tuition, a program later struck down by the state Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Another program, also being challenged in court, gives companies a tax credit if they donate for private school scholarships."
"Mr. Bush also sparked protests with his One Florida program, which aimed to end affirmative action preferences for minorities in universities and state contracting."
"Mr. Bush was initially opposed to offshore oil drilling, before backing down. He drove to increase the power of the governor’s office, winning total control over judicial nominations, which until then had been shared with the state bar association."
"On crime, he backed a mandatory sentencing law for offenders using guns and enhanced the state’s concealed carry law. He also signed the “stand your ground” law giving people the right to use deadly force when threatened, which later played a role in the debate over the shooting of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin. Mr. Bush has said he didn’t think the law applied in that case."
"For Republican activists, that record has been overshadowed by his more-recent positions on immigration and education. Mr. Bush has said if he runs for the presidency, he won’t back away from his support of granting legal status to many illegal immigrants, or for Common Core, a set of state-driven academic standards. He has also declined to sign a pledge promising never to raise taxes."
“He’s too moderate for the Republican base,” said one-time presidential contender Pat Buchanan in a recent television appearance, echoing a sentiment often heard from the party’s conservative activists.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/jeb-bush-built-conservative-record-as-florida-governor-1418761689
I quoted that in detail as I really hope that liberals are taking notes here. This is not someone that any real liberal should fall in love with as some Democrats seemed to be on tv today. It will be just like his elder brother, George W. Bush-the GOP will never accommodate the positive parts of Jeb's agenda like immigration but they'll be all for things like cutting taxes for the rich or the Terry Schiavo case-this is part of the 'pro-life' agenda where the state makes the tough moral choices that individuals allegedly aren't qualified to make. They oppose not just abortion but euthanasia.
Liberals need to understand that this election is huge-on the question of immigration, where a vote for Jeb is against immigration reform no matter how Jeb may try to spin this in a general election. On a woman's right to choose as well, where GOPers at the state level continue to beat back a woman's right to choose. The victor from the 2016 election may well get the chance to appoint not one but two SCJs and may be able to change the ideological makeup of the court.
It's also quite rich that he accuses the President of abusing executive power in doing something he himself agrees with, yet he usurped the state Supreme Court in favor of runaway Governor power when he was in office-recall that the recount debacle of 2000 happened with him at the helm-who knows how instrumental he was in cinching that for his big brother?
No comments:
Post a Comment