Jeb Bush Isn't a Conservative?

[Procrustes Stretched]

That he is not considered so by many just shows how rigidly lock-step the Republican base has become with their check-the-box, unimaginative mentality.

Here are two articles recently about Bush's time as governor. He certainly was never criticized as being "too moderate" when he was governor.

Who s a Conservative Jeb Bush Is About to Find Out - Bloomberg Politics

What Kind of Republican is Bush His Time as Governor Offers Clues - WSJ

He's a Bush, so by definition he's a Statist and will only hasten America's slide toward European Socialism.

My opinion is that the entire family is evil: his Dad was CIA Director and tried to assassinate Reagan for not playing ball with the Establishment and Dubya took a "terrorist attack" and turned American into a police state. Jeb? Really? How fucking stupid do you have to be to think anything good can come of another Bush Presidency?

Frank's Bugaboo from the Cold War.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Of course. As a liberal Dante considers all credible and qualified candidates given that there exists no major disqualification. If politics is the art of compromise as Dante truly believes it is, then it behooves him to at least consider JEB

For the GOP to nominate Jeb, would secure the election for the dims. There is no upside to such a move for the GOP. No one suggested banning Jeb - just that for the GOP to nominate him is suicide.

In 2012, I said that Mitt Romney was uniquely qualified to lose to Obama. Very few of the other GOP candidates could have successfully lost the election. In 2016, Jeb is uniquely qualified to lose. IF the GOP wishes to lose, them by all means run Jeb.

I believe JEB has a fantastic chance of winning a general election campaign baring no scandalous revelations, and I think that's not probable seeing how long he's been in the public eye and he is a stand up man like his pop. George HW Bush did what had to be done with taxes. He was held to account for a silly campaign promise, which if he stuck to would have caused the greater harm

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Populist? Bush's are Tea Party types?

Utter nonsense, you know better than this.

The Tea Party type fits the classic definition of a populist

 

[Uncensored2008]

I believe JEB has a fantastic chance of winning a general election campaign baring no scandalous revelations, and I think that's not probable seeing how long he's been in the public eye and he is a stand up man like his pop. George HW Bush did what had to be done with taxes. He was held to account for a silly campaign promise, which if he stuck to would have caused the greater harm

As I said, democrats desperately want the GOP to run Jeb.

But I don't think you actually have their best interests at heart.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The Tea Party type fits the classic definition of a populist

In many ways.

Dubya had no connection to the TEA party.

I went to my first TEA party to protest Bush and McCain attempting to grant amnesty in 2006. Dubya represents what the TEA party opposed, big, stupid government.

 

[gipper]

The Tea Party type fits the classic definition of a populist

In many ways.

Dubya had no connection to the TEA party.

I went to my first TEA party to protest Bush and McCain attempting to grant amnesty in 2006. Dubya represents what the TEA party opposed, big, stupid government.

The R establishment HATES the TP just as much as the D establishment, the MSM, academia, Hollywood, and every leftist from coast to coast. This is why nothing was done about the flagrantly criminal actions by the IRS, to silence TP groups.

Yet some believe the R party is tied to the TP. How can they be so blind?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Tea Party type fits the classic definition of a populist

In many ways.

Dubya had no connection to the TEA party.

I went to my first TEA party to protest Bush and McCain attempting to grant amnesty in 2006. Dubya represents what the TEA party opposed, big, stupid government.

Then how the heck is any bush a populist?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I believe JEB has a fantastic chance of winning a general election campaign baring no scandalous revelations, and I think that's not probable seeing how long he's been in the public eye and he is a stand up man like his pop. George HW Bush did what had to be done with taxes. He was held to account for a silly campaign promise, which if he stuck to would have caused the greater harm

As I said, democrats desperately want the GOP to run Jeb.

But I don't think you actually have their best interests at heart.

Sounds like something Rush the populist Limbaugh would say or think.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The Tea Party type fits the classic definition of a populist

In many ways.

Dubya had no connection to the TEA party.

I went to my first TEA party to protest Bush and McCain attempting to grant amnesty in 2006. Dubya represents what the TEA party opposed, big, stupid government.

The R establishment HATES the TP just as much as the D establishment, the MSM, academia, Hollywood, and every leftist from coast to coast. This is why nothing was done about the flagrantly criminal actions by the IRS, to silence TP groups.

Yet some believe the R party is tied to the TP. How can they be so blind?

keeper post

save

 

[Uncensored2008]

Then how the heck is any bush a populist?

Populism isn't a dogma. I agree that in many ways the TEA party is populist, but in many ways they are not. Dubya embraces populism by adopting the cause du juor. Dubya often violated the stated principles he espoused to pursue agendas that were popular with the public at large.

The TEA party certainly latched upon popular ideas, ergo has a populist element, however the base of the TEA party is principle, which generally is not sacrificed to popular pressure. One of the difficulties in discussing this is that there is no actual "TEA party," any jackass can claim to be a representative. Fringe elements pop up that violate the principles of small government, low taxes, and individual liberty, but they are not representative of the movement in general.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[
Sounds like something Rush the populist Limbaugh would say or think.

If so, he's smarter than I give him credit for.

 

[paulitician]

Being criticized by Communists/Progressives for being 'Too Conservative', does not necessarily a Conservative make. I'm pretty sure anything slightly to the right of far Left Communist/Progressive loons, would be considered 'Conservative' to them. So just because Communists call Bush a 'Conservative', doesn't mean it's so.

Earth to paulitician , come in? We seem to have lost you... come in?

Yes we know. You're confused again. Don't be so proud of it fuckwit.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Then how the heck is any bush a populist?

Populism isn't a dogma. I agree that in many ways the TEA party is populist, but in many ways they are not. Dubya embraces populism by adopting the cause du juor. Dubya often violated the stated principles he espoused to pursue agendas that were popular with the public at large.

The TEA party certainly latched upon popular ideas, ergo has a populist element, however the base of the TEA party is principle, which generally is not sacrificed to popular pressure. One of the difficulties in discussing this is that there is no actual "TEA party," any jackass can claim to be a representative. Fringe elements pop up that violate the principles of small government, low taxes, and individual liberty, but they are not representative of the movement in general.

would you agree with: populism: "political ideas and activities that are intended to get the support of ordinary people by giving them what they want: Their ideas are simple populism - tax cuts and higher wages."

Definition of POPULIST
1
: a member of a political party claiming to represent the common people; especially often capitalized : a member of a United States political party formed in 1891 primarily to represent agrarian interests and to advocate the free coinage of silver and government control of monopolies
2
: a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people

or do you have your own definition you'd care to share?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The TEA party certainly latched upon popular ideas, ergo has a populist element, however the base of the TEA party is principle, which generally is not sacrificed to popular pressure.

One of the difficulties in discussing this is that there is no actual "TEA party," any jackass can claim to be a representative.

Fringe elements pop up that violate the principles of small government, low taxes, and individual liberty, but they are not representative of the movement in general.

Not bad at the sophistry but, forms of populism have their own principles and all populist movements do. Having principles does not negate any populist label.

There is of course an organized Tea Party with factions and their are the delusional types that show up at rallies called by Sarah Palin where 5 - 40 people show up talking to themselves.

You are like the communists who say because professed communists strayed from the pure ideal of communism there has never been a communist state in the history of the world

 

[Uncensored2008]

would you agree with: populism: "political ideas and activities that are intended to get the support of ordinary people by giving them what they want: Their ideas are simple populism - tax cuts and higher wages."

Definition of POPULIST
1
: a member of a political party claiming to represent the common people; especially often capitalized : a member of a United States political party formed in 1891 primarily to represent agrarian interests and to advocate the free coinage of silver and government control of monopolies
2
: a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people

or do you have your own definition you'd care to share?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make?

{
Populism
[pop-yuh-liz-uh m] IPA Syllables

• Examples
• Word Origin

noun
1.
the political philosophy of the People's party.
2.
(lowercase) any of various, often antiestablishment or anti-intellectual political movements or philosophies that offer unorthodox solutions or policies and appeal to the common person rather than according with traditional party or partisan ideologies.
3.
(lowercase) grass-roots democracy; working-class activism; egalitarianism.}

I agree that the TEA Party mostly meets #3

 

[ScienceRocks]

conservative has nothing to do with gutting science, infrastructure or investment into good ideas. That is just dumb.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Then how the heck is any bush a populist?

Populism isn't a dogma. I agree that in many ways the TEA party is populist, but in many ways they are not. Dubya embraces populism by adopting the cause du juor. Dubya often violated the stated principles he espoused to pursue agendas that were popular with the public at large.

The TEA party certainly latched upon popular ideas, ergo has a populist element, however the base of the TEA party is principle, which generally is not sacrificed to popular pressure. One of the difficulties in discussing this is that there is no actual "TEA party," any jackass can claim to be a representative. Fringe elements pop up that violate the principles of small government, low taxes, and individual liberty, but they are not representative of the movement in general.

would you agree with: populism: "political ideas and activities that are intended to get the support of ordinary people by giving them what they want: Their ideas are simple populism - tax cuts and higher wages."

Definition of POPULIST
1
: a member of a political party claiming to represent the common people; especially often capitalized : a member of a United States political party formed in 1891 primarily to represent agrarian interests and to advocate the free coinage of silver and government control of monopolies
2
: a believer in the rights, wisdom, or virtues of the common people

or do you have your own definition you'd care to share?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make?

Populism:

1 the political philosophy of the People's party.

2. (lowercase) any of various, often antiestablishment or anti-intellectual political movements or philosophies that offer unorthodox solutions or policies and appeal to the common person rather than according with traditional party or partisan ideologies.

3. (lowercase) grass-roots democracy; working-class activism; egalitarianism.

I agree that the TEA Party mostly meets #3

More like 2 and 3.

the point?

You claimed the Bush's were populists. I stated the bush's were no favorites of the Tea Party types who fit the text book definition of populists and a populist movement.

 

[Toro]

Of course. As a liberal Dante considers all credible and qualified candidates given that there exists no major disqualification. If politics is the art of compromise as Dante truly believes it is, then it behooves him to at least consider JEB

For the GOP to nominate Jeb, would secure the election for the dims. There is no upside to such a move for the GOP. No one suggested banning Jeb - just that for the GOP to nominate him is suicide.

In 2012, I said that Mitt Romney was uniquely qualified to lose to Obama. Very few of the other GOP candidates could have successfully lost the election. In 2016, Jeb is uniquely qualified to lose. IF the GOP wishes to lose, them by all means run Jeb.

I believe JEB has a fantastic chance of winning a general election campaign baring no scandalous revelations, and I think that's not probable seeing how long he's been in the public eye and he is a stand up man like his pop. George HW Bush did what had to be done with taxes. He was held to account for a silly campaign promise, which if he stuck to would have caused the greater harm

I think Hillary would beat Bush.

It's kind of sad, actually, that in the nation that is the most powerful the world has ever seen, the standard bearer of democracy, with 320 million people, we have these two families as if they're aristocracies.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

conservative has nothing to do with gutting science, infrastructure or investment into good ideas. That is just dumb.

It is dumb of conservatives to support those in their camp/alliance who advocate "gutting science, infrastructure or investment into good ideas."

It's more than dumb, it's supported by the conservatives in order to get votes

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Of course. As a liberal Dante considers all credible and qualified candidates given that there exists no major disqualification. If politics is the art of compromise as Dante truly believes it is, then it behooves him to at least consider JEB

For the GOP to nominate Jeb, would secure the election for the dims. There is no upside to such a move for the GOP. No one suggested banning Jeb - just that for the GOP to nominate him is suicide.

In 2012, I said that Mitt Romney was uniquely qualified to lose to Obama. Very few of the other GOP candidates could have successfully lost the election. In 2016, Jeb is uniquely qualified to lose. IF the GOP wishes to lose, them by all means run Jeb.

I believe JEB has a fantastic chance of winning a general election campaign baring no scandalous revelations, and I think that's not probable seeing how long he's been in the public eye and he is a stand up man like his pop. George HW Bush did what had to be done with taxes. He was held to account for a silly campaign promise, which if he stuck to would have caused the greater harm

I think Hillary would best Bush.

It's kind of sad, actually, that in the nation that is the most powerful the world has ever seen, the standard bearer of democracy, with 320 million people, we have these two families as if they're aristocracies.

Aristocracies? Nope. Political dynasties? Yes. What is wrong with a political dynasty? It is an American tradition.