Jeb

[candycorn]

No more Bushes, Clintons, Kennedys.

End this family entitlement crap.

This, this and more this.

I tire of the monarch like 'succession' that Americans seems to be getting far to comfortable with. Out of 300 million people you would think that we could find a single person that is qualified and does not have a close familial relationship with a previous president.

Of course Bush is the worst of those names to bear. It will be impossible to overcome the bitter resentment that the right has for what Bush did to them. He has exactly zero chance of actually sinning and it has nothing to do with being a RINO. His platform is actually irrelevant - it is the association with Bush Jr. that sinks him right off the bat. I cant fathom why the establishment would even be willing to let him put his name in the ring.

I think we should not have term limits in any election. You should be able to vote for anyone you wish. If the plurality picks A Bush,Kennedy, or Williams for that matter...it's their choice.

Interesting that I didn't say a damn thing about term limits at all in my post. Nowhere was there ever a mention to a legal barrier to those people running again.

Perhaps you should actually respond to text that you quote.

If this is the worst thing that happens to you all day, you've had a pretty good day.

 

[Super_Lantern]

2. I've heard (haven't seen data on this) that 4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney was a "RINO".

4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney is a mormon.

GOPers need to stop crying over establishment candidates. Viable alternatives are never offered.

 

[Mac1958]

2. I've heard (haven't seen data on this) that 4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney was a "RINO".

4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney is a mormon.

GOPers need to stop crying over establishment candidates. Viable alternatives are never offered.

Seems to me that getting a conservative -- even if it's not a Tea Partier -- would be job 1. Then you show the electorate that you know what the hell you're doing, show them that things are improving as a result of your strategies and actions, then you move further right if you think you can and bring everyone along with you.

I don't understand this thinking that the electorate is ready and willing to knee-jerk, maybe it's just me.

.

 

[Super_Lantern]

2. I've heard (haven't seen data on this) that 4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney was a "RINO".

4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney is a mormon.

GOPers need to stop crying over establishment candidates. Viable alternatives are never offered.

Seems to me that getting a conservative -- even if it's not a Tea Partier -- would be job 1. Then you show the electorate that you know what the hell you're doing, show them that things are improving as a result of your strategies and actions, then you move further right if you think you can and bring everyone along with you.

I don't understand this thinking that the electorate is ready and willing to knee-jerk, maybe it's just me.

.

If you strip away tea-party expectations, Romney and Jeb qualify as conservative. They are right of center. Both are establishment candidates, both are more moderate but to sit and lie and say they are liberal or left of center isn't true. Voters stayed home because Romney is a Mormon. Jeb doesn't have a divisive religious angle but he does have a divisive family name.

To say the GOP went with the wrong candidate in 2012 is to say Gingrich or Santorum should have received the nomination and that they would have done better. Both are more conservative than Romney but they would not have done better. They wouldn't have won the election.

If you refuse to support a moderate establishment candidate without presenting viable alternatives, then you are just an annoyance daydreaming for an ideal that won't happen in the real world. Ted Cruz won't carry any swing states in a general election. No tea-party approved candidate will

Jeb isn't a liberal. I'm no fan of his, but to continue this farce that only politicians significantly right of center can be called conservative is a damaging benchmark.

 

[Mac1958]

2. I've heard (haven't seen data on this) that 4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney was a "RINO".

4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney is a mormon.

GOPers need to stop crying over establishment candidates. Viable alternatives are never offered.

Seems to me that getting a conservative -- even if it's not a Tea Partier -- would be job 1. Then you show the electorate that you know what the hell you're doing, show them that things are improving as a result of your strategies and actions, then you move further right if you think you can and bring everyone along with you.

I don't understand this thinking that the electorate is ready and willing to knee-jerk, maybe it's just me.

.

If you strip away tea-party expectations, Romney and Jeb qualify as conservative. They are right of center. Both are establishment candidates, both are more moderate but to sit and lie and say they are liberal or left of center isn't true. Voters stayed home because Romney is a Mormon. Jeb doesn't have a divisive religious angle but he does have a divisive family name.

To say the GOP went with the wrong candidate in 2012 is to say Gingrich or Santorum should have received the nomination and that they would have done better. Both are more conservative than Romney but they would not have done better. They wouldn't have won the election.

If you refuse to support a moderate establishment candidate without presenting viable alternatives, then you are just an annoyance daydreaming for an ideal that won't happen in the real world. Ted Cruz won't carry any swing states in a general election. No tea-party approved candidate will

Jeb isn't a liberal. I'm no fan of his, but to continue this farce that only politicians significantly right of center can be called conservative is a damaging benchmark.

Couldn't agree more. But all the energy in the party -- obviously egged on by the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity & Levin -- is with the people who are causing it the most damage.

.

 

[JoeB131]

To say the GOP went with the wrong candidate in 2012 is to say Gingrich or Santorum should have received the nomination and that they would have done better. Both are more conservative than Romney but they would not have done better. They wouldn't have won the election.

I don't know if they would have won. I think the GOP as a brand has so alienated key groups - minorities, women, the young - that no one could have done well.

I think Santorum or Gingrich might have done better because they wouldn't have said stupid shit like "I like to be able to fire people' and "the 47% are all moochers">

 

[Super_Lantern]

To say the GOP went with the wrong candidate in 2012 is to say Gingrich or Santorum should have received the nomination and that they would have done better. Both are more conservative than Romney but they would not have done better. They wouldn't have won the election.

I don't know if they would have won. I think the GOP as a brand has so alienated key groups - minorities, women, the young - that no one could have done well.

I think Santorum or Gingrich might have done better because they wouldn't have said stupid shit like "I like to be able to fire people' and "the 47% are all moochers">

You're right, instead we'd have Santorum winning over minorities with the use of racial slurs or Gingrich talking about building moon bases.




I don't understand how you can say Santorum and Gingrich would do better among female voters and minorities than Romney did. How do either of those two appeal to women or minorities?

Romney supports raising minimum wage (something that resonates with lower income and younger demographics), Romney is more than willing to assess new approaches to managing the immigration reform crisis. You know what you'd get on immigration reform with Santorum and Gingrich? Tea-party pandering which will do NOTHING for the GOP on improving relationships with women and minorities

When looking at polls Romney actually fares better with women than any other 2016 hopeful

He's not running again, I'm not trying to cheer lead for him. Every 4 years having to deal with the crying over establishment candidates without worthwhile alternatives every being around (this time is admittedly different with Rand Paul's unique angle and Ted Cruz's growing fame) is getting ridiculous though and we're already seeing it happening again with Jeb

 

[gipper]

Jeb is dumber and an even more progressive/statist than his older brother.

He should be a Dem.

 

[JoeB131]

I don't understand how you can say Santorum and Gingrich would do better among female voters and minorities than Romney did. How do either of those two appeal to women or minorities?

I didn't say that. I thought they'd do better among WORKING PEOPLE.

The only thing that kept Romney's Zombie candidacy alive was that so much of the GOP is so racist, they'd have voted for a follower or C'Thulhu rather than support the black guy.

 

[Roadrunner]

Well, if a Tea Partier gets it, than all former predictions get thrown out the window and Hillary climbs over 60% nationally.

Rand Paul would beat Hillary or Liz Warren by 10 million votes. Blacks will go 50% to the GOP

Sent from smartphone using my wits and Taptalk

Rand Paul?

Can I get some of that acid you're tripping on?

 

[Super_Lantern]

I don't understand how you can say Santorum and Gingrich would do better among female voters and minorities than Romney did. How do either of those two appeal to women or minorities?

I didn't say that. I thought they'd do better among WORKING PEOPLE.

The only thing that kept Romney's Zombie candidacy alive was that so much of the GOP is so racist, they'd have voted for a follower or C'Thulhu rather than support the black guy.

Yeah I misread part of your post. My bad

 

[Statistikhengst]

 

[Statistikhengst]

2. I've heard (haven't seen data on this) that 4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney was a "RINO".

4 million GOP voters stayed home because Romney is a mormon.

GOPers need to stop crying over establishment candidates. Viable alternatives are never offered.

And yet, it has been mathematically proven that not that many GOPers stayed home.

And not only that, there are more registered Ds and Is than Rs, and it shows.

 

[FA_Q2]

To say the GOP went with the wrong candidate in 2012 is to say Gingrich or Santorum should have received the nomination and that they would have done better. Both are more conservative than Romney but they would not have done better. They wouldn't have won the election.

I don't know if they would have won. I think the GOP as a brand has so alienated key groups - minorities, women, the young - that no one could have done well.

I think Santorum or Gingrich might have done better because they wouldn't have said stupid shit like "I like to be able to fire people' and "the 47% are all moochers">

You're right, instead we'd have Santorum winning over minorities with the use of racial slurs or Gingrich talking about building moon bases.




I don't understand how you can say Santorum and Gingrich would do better among female voters and minorities than Romney did. How do either of those two appeal to women or minorities?

Romney supports raising minimum wage (something that resonates with lower income and younger demographics), Romney is more than willing to assess new approaches to managing the immigration reform crisis. You know what you'd get on immigration reform with Santorum and Gingrich? Tea-party pandering which will do NOTHING for the GOP on improving relationships with women and minorities

When looking at polls Romney actually fares better with women than any other 2016 hopeful

He's not running again, I'm not trying to cheer lead for him. Every 4 years having to deal with the crying over establishment candidates without worthwhile alternatives every being around (this time is admittedly different with Rand Paul's unique angle and Ted Cruz's growing fame) is getting ridiculous though and we're already seeing it happening again with Jeb

A small problem with Jeb though- he simply cannot win, period.

It is not a matter of being 'conservative' or not. It is simply a matter of name - there is NOT going to be another bush in the White House after Jr. this soon. The shit flavor in everyone's mouth is still there from the last one.

It does not even matter if you really liked Bush Jr. (or whoever might be plugging for Jeb) - the American people still see him as an abysmal failure.

The 'establishment' is simply nuts and is not interested in taking the presidency if they elect him IMHO.

Also, I would add that this is the poison pill of primaries. It is an unfortunate side effect when you take all the moderates and other party members out of the equation - the rabid and far flung groups within the party have a MASSIVE influence in the selection of candidate but conversely have ZERO influence in actually getting them elected.

How do you surmount that? I do not know.

 

[candycorn]

I think Jeb Bush is one of 3 or 4 (currently on the scene) candidates in the GOP that can win out of the gate.

Money. Check
Name Recognition. Check
Heavyweight Credentials. Check

In truth, a warm bucket of spit with a D or R next to their name on the ballot gets 35% of the vote out of the gate; not enough to win but enough to be on deck if the only viable opponent has a fatal gaffe or develops a pimple on their face and loses favor among the voters.

 

[Mac1958]

I think Jeb Bush is one of 3 or 4 (currently on the scene) candidates in the GOP that can win out of the gate.

Money. Check
Name Recognition. Check
Heavyweight Credentials. Check

In truth, a warm bucket of spit with a D or R next to their name on the ballot gets 35% of the vote out of the gate; not enough to win but enough to be on deck if the only viable opponent has a fatal gaffe or develops a pimple on their face and loses favor among the voters.

Yikes, that "name recognition" thing is a double-edged sword here.

How does Jeb win when he has to run against the Democrats, the Tea Party and his brother?

.

 

[JWBooth]

I think Jeb Bush is one of 3 or 4 (currently on the scene) candidates in the GOP that can win out of the gate.

Money. Check
Name Recognition. Check
Heavyweight Credentials. Check

In truth, a warm bucket of spit with a D or R next to their name on the ballot gets 35% of the vote out of the gate; not enough to win but enough to be on deck if the only viable opponent has a fatal gaffe or develops a pimple on their face and loses favor among the voters.

If he choses to run, he'd likely win the nomination, influence within the party, money, and the sense of inevitability that sets in when the party decides to punt again on first down.

 

[candycorn]

I think Jeb Bush is one of 3 or 4 (currently on the scene) candidates in the GOP that can win out of the gate.

Money. Check
Name Recognition. Check
Heavyweight Credentials. Check

In truth, a warm bucket of spit with a D or R next to their name on the ballot gets 35% of the vote out of the gate; not enough to win but enough to be on deck if the only viable opponent has a fatal gaffe or develops a pimple on their face and loses favor among the voters.

Yikes, that "name recognition" thing is a double-edged sword here.

How does Jeb win when he has to run against the Democrats, the Tea Party and his brother?

.

He doesn't have to run against all 3 at one time.
He has the money to stay in the primaries until Super Tuesday which is after the Florida Primary if memory serves. He should do well in Florida and have momentum going into Super Tuesday. I would imagine that he has a leg up in both Iowa and New Hampshire.

I'm not sure why you think the name Bush is a guaranteed negative....many here remember the years prior to Obama as the golden age of the nation it seems.

As for the TEA party, if you wait long enough, it usually self-destructs.

Remember, all 8-10 candidates have to run against the Democrats and TEA party too (those not in the TEA party). I'd take the money and name recognition over the negatives any day.

I happen to think the TEA party has a bigger problem. At some point, those who say they have TEA party credentials are going to have to define what that means. Once that happens, they become de facto responsible for what other TEA Party "embracees" say, do, think, etc...

 

[JoeB131]

I think Jeb Bush is one of 3 or 4 (currently on the scene) candidates in the GOP that can win out of the gate.

Money. Check
Name Recognition. Check
Heavyweight Credentials. Check

In truth, a warm bucket of spit with a D or R next to their name on the ballot gets 35% of the vote out of the gate; not enough to win but enough to be on deck if the only viable opponent has a fatal gaffe or develops a pimple on their face and loses favor among the voters.

Yikes, that "name recognition" thing is a double-edged sword here.

How does Jeb win when he has to run against the Democrats, the Tea Party and his brother?

.

I think the Tea Party is a spent force. The Establishment beat back nearly every Tea Party challenge to its candidates for Senate this cycle, and if they take the Senate, they can point to their strategy as being the best. (As opposed to the Teabaggers blowing their shots in 2010 and 2012.)

Bush's brother is not really an obstacle for him in the primaries. Most Republicans don't think Bush-43 did anything wrong.

He will be a drag on him in the general election, especially if he goes up against Hillary. The Republicans are screwed if this becomes a referendum on Clinton vs. Bush. I just don't see any of the alternatives doing better.

The real problem the GOP has is that the minority and women bashing that served it so well under Reagan and Bush's father is now a liability.

 

[Roadrunner]

I think Jeb Bush is one of 3 or 4 (currently on the scene) candidates in the GOP that can win out of the gate.

Money. Check
Name Recognition. Check
Heavyweight Credentials. Check

In truth, a warm bucket of spit with a D or R next to their name on the ballot gets 35% of the vote out of the gate; not enough to win but enough to be on deck if the only viable opponent has a fatal gaffe or develops a pimple on their face and loses favor among the voters.

Party affiliation should be removed from all ballots, even if that takes a Constitutional amendment.

If a person does not know enough about the issues and candidates to vote without a party symbol to guide him, he does not need to be voting.