The GOP demands Jeb Bush

[frigidweirdo]

You see, I don't buy that. I think most Americans have War Fatigue after 13 years of being told there's a scary Muslim under their bed.

But then how much war fatigue was there in the "War on Communism" (to update the term Cold War).

WW2, lots of fatigue, then Korea happened, it was tough, then the US lurched into Vietnam. No matter how much fatigue there is, the politicians will use things.

How many Americans now are afraid of ISIS?

Obama went to Congress about Syria, Congress said NO.
Obama is now bombing in Syria.

Why? Because the situation is now good enough for a president to do so, fatigue?

 

[Rikurzhen]

What could Bush claim was Clinton's fault?

What was Al Queda doing blowing a hole in the USS Cole and bombing our embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi and attacking Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia? Damn idiots, didn't they know that Bush wasn't yet President so they should wait to attack until he was.

 

[Iceweasel]

Any Republican can win at this point. Having another Bush in the white House would be priceless. The libs would be foaming over and having strokes.

Run Jeb run.

Did you find yourself saying "Romney by a landslide" at any point during 2012?

No, why do you ask such a retarded question?

 

[JoeB131]

You see, I don't buy that. I think most Americans have War Fatigue after 13 years of being told there's a scary Muslim under their bed.

But then how much war fatigue was there in the "War on Communism" (to update the term Cold War).

WW2, lots of fatigue, then Korea happened, it was tough, then the US lurched into Vietnam. No matter how much fatigue there is, the politicians will use things.

How many Americans now are afraid of ISIS?

Obama went to Congress about Syria, Congress said NO.
Obama is now bombing in Syria.

Why? Because the situation is now good enough for a president to do so, fatigue?

Yeah, but if he ordered a bunch of ground troops in there, it would get some serious oppossition.

He got just enough outrage over the beheadings to get bombings... But mark my words, we will lose interest in about a month.

 

[Iceweasel]

The Bush name is a shitstain on anyone running. Those middle voters will NEVER line up to vote Bush [Cheney] again. Never ever ever. So by running Bush, all they're doing is preaching to the choir....and gambling quite dangerously...possibly handing a clear victory over to whatever LGBT tool the dems are forced to run.

Your name is the shit stain. You have no facts, period.
Bush Favorability

George Bush's approval is 49%, obama's is 46%. So either everyone else is lying or you are.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What was Al Queda doing blowing a hole in the USS Cole and bombing our embassies in Dar es Salaam and Nairobi and attacking Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia? Damn idiots, didn't they know that Bush wasn't yet President so they should wait to attack until he was.

What was it doing? It was trying to damage the US, USS Cole happened in Yemen, others happened anywhere but Iraq too.

Was it Clinton's fault that these happened? In part, again, as US President he gets some blame, I would not put much.

US foreign policy with Islamic countries over a long period of time helped, especially the situation with Israel has made the US a target of extremist Islamists. Kuwait played a small part, I wouldn't put much blame on Bush himself, US policy was moving towards oil at the time anyway, and US interests. But it can play a part in explaining how things happened.

Even 9/11 happened. It wasn't Bush W.'s fault as far as I know. (Depending on conspiracy theories and unknown things etc). It happened as a result of US foreign policy since the beginning of Israel as a nation, and even British foreign policy beforehand.

But you're missing the point. The point isn't just black and white, simple enough for a primary school kid to understand. It's complex.

In 2001 9/11 happened. There were plenty of choices out there, one of which was not to invade Iraq, but Bush did it anyway. Afghanistan was a choice, he took it too. It also helped. There were other choices concerning Afghanistan that was not troops on the ground.

But not only what Bush did with military action, it was also what he did with his speech. He made al-Qaeda the coolest kids in the anti-American terrorist movement. If you were anti-American and wanted to fight the US, then become al-Qaeda.

Also, Obama does not want troops on the ground in Syria and Iraq. Why not? You'd be giving extremists a target. Bush not only gave them a target (many moved from Afghanistan to fight in Iraq) but he also set up the perfect situation for them. He got rid of the Iraqi police and army and therefore a power vacuum the US armed forces (with British) could not hope to fill.

So terrorist groups could grow, they could use this to recruit more easily, they were helped massively by Bush's incompetent policies with complete lack of foresight, with complete lack of learning from history. The US believed it could take out a country, rebuild it in a mould it liked and all would be well. It's called arrogance, it happened in Vietnam, it happened in Iraq.

The point isn't al-Qaeda. The point is the development of al-Qaeda to a pain in the ass group run by a few loonies, to a major international organization that has changed the face of international foreign affairs for a lot of countries.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, but if he ordered a bunch of ground troops in there, it would get some serious oppossition.

He got just enough outrage over the beheadings to get bombings... But mark my words, we will lose interest in about a month.

Well interest comes and goes. In 2 years time who knows the situation? But, there's enough problems now for them to be able to create interest along the campaign trail, to slam Obama and the Democrats for not being tough. Will they do it? I don't know.

 

[Iceweasel]

The point isn't al-Qaeda. The point is the development of al-Qaeda to a pain in the ass group run by a few loonies, to a major international organization that has changed the face of international foreign affairs for a lot of countries.

Hey genius. AQ gained power while Clinton was in office. Checks some facts first. obama's incompetance is why we are dealing with ISIS now, we got out of Iraq too soon, against the advice of the military folks that would know. Come back when you do some homework.

 

[Esmeralda]

Jeb is the only Republican who can win swing states and fight Hillary for Florida.

He is their only option.

How pathetic is that?

Says the supporter of a party which is going to reward a woman riding on the coattails of her husband and with a record of being promoted after each failure.

Coattails?

She was a United States Senator for eight years and Secretary of State for four. She has more experience than her husband had when he was elected

I think, as well, though it is not an elected position, being first lady for 8 years gave her a lot of experience on the national and international level. Her husband consulted her for her opinion on a lot of issues, and she was there to be involved and observant of international and national situations and peoples. Being the highly intelligent person she is, that experience would have enriched her understanding of politics and diplomacy no end.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Hey genius. AQ gained power while Clinton was in office. Checks some facts first. obama's incompetance is why we are dealing with ISIS now, we got out of Iraq too soon, against the advice of the military folks that would know. Come back when you do some homework.

al-Qaeda was gaining some power under Clinton. Again, it's not the point. You're not arguing that al-Qaeda would have been as power as it is/was had Gore got into office and not invaded Iraq. You're making a simple comment that "as al-Qaeda had some power under Clinton therefore it has nothing to do with Bush".

Are we discussing complex political matters, or fighting over which football player is the best? It's not so simple, never was, never will be.

Which part of what Obama did has led to ISIS?

Pulling out of Iraq. Okay, Bush would have pulled out of Iraq in 2011. He signed the damn piece of paper to pull out. Any president would have pulled out, simples. Had it been Republican you wouldn't have been complaining.

The advice of the military folk means nothing when A) the US decided to pull out under Bush, B) The Iraqis wanted the US out under Bush and C) everyone wanted out of Iraq EXCEPT those who make money out of being in Iraq. Ie, the military guys.

You think I haven't done my homework because I'm not speaking SIMPLY?

Maybe you should actually try and do more than 1+1=2. Because there's a lot more ones out there and lot more other numbers, and sometimes it's not even adding that's required.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I think, as well, though it is not an elected position, being first lady for 8 years gave her a lot of experience on the national and international level. Her husband consulted her for her opinion on a lot of issues, and she was there to be involved and observant of international and national situations and peoples. Being the highly intelligent person she is, that experience would have enriched her understanding of politics and diplomacy no end.

When was the last time the US elected a president because they were the best person for the job?

I'm discounting Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Reagan immediately, I'm not even going to bother going further back than that. The media age has come, best for the job is clearly not a requirement.

 

[Esmeralda]

I think, as well, though it is not an elected position, being first lady for 8 years gave her a lot of experience on the national and international level. Her husband consulted her for her opinion on a lot of issues, and she was there to be involved and observant of international and national situations and peoples. Being the highly intelligent person she is, that experience would have enriched her understanding of politics and diplomacy no end.

When was the last time the US elected a president because they were the best person for the job?

I'm discounting Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Reagan immediately, I'm not even going to bother going further back than that. The media age has come, best for the job is clearly not a requirement.

She appears to be the best candidate available, and she may very well be elected. Is she the best American bar none for the job? We don't know because no one better has put him or herself forward.

 

[frigidweirdo]

She appears to be the best candidate available, and she may very well be elected. Is she the best American bar none for the job? We don't know because no one better has put him or herself forward.

I'd put a lot of money on her not getting elected, in fact not even winning the primaries, if I were a betting man.

I don't think it matters who is going to put themselves forward, there is going to be some smooth dude with gel in his hair, a nice smile, a team paid for with lots of money from corporations and who will do their bidding at the drop of a hat. And he will win the primaries. I say "he" deliberately.

Why would a corporation want someone who is the best candidate for the country when they can have the best candidate who does what he's told?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jeb is one of the few Republicans who is strong enough to shake off the bat shit crazy wing of the party and embrace the middle

The country will support a right leaning populist president.
Strong on military and foreign policy. Strong on fiscal responsibility. Moderate on social policy.

Substitute "non-interventionists" for "Strong on military and foreign policy" and the great majority of the country will support that.

Not posting to you. Please do not respond to my posts.
We're done. Don't respond....

You are trolling when you try to correct me only and avoid the OP. I will post to any OP anytime I wish. Jeb would be a great candidate on the lines I suggest. If you post back, stay on the OP.

 

[rightwinger]

Jeb is the only Republican who can win swing states and fight Hillary for Florida.

He is their only option.

How pathetic is that?

Says the supporter of a party which is going to reward a woman riding on the coattails of her husband and with a record of being promoted after each failure.

Coattails?

She was a United States Senator for eight years and Secretary of State for four. She has more experience than her husband had when he was elected

I think, as well, though it is not an elected position, being first lady for 8 years gave her a lot of experience on the national and international level. Her husband consulted her for her opinion on a lot of issues, and she was there to be involved and observant of international and national situations and peoples. Being the highly intelligent person she is, that experience would have enriched her understanding of politics and diplomacy no end.

Republicans dismiss her time as First Lady as just a bunch of tea parties and social functions. Hillary had top level access in the White House for eight years. She went to meetings, met with dignitaries and most importantly, had the ear of the most powerful man on earth.

No current Republican candidate has any experience in the Executive Branch of Government that they seek to lead

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Now, however, a growing number of millennials are rethinking their Democratic viewpoints." Show us where this "growing number" is on the circle below.

​

 

[Iceweasel]

Hey genius. AQ gained power while Clinton was in office. Checks some facts first. obama's incompetance is why we are dealing with ISIS now, we got out of Iraq too soon, against the advice of the military folks that would know. Come back when you do some homework.

al-Qaeda was gaining some power under Clinton. Again, it's not the point. .

Yes, it is the point.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Hey genius. AQ gained power while Clinton was in office. Checks some facts first. obama's incompetance is why we are dealing with ISIS now, we got out of Iraq too soon, against the advice of the military folks that would know. Come back when you do some homework.

al-Qaeda was gaining some power under Clinton. Again, it's not the point. .

Yes, it is the point.

Then, if this is YOUR point, make an argument for it. I don't see an argument for why this is a point.

 

[Redfish]

Well, I agree with Jeb on common core and immigration, but I doubt moderate views can make it through the primaries, even with the changes the party made to lessen the TPM voice.

common core is idiocy. have you seen what it calls math? it takes a very simple addition or subtraction problem and makes it a long complex calculation----------its ridiculous.

Jeb is wrong on immigration. Illegal immigration is destroying our schools, bringing in diseases, and making us vulnerable to terrorist attack.

Jeb will NOT be the GOP candidate in 2016. If he is, Hillary will become the first lesbian president.

 

[Iceweasel]

Then, if this is YOUR point, make an argument for it. I don't see an argument for why this is a point.

It's a fact. There's no argument to be made.