Jump to content

Bush in 2016??


Recommended Posts

LAS VEGAS — Many of the Republican Party’s most powerful insiders and financiers have begun a behind-the-scenes campaign to draft former Florida governor Jeb Bush into the 2016 presidential race, courting him and his intimates and starting talks on fundraising strategy.

 

Concerned that the George Washington Bridge traffic scandal has damaged New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s political standing and alarmed by the steady rise of Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.), prominent donors, conservative leaders and longtime operatives say they consider Bush the GOP’s brightest hope to win back the White House.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/influential-republicans-working-to-draft-jeb-bush-into-2016-presidential-race/2014/03/29/11e33b06-b5f2-11e3-8cb6-284052554d74_story.html

 

As a Democrat I'd welcome that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 235
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The last thing this nation needs is another Bush or Clinton in the executive. We're supposed to be a democracy, not a monarchy.

 

(edit: obviously, just one man's opinion)

Political dynasties have always troubled me. Even Rand Paul's assention into the political spotlight is worrisome. Who knows what could, or even should, be done about it, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Political dynasties have always troubled me. Even Rand Paul's assention into the political spotlight is worrisome. Who knows what could, or even should, be done about it, however.

 

I concur and it's hard to imagine another Bush or Clinton in office. However, these are individuals following a process to be elected. It's not as if the 'first' Bush or Clinton ran on a familial ticket with the understanding that their offspring/spouses would then be elected in their shadow. Denying a 'second' generation or a spouse the opportunity to run would be very un-American in my mind.

 

This falls squarely on the voters. If we opt to 'do something' ....we need to do so in the booth. Sadly, we left being a government of the people and by the people a long time ago. Presidential candidates are far from being citizens in the median of society. I'm not suggesting we elect those who are not 'excellent.' Rather, of those who might be excellent candidates, our current system seemingly selects those of great wealth and heritage for nomination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last thing this nation needs is another Bush or Clinton in the executive. We're supposed to be a democracy, not a monarchy.

 

(edit: obviously, just one man's opinion)

IIRC we could realistically go something like:

 

Hilary Clinton

Hilary Clinton

Jeb Bush

Jeb Bush

Chelsea Clinton

Chelsea Clinton

Bush Twin

Bush Twin

Malia Obama

Malia Obama

Richard Nixon's Head

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last thing this nation needs is another Bush or Clinton in the executive. We're supposed to be a democracy, not a monarchy.

 

(edit: obviously, just one man's opinion)

 

Two men's. I've been saying that for fifteen years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's in a name? I tend to look at the accomplishments of a person. Did Jeb govern Florida well? What has Hillary ever done that can be praised?

Does an example of a parody in an episode of South Park help?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Political dynasties have always troubled me. Even Rand Paul's assention into the political spotlight is worrisome. Who knows what could, or even should, be done about it, however.

Nothing. People are free to run for office if they want. Many people follow in their families footsteps. Obviously Republican voters had no objections to putting the millstone of W around the country's neck in 2000...oh wait, that wasn't the majority of Americans :oops:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing. People are free to run for office if they want. Many people follow in their families footsteps. Obviously Republican voters had no objections to putting the millstone of W around the country's neck in 2000...oh wait, that wasn't the majority of Americans :oops:

It's well documented here that I'm firmly against the consolidation of power. This is especially true when dealing lineage based dynastic power, as this reeks of oligarchy/monarchy, and this type of leadership is typically more concerned with legacy building than governance.

 

To your second "point", the United States is not a democracy (though it certainly is, unfortunately, trending that way). We are a Republic, and the system worked as intended when it elected President George W. Bush. The system has elected three other presidents without the popular vote as well. John Quincy Adams (1824), Rurtherford B. Hayes (1876), and Benjamin Harrison (1888).

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To your second "point", the United States is not a democracy

 

He wouldn't understand what you're saying if you explained it using cartoons and songs on Schoolhouse Rock. But it's what you expect from a person who, on one hand, is looking forward to voting for another Clinton while, on the other hand, laughing about the prospect of people voting for another Bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with it, because he happens to be among the most qualified for the job. We can pretend to live in an ideal world, but understanding what it takes to get to the level to even be considered for a nomination, many capable people would not even bother. The sheer organization and cost needed to run the campaign precludes anyone but multi-billionaires and family scions.

 

But to indulge the fantasy that popular novices can sweep to the national stage and get serious consideration to be President, I'll offer up Palin and Obama. No thanks. I'll take my chances with another Bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with it, because he happens to be among the most qualified for the job. We can pretend to live in an ideal world, but understanding what it takes to get to the level to even be considered for a nomination, many capable people would not even bother. The sheer organization and cost needed to run the campaign precludes anyone but multi-billionaires and family scions.

 

But to indulge the fantasy that popular novices can sweep to the national stage and get serious consideration to be President, I'll offer up Palin and Obama. No thanks. I'll take my chances with another Bush.

Long Live The King! Or atleast the decention of our political process into dynastic brand name candidacies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that any guy on this board would want to wait two more years for Bush. In fact, I think that every guy on this board would want to have Bush tonight rather than have to wait two more years.

 

:D

 

Both literally and figuratively. To each his own though. Landing strips are ok, jungles are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's in a name? I tend to look at the accomplishments of a person. Did Jeb govern Florida well? What has Hillary ever done that can be praised?

IIRC Jeb promised that W would win Florida

with that ... Do you remember Chad?

 

He was ":hanging" around when W "won" the second election.

 

To your second "point", the United States is not a democracy (though it certainly is, unfortunately, trending that way). We are a Republic,

 

Like the People Republic of China

Like Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic

 

or the ever confused Democratic People's Republic of Korea?

 

 

 

its SARCASM people

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...