Jeb Bush and open convention

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 5:39 PM GMT
    Still my hope.

    http://www.newsmax.com/MattTowery/Jeb-Bush-open-convention/2012/03/09/id/431983

    "Jeb Bush left his position as governor a very popular man. He was viewed by most as a conservative, creative, and extremely savvy leader. The Republican-dominated legislature sometimes viewed him as a bit heavy-handed, but that comes with the territory when one is a governor.

    Most analysts would say "the country would never elect another Bush as president." They are nuts. Bush could debate Obama in a manner that would shock not only Democrats, but moderates as well. This guy is fast on his feet, knows public policy inside and out, and is no stranger to the presidency.

    As for any comparisons to his father or brother and their presidencies, the nation would get a taste of the best of both men. There would be no question about whether Jeb Bush could meet the interests of the conservative side of the GOP. The good news is that he is strong in his convictions, and he is able to articulate them in a very positive way.

    There would be no ability for the press to unfairly characterize him as inarticulate or not bright. They got away with it to some extent under his brother's administration — which is pretty ironic because they drooled over interviews with him when he released his autobiography.

    In the case of Jeb Bush, it is obvious you are dealing with a very smart guy who will get the best of most in any press conference or tangle with the media. It would be a blast to watch the media's frustration trying to deal with him.

    The real issue is whether anyone could convince Bush to accept a nomination in 2012.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 5:55 PM GMT
    Who is 'you people' ?

    And if there's enough 'you people' you can pretty much guess the result.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Mar 10, 2012 6:17 PM GMT
    It will take at least 10 years of Democratic supplied prosperity before the Bush family name will be able to win ANY political position.



    icon_exclaim.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 6:23 PM GMT
    rnch saidIt will take at least 10 years of Democratic supplied prosperity before the Bush family name will be able to win ANY political position.



    icon_exclaim.gif


    It’s likely all moot because he won’t run, but I think Jeb Bush would have the best chance of all GOPers in 2012
  • DalTX

    Posts: 612

    Mar 10, 2012 6:39 PM GMT
    Right. America is clamouring for another Bush.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 6:40 PM GMT
    DalTX saidRight. America is clamouring for another Bush.


    Correct
  • DalTX

    Posts: 612

    Mar 10, 2012 7:13 PM GMT
    Good luck with all that..
    hold your breath!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 7:25 PM GMT
    DalTX saidGood luck with all that..
    hold your breath!


    Thanks. IF we could only convince him to run.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Mar 10, 2012 7:29 PM GMT
    The Repugs are goning to be amazed by what all President Obama does in his second term in office.




  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2012 8:12 PM GMT
    rnch saidThe Repugs are goning to be amazed by what all President Obama does in his second term in office.




    THAT is our concern. We'll do the best we can to make certain it doesn't happen.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 11, 2012 4:37 AM GMT
    rnch saidThe Repugs are goning to be amazed by what all President Obama does in his second term in office.






    Obama has largely been playing centre-right in the fashion of Clinton. If he wins with gaining a few House seats and keeping the Senate majority, I'll expect him to curve so far and fast to the left it'll make Lenin's formaldehyde preserved head spin.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 11, 2012 4:41 AM GMT
    JPtheBITCH saidYou people really do live in some alternate reality.

    The Bush name is poison.

    It is for now. And candidates not selected until a convention have an excellent record........for losing the general election, that is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 11, 2012 5:14 AM GMT
    JPtheBITCH said
    socalfitness said
    JPtheBITCH saidYou people really do live in some alternate reality.

    The Bush name is poison.

    It is for now. And candidates not selected until a convention have an excellent record........for losing the general election, that is.

    Between 1980 and 2008, there was either a Bush or a Clinton on a ticket or in one of the two top offices in the country. Even people who liked Hillary in 2008 had some misgivings about allowing that kind of dynasty to continue; it seems more appropriate for one o' them Eur-o-peen monarchies than an American republic.

    Do you think that sentiment willl have changed in just four years, even if Bush the Younger had been a success? And given that he was not merely a failure but a colossal failure, why would anyone think the country would be MORE inclined to a Bush---or a Clinton, for that matter---now? As it happens, lots of people, me included, were unhappy that Obama surrounded himself with Clinton people, let alone the C's themselves.

    Nope. Not happening in my lifetime. Sorry Jeb. Sorry George P.

    Maybe I was not clear. I agree that the Bush name at this point is a non-starter. I disagree in your assessment of the Bush administration. I suspect history will look at him favorably.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 11, 2012 5:23 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    JPtheBITCH said
    socalfitness said
    JPtheBITCH saidYou people really do live in some alternate reality.

    The Bush name is poison.

    It is for now. And candidates not selected until a convention have an excellent record........for losing the general election, that is.

    Between 1980 and 2008, there was either a Bush or a Clinton on a ticket or in one of the two top offices in the country. Even people who liked Hillary in 2008 had some misgivings about allowing that kind of dynasty to continue; it seems more appropriate for one o' them Eur-o-peen monarchies than an American republic.

    Do you think that sentiment willl have changed in just four years, even if Bush the Younger had been a success? And given that he was not merely a failure but a colossal failure, why would anyone think the country would be MORE inclined to a Bush---or a Clinton, for that matter---now? As it happens, lots of people, me included, were unhappy that Obama surrounded himself with Clinton people, let alone the C's themselves.

    Nope. Not happening in my lifetime. Sorry Jeb. Sorry George P.

    Maybe I was not clear. I agree that the Bush name at this point is a non-starter. I disagree in your assessment of the Bush administration. I suspect history will look at him favorably.


    More of those Socal delusions...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 11, 2012 6:46 AM GMT
    I think Ron Paul would be POTUS before another of Prsecott Bush's spawn gets a shot at it again.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Mar 11, 2012 7:13 AM GMT
    Jeb Bush would probably have far more support than people realize. I'd be thrilled if Romney tapped him as V.P. though, granted, it would be an extremely risky move that potentially could backfire BIG time.
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Mar 11, 2012 7:34 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidJeb Bush would probably have far more support than people realize. I'd be thrilled if Romney tapped him as V.P. though, granted, it would be an extremely risky move that potentially could backfire BIG time.


    Hopefully it would blow up in their faces. We've had enough of Bushes to last a century.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 11, 2012 8:34 AM GMT
    JPtheBITCH said
    socalfitness said
    JPtheBITCH saidYou people really do live in some alternate reality.

    The Bush name is poison.

    It is for now. And candidates not selected until a convention have an excellent record........for losing the general election, that is.

    Between 1980 and 2008, there was either a Bush or a Clinton on a ticket or in one of the two top offices in the country. Even people who liked Hillary in 2008 had some misgivings about allowing that kind of dynasty to continue; it seems more appropriate for one o' them Eur-o-peen monarchies than an American republic.

    Do you think that sentiment willl have changed in just four years, even if Bush the Younger had been a success? And given that he was not merely a failure but a colossal failure, why would anyone think the country would be MORE inclined to a Bush---or a Clinton, for that matter---now? As it happens, lots of people, me included, were unhappy that Obama surrounded himself with Clinton people, let alone the C's themselves.

    Nope. Not happening in my lifetime. Sorry Jeb. Sorry George P.


    Folks in FL sure seemed to like him, even non Cuban Hispanics and NY Jews.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeb_bush

    "Political basesBush is popular among Cubans in Florida (winning 80 percent of the Cuban vote in 2002) and popular among non-Cuban Hispanics (56 percent in 2002, equaling the 56 percent he won statewide). As a longtime supporter of Israel,[29] Bush also maintains a significant connection to Florida's Jewish voters. He was endorsed in his two winning Governor races by a national Jewish publication, and won 44 percent of the state's Jewish vote in the 2002 Governor's race.[30] Many black voters support his focus on public education and parental choice in education, and a number of Black Republican clubs have risen in Florida.[31] In his re-election in 2002, Bush surprised critics by winning the white female vote in the swing-voting battleground of Central Florida's I-4 corridor.[32] Most recently[when?], he has reached out extensively to Florida's Haitian community."

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 11, 2012 8:37 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidJeb Bush would probably have far more support than people realize. I'd be thrilled if Romney tapped him as V.P. though, granted, it would be an extremely risky move that potentially could backfire BIG time.


    How? I think that would be ideal.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Mar 11, 2012 8:42 PM GMT
    The Republicans would have to be pretty damn desperate to anoint Jeb Bush as their candidate.
    But, even though they are pretty damn desperate, that will never happen.

    There's a lot of primary voting yet to come, with huge chunks of delegates to come from New York, California, New Jersey, Texas, etc.
    Gingrich, Santorum, and Paul don't have a prayer of getting anywhere near the required number of votes to secure the nomination.

    That leaves Romney, who, right now, has more total delegates than the other 3 put together.

    And, when the Democratic "super pacs" educate the general public about the particulars of the Mormon cult, Romney will lose in a landslide, against President Obama.

  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Mar 11, 2012 8:44 PM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    rnch saidThe Repugs are goning to be amazed by what all President Obama does in his second term in office.




    THAT is our concern. We'll do the best we can to make certain it doesn't happen.






    Yes, the GOP/TEAbagger's agenda for the last four years has been to defeat President Obama anyway/everyway they can..regardles of the consequences to our country and it's residents.
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Mar 11, 2012 9:31 PM GMT
    The Bush name is completely toxic.
    Republicans would be better off sticking with Romney.
    Also, Romney would never pick Jeb as his running mate -- it makes the Dem's case for them that Romney would take the country back to the failed economic policies of George W. Bush. The campaign ads basically write themselves.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Mar 11, 2012 10:24 PM GMT
    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRW3H9o67ETVqxzhcOs1PP

    No words need to be said ... just a ten second spot with this picture would be ALL the democrats need for November

    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Mar 11, 2012 10:51 PM GMT
    GQjock saidimages?q=tbn:ANd9GcRW3H9o67ETVqxzhcOs1PP

    No words need to be said ... just a ten second spot with this picture would be ALL the democrats need for November

    icon_rolleyes.gif


    OMG, that photo. Sickening

    Clown+puke.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 12, 2012 3:59 AM GMT
    rnch said
    freedomisntfree said
    rnch saidThe Repugs are goning to be amazed by what all President Obama does in his second term in office.




    THAT is our concern. We'll do the best we can to make certain it doesn't happen.






    Yes, the GOP/TEAbagger's agenda for the last four years has been to defeat President Obama anyway/everyway they can..regardles of the consequences to our country and it's residents.


    Did you say the magic word?