Is Jeb Bush already toast?

[Care4all]

I have been reading a great deal, especially from Conservative websites, and the concensus I am reading is that Jeb has screwed the pooch this last with with his answer to the Iraq War question and the three subsequent days of flip-flopping and waffle'ing.

I mean, come on, it's pretty hard for a Republican to screw up a softball question on FOX, of all stations.

If polling that starts as of this weekend starts to show Jeb's numbers tanking, I guess we will all know.

But I do think that the big winner on the Republican side this last week was Scott Walker. As a good substitute for the man that the GOP establishment has been wanting, all he has to do is to wait, look good and not screw up. Easy, right?



Your thoughts? Did Jeb Bush sink his ship before it even got out of the harbor, or is there still hope for a third Bush presidency within a span of about 25 years?

He never had a chance.

No more Clinton.
No more Bush.

I've noticed that only those right of center are able to say 'no more Bush,no more Clinton'
Those to the left can't say no to Clinton

Why would we not want a repeat of Bill Clinton?

Clinton was an excellent President, the country did really well under his reign, he was able to work across the aisle and give in to the Republicans in Congress when necessary for compromise, or in order to get a piece of what he wanted for the Nation....we prospered as a Nation, Poverty rates went down, and the wealthy got wealthier...it was a win, win for near everybody in this Nation. If Clinton had been able to keep Willie (the one eyed trouser worm) in his pants, he would be recognized at one of the best Presidents in our Modern day history if not in all time.

Why would we not want a repeat of George Bush?

Well, because of the Iraq war and the deliberate misinformation given to us on why we had to attack..., because he and Congress spent like a drunken sailor while he was in office, with no regard to the deficit and National Debt, and he did so in good economic times, when taxes should be paying for what the government spends....
He took our Social Security Surplus, and gave 50% of the estimated Social Security tax surplus to the top 10% in this Nation as INCOME tax breaks....the very people who DO NOT PAY taxes on every dime of what they earn in Social Security taxes, as the average working Americans do....so a reverse Robin Hood took place and a slight of hand under him....And he signed the Medicare Pill Bill passed in the wee hours of the night via CHEATING, (holding a 15 minute vote open or 3 hours to twist and pay off congressmen to change their vote), and he never had Congress FUND this new entitlement, which is still a BIG FACTOR in the deficits and National Debt we run today...He turned a BLIND EYE to regulators which was a big factor in the financial and Wall Street crash and the Housing market boom and BUST....

I can go on forever and a day on how bad his presidency was for ALL of us...

So IF citizens would have to choose between a Bush and a Clinton, MOST would pick a redo of a Clinton vs and redo of a Bush in my humble, (yet wise) opinion....

 

[NYcarbineer]

lol, one poll out of them all where Hillary is behind, and it's the RINO the RW'ers hate. lol

 

[JoshuaZ]

I have been reading a great deal, especially from Conservative websites, and the concensus I am reading is that Jeb has screwed the pooch this last with with his answer to the Iraq War question and the three subsequent days of flip-flopping and waffle'ing.

I mean, come on, it's pretty hard for a Republican to screw up a softball question on FOX, of all stations.

If polling that starts as of this weekend starts to show Jeb's numbers tanking, I guess we will all know.

But I do think that the big winner on the Republican side this last week was Scott Walker. As a good substitute for the man that the GOP establishment has been wanting, all he has to do is to wait, look good and not screw up. Easy, right?



Your thoughts? Did Jeb Bush sink his ship before it even got out of the harbor, or is there still hope for a third Bush presidency within a span of about 25 years?

Jeb was never a serious contender. He was the media's choice but the cons I know around here, and believe me there are a lot of them, were universal in their dislike of him. I couldn't get a single one of them to come up with anything positive about him.

In this neck of the woods Scott Walker is the overwhelming choice.

Walker or Rubio will win the nomination. All the libturds can focus on is Bush due to their derangement syndrome.

I also find it ironic that Bush makes a minor wobble on one question and the Hildabesat is hiding in her bunker and hasn't taken a single question in over a month. She is being sued due to her deleted sever issue....she is facing ethics charges.....she'll have to testify again before Congress....but Scat is focused on a missed question by Jeb.


It's delusional. Truly delusional.

How certain are you that the nominee will be Walker or Rubio?

 

[Care4all]

I have been reading a great deal, especially from Conservative websites, and the concensus I am reading is that Jeb has screwed the pooch this last with with his answer to the Iraq War question and the three subsequent days of flip-flopping and waffle'ing.

I mean, come on, it's pretty hard for a Republican to screw up a softball question on FOX, of all stations.

If polling that starts as of this weekend starts to show Jeb's numbers tanking, I guess we will all know.

But I do think that the big winner on the Republican side this last week was Scott Walker. As a good substitute for the man that the GOP establishment has been wanting, all he has to do is to wait, look good and not screw up. Easy, right?



Your thoughts? Did Jeb Bush sink his ship before it even got out of the harbor, or is there still hope for a third Bush presidency within a span of about 25 years?

He never had a chance.

No more Clinton.
No more Bush.

I've noticed that only those right of center are able to say 'no more Bush,no more Clinton'
Those to the left can't say no to Clinton

Because there's simply no comparison.

Everything was fine and dandy during the Clinton years.

Only Republicans hated him, for partisan reasons no doubt.

Cut out the false equivalency nonsense. Its not going to help you.

Then maybe you can be the one to list her accomplishments.
Not just offices she held, but solid results she accomplished while in those offices

She was an excellent Senator of New York, she crossed the aisle and worked with Republicans on most everything she did, she even joined the Prayer Breakfasts that congress had, so she could mingle with those of like minds religiously... Every Republican Senator that she compromised and worked with to accomplish things, PRAISED HER when she was a Senator...You CAN'T take that back.... She worked to get NYC money after 911, for the injured and for the city to make it more secure, she worked on changing the Patriot act, with a handful of Republicans before Patriot Act 2 was passed and took out objectionables, she was a committee member of many important committees in the Senate, one of which was the Armed forces committee which gave her experience in Foreign affairs and Defense.

I disagree with you. She is not a far left Liberal...at most, she is a Centrist...too RIGHT WINGED for many Democrats and this is why they voted for Obama, who was less centrist than she was...

 

[hortysir]

Well, shit

First, thank you Care for a few specifics. That's the most I've been able to pull out of others around here (even if there is no sponsored bills or foreign policy success stories )

But I just found this in my e-mail:

GOP Approves Florida Winner-Take-All Primary
GOP Approves Florida Winner-Take-All Primary Shark Tank

Party Chairman Blaise Ingoglia released the following statement:

The road to the White House runs through Florida. This now confirms that the road to the Republican nomination will run through Florida as well.

 

[Care4all]

Well that kills the chances of any Independent or Libertarian running which may displease some L conservatives, and it gives an indication of who the Republican Party believes will be their Candidate, Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio..., right?

 

[bendog]

Well that kills the chances of any Independent or Libertarian running which may displease some L conservatives, and it gives an indication of who the Republican Party believes will be their Candidate, Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio..., right?

Well, I think Hillary would prefer to run against Jeb.

 

[Zander]

lol, one poll out of them all where Hillary is behind, and it's the RINO the RW'ers hate. lol

Polls over 18 months from the election have essentially no predictive value. Especially in Presidential elections.....but keep telling us who you like so we can go the opposite way

Well that kills the chances of any Independent or Libertarian running which may displease some L conservatives, and it gives an indication of who the Republican Party believes will be their Candidate, Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio..., right?

Not really. Nostalgia for Rubio or Bush may not translate into Republican primary votes. Lots of time between now and then....

 

[hortysir]

lol, one poll out of them all where Hillary is behind, and it's the RINO the RW'ers hate. lol

Polls over 18 months from the election have essentially no predictive value. Especially in Presidential elections.....but keep telling us who you like so we can go the opposite way

Well that kills the chances of any Independent or Libertarian running which may displease some L conservatives, and it gives an indication of who the Republican Party believes will be their Candidate, Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio..., right?

Not really. Nostalgia for Rubio or Bush may not translate into Republican primary votes. Lots of time between now and then....

I already showed polls, from 18mo prior to the 2008 elections, that had Hilderbeast ahead by 5 lengths.
We see how that worked out

 

[NYcarbineer]

lol, one poll out of them all where Hillary is behind, and it's the RINO the RW'ers hate. lol

Polls over 18 months from the election have essentially no predictive value. Especially in Presidential elections.....but keep telling us who you like so we can go the opposite way

Well that kills the chances of any Independent or Libertarian running which may displease some L conservatives, and it gives an indication of who the Republican Party believes will be their Candidate, Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio..., right?

Not really. Nostalgia for Rubio or Bush may not translate into Republican primary votes. Lots of time between now and then....

You people on the far right thought there were more conservative Republicans in 2008 and 2012 who could have beaten Obama...

...but none of you were able to name one.

 

[JoshuaZ]

lol, one poll out of them all where Hillary is behind, and it's the RINO the RW'ers hate. lol

Polls over 18 months from the election have essentially no predictive value. Especially in Presidential elections.....but keep telling us who you like so we can go the opposite way

Well that kills the chances of any Independent or Libertarian running which may displease some L conservatives, and it gives an indication of who the Republican Party believes will be their Candidate, Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio..., right?

Not really. Nostalgia for Rubio or Bush may not translate into Republican primary votes. Lots of time between now and then....

I already showed polls, from 18mo prior to the 2008 elections, that had Hilderbeast ahead by 5 lengths.
We see how that worked out

That's an argument that the polls sometimes change, and that's certainly true. It isn't an argument that the early polls aren't useful information.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

if jeb is toast, then who is a pop-tart?

good one Rexx, i like that, the libs here will never make the connection.

tough one yes, we have a slice of toast, so who will be the well done blueberry pop-tart? Hillary?

 

[Zander]

lol, one poll out of them all where Hillary is behind, and it's the RINO the RW'ers hate. lol

Polls over 18 months from the election have essentially no predictive value. Especially in Presidential elections.....but keep telling us who you like so we can go the opposite way

Well that kills the chances of any Independent or Libertarian running which may displease some L conservatives, and it gives an indication of who the Republican Party believes will be their Candidate, Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio..., right?

Not really. Nostalgia for Rubio or Bush may not translate into Republican primary votes. Lots of time between now and then....

You people on the far right thought there were more conservative Republicans in 2008 and 2012 who could have beaten Obama...

...but none of you were able to name one.

Now I'm "far right"??

 

[Uncensored2008]

Without Jeb, Hillary loses in the general.

 

[JoshuaZ]

Without Jeb, Hillary loses in the general.

Conditional on Jeb not becoming the nominee, how likely do you think it is that Hillary will lose?

Conditional on Jeb becoming the nominee, how likely do you think it is that Hillary will win?

 

[Dragonlady]

only problem I ever had with the booshs is their immigration policies . Other than that I thought that they did pretty good work Luddley !! Just saying .

Really?

Iraq is pretty damn well considered a fuckup by almost everyone now.

think we can thank mrobama for that FA_. War in Iraq was won , mrobama pulled out the troops and lost the war .

The war was never won. The level of opposition varied, but it never stopped. Bush blew it when he refused to hire Iraqis to rebuild their own country.

The whole Iraq war was to enable Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al to loot the U.S. Treasury and line their own pockets. They should have been impeached and turned over to Le Hague to be tried for war crimes.

 

[JoeB131]

Bush could have easily been beaten in 2000 by a better candidate.

Okay. Who was the better candidate in 2000 who had the stature to challenge Bush?

I really can't think of a name, and neither could the Democrats, who gave Al Gore even less resistance than Hillary is getting right now.

 

[JoeB131]

Please do some research on who received the"Wall Street money" in the last two Presidential elections.
Spoiler: It's not always republican

It was in the last one. Frankly, Romney was as close as America every got to a Hostile Takeover by Wall Street and the Mormon Church.

Thankfully, democracy won.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Bush could have easily been beaten in 2000 by a better candidate.

Okay. Who was the better candidate in 2000 who had the stature to challenge Bush?

I really can't think of a name, and neither could the Democrats, who gave Al Gore even less resistance than Hillary is getting right now.

Bill Bradley and Bob Kerrey for starters. From another angle, Lieberman was a poor choice. Had Gore picked Sen. Bob Graham of Florida, who was on the short list for VP, he would won Florida easily and thus the presidency.

 

[JoeB131]

Bill Bradley and Bob Kerrey for starters. From another angle, Lieberman was a poor choice. Had Gore picked Sen. Bob Graham of Florida, who was on the short list for VP, he would won Florida easily and thus the presidency.

Bill Bradley ran against Gore and lost badly.

For Bob Kerrey, not more than a few months after the 2000 election, it was revealed he had engaged in serious war crimes in Vietnam. (His unit had killed civilians, including children, and reported them as enemy Killed in Action.) Those things would have come out a lot earlier had he gotten additional scrutiny in 2000.

Now, I think Gore ran an awful campaign in 2000. But he was probably better than anything else the Democrats had at the time.