What Does The Total & Complete Repudiation of Jeb Bush Mean?

[bendog]

The Bush name is dirt. You people are reading too much into it. The Bush name was destroyed by Dubya, and too many people refuse to allow a Bush to ever hold the White House again.

It's not really about 9-11. Benghazi doesn't resonate with a supermaj because fair people know mistakes happen. Even Iraq doesn't really resonate, other than the neocons will not get public opinion for a redeaux. But W was NOT a conservative. He was a spendthrift who didn't support the middle class. The establishment is DOA.

But Reagan pretty much got all 50 state parties to de-elect establishment candidates. Or, like in Mississippi, he encountered fellow travelers who disliked and distrusted the fed govt.

I can't really see Trump leading the right of center party out of this morass, but someone will come along. Most likely it will not be PBush.

 

[MarcATL]

The Bush name is dirt. You people are reading too much into it. The Bush name was destroyed by Dubya, and too many people refuse to allow a Bush to ever hold the White House again.

WHY is it dirt though?

Answer me that.

In large part because nothing he did made us safer. And in fact did the opposite.

Exactly! He actually made the country LESS safe. By every and any measure. Not to mention make Americans more afraid.

 

[TheOldSchool]

The Bush name is dirt. You people are reading too much into it. The Bush name was destroyed by Dubya, and too many people refuse to allow a Bush to ever hold the White House again.

It's not really about 9-11. Benghazi doesn't resonate with a supermaj because fair people know mistakes happen. Even Iraq doesn't really resonate, other than the neocons will not get public opinion for a redeaux. But W was NOT a conservative. He was a spendthrift who didn't support the middle class. The establishment is DOA.

But Reagan pretty much got all 50 state parties to de-elect establishment candidates. Or, like in Mississippi, he encountered fellow travelers who disliked and distrusted the fed govt.

I can't really see Trump leading the right of center party out of this morass, but someone will come along. Most likely it will not be PBush.

I remember when it was Dubya and his cronies running around calling people RINO's, and the base frothing at the mouth in agreement.

And Iraq absolutely DOES resonate, which is why those neocons you mentioned are now considered RINO's.

 

[bendog]

The Bush name is dirt. You people are reading too much into it. The Bush name was destroyed by Dubya, and too many people refuse to allow a Bush to ever hold the White House again.

Yes, the only reason Sanders and Trump have made it as far as they have is because no one wanted to have to choose between another Clinton and another Bush. Especially another Bush.

Neither party really has anyone. I thought earlier that this was a lame bunch. Kasich is just old. Walker was the early favorite and he has the warmth and magnetism of Ted Cruz merged with Joe McCarthy.

The theory is Rubio is the gop's future, but he looks like melting wax to me. But the gop is in much better shape with having numbers of young guys in state positions. Unfortunately, we appear to have pissed off all the latinos, Asians, and gays.

 

[MarcATL]

The Bush name is dirt. You people are reading too much into it. The Bush name was destroyed by Dubya, and too many people refuse to allow a Bush to ever hold the White House again.

It's not really about 9-11. Benghazi doesn't resonate with a supermaj because fair people know mistakes happen. Even Iraq doesn't really resonate, other than the neocons will not get public opinion for a redeaux. But W was NOT a conservative. He was a spendthrift who didn't support the middle class. The establishment is DOA.

But Reagan pretty much got all 50 state parties to de-elect establishment candidates. Or, like in Mississippi, he encountered fellow travelers who disliked and distrusted the fed govt.

I can't really see Trump leading the right of center party out of this morass, but someone will come along. Most likely it will not be PBush.

I remember when it was Dubya and his cronies running around calling people RINO's, and the base frothing at the mouth in agreement.

And Iraq absolutely DOES resonate, which is why those neocons you mentioned are now considered RINO's.

What you're observing here, in real time, are Republicans simply UNABLE, UNWILLING and most probably, INCAPABLE of accepting the truth, the hard facts that GWB was a COLOSSAL failure, by all measures.

Keep an eye on T-Rump though, he's setting the records straight on the Bush Failure.

And I absolutely LOVE him for it!

 

[bendog]

The Bush name is dirt. You people are reading too much into it. The Bush name was destroyed by Dubya, and too many people refuse to allow a Bush to ever hold the White House again.

It's not really about 9-11. Benghazi doesn't resonate with a supermaj because fair people know mistakes happen. Even Iraq doesn't really resonate, other than the neocons will not get public opinion for a redeaux. But W was NOT a conservative. He was a spendthrift who didn't support the middle class. The establishment is DOA.

But Reagan pretty much got all 50 state parties to de-elect establishment candidates. Or, like in Mississippi, he encountered fellow travelers who disliked and distrusted the fed govt.

I can't really see Trump leading the right of center party out of this morass, but someone will come along. Most likely it will not be PBush.

I remember when it was Dubya and his cronies running around calling people RINO's, and the base frothing at the mouth in agreement.

And Iraq absolutely DOES resonate, which is why those neocons you mentioned are now considered RINO's.

What you're observing here, in real time, are Republicans simply UNABLE, UNWILLING and most probably, INCAPABLE of accepting the truth, the hard facts that GWB was a COLOSSAL failure, by all measures.

Keep an eye on T-Rump though, he's setting the records straight on the Bush Failure.

And I absolutely LOVE him for it!

Yeah, but the teaparty and Joe the Plumber really began before Obama. Palin was repudiating the establishment back then. Mitt was the establishment trying to run as tea party lite.

 

[bendog]

The Bush name is dirt. You people are reading too much into it. The Bush name was destroyed by Dubya, and too many people refuse to allow a Bush to ever hold the White House again.

It's not really about 9-11. Benghazi doesn't resonate with a supermaj because fair people know mistakes happen. Even Iraq doesn't really resonate, other than the neocons will not get public opinion for a redeaux. But W was NOT a conservative. He was a spendthrift who didn't support the middle class. The establishment is DOA.

But Reagan pretty much got all 50 state parties to de-elect establishment candidates. Or, like in Mississippi, he encountered fellow travelers who disliked and distrusted the fed govt.

I can't really see Trump leading the right of center party out of this morass, but someone will come along. Most likely it will not be PBush.

I remember when it was Dubya and his cronies running around calling people RINO's, and the base frothing at the mouth in agreement.

And Iraq absolutely DOES resonate, which is why those neocons you mentioned are now considered RINO's.

Tom Cotton? Carpet bombing ISIS? the neocons haven't gone anywhere. They led the charge into arming the Syrians.

But there's no way America will support having a real military force in Iraq. Some special forces or something ... ok.

 

[whitehall]

Was it a "complete repudiation" of JFK and Bobby and the Kennedy dynasty when Ted Kennedy couldn't muster enough support from democrats to run in 1979 even though the Kennedy's had full and total support from the liberal media? Ted was a jerk and wishful thinking doesn't translate to political analysis even in the minds of the low information left.

 

[blackhawk]

It means people are not interested in having a legacy President the same thing is happening with the Democrats and Hillary. Why do you think she is having so much trouble with Sanders? I feel safe in saying if Elizabeth Warren or even Joe Biden had gotten into the race Hillary would not be getting the Democratic nomination.

 

[Edgetho]

Typical fair-minded dimocrap scumbag in WAY over her head...

The real racists in this Country are, and have always been, dimocrap FILTH.

For over 150 years they favored Whites over Blacks. Since 1964, they have favored Blacks over Whites.

The dimocrap scum party is the party of racism and hate. Always has been. Always will be

University of Wisconsin Chancellor Publicly Brands Students As “Racists” After Mistaking Their Exfoliation Masks For Blackface…

Via NRO:

Two students at the University of Wisconsin–Whitewater were publicly, officially branded as “racist” in a campus-wide post because the school’s chancellor mistook their exfoliation masks for blackface.

The controversy all started when the students posted a Snapchat photo of themselves wearing face masks in the dorms. Seeing as skincare is widely accepted as an uncontroversial activity, they probably thought nothing of it — but Chancellor Beverly Kopper rushed to interpret it as blackface and immediately posted a statement condemning them as racist on the school’s official website.

”Last night a disturbing racist post that was made to social media was brought to my attention,” Kopper wrote in a statement on the school’s official website last week.

“This post was hurtful and destructive to our campus community,” Kopper’s post continued. While social media can certainly bring about positive change, it can also be a place that deeply hurts and harms others.”

The students — likely very shocked to find that they had been declared “racist” for an attempt at self-care — immediately explained that they weren’t trying to hate, just to exfoliate, which has prompted widespread backlash against Kopper.

State senator Stephen Nass (R., Whitewater) even released a statement criticizing Kopper, explaining that “the [chancellor’s] official statement misled students, parents, and the public by confirming that a racist event had occurred, even though it really hadn’t.”

 

[g5000]

Was it a "complete repudiation" of JFK and Bobby and the Kennedy dynasty when Ted Kennedy couldn't muster enough support from democrats to run in 1979 even though the Kennedy's had full and total support from the liberal media? Ted was a jerk and wishful thinking doesn't translate to political analysis even in the minds of the low information left.

Apples and oranges. Teddy didn't run because he knew he would be slaughtered with Chappaquiddick.

 

[MarcATL]

Was it a "complete repudiation" of JFK and Bobby and the Kennedy dynasty when Ted Kennedy couldn't muster enough support from democrats to run in 1979 even though the Kennedy's had full and total support from the liberal media? Ted was a jerk and wishful thinking doesn't translate to political analysis even in the minds of the low information left.

I love this one trying to throw everyone but the Bushes under the bus.

ROTFLMBAO!!!

 

[Edgetho]

If you have a strong stomach, watch this despicable shitbag pretend to be a preacher

 

[MarcATL]

It means people are not interested in having a legacy President the same thing is happening with the Democrats and Hillary. Why do you think she is having so much trouble with Sanders? I feel safe in saying if Elizabeth Warren or even Joe Biden had gotten into the race Hillary would not be getting the Democratic nomination.

Saying "Joe Biden" is a dumb far rightwing talking point.

Biden tried THRICE for the Presidency and failed.

Talk about establishment.

Get that S*#@T outta heah!!!

 

[blackhawk]

It means people are not interested in having a legacy President the same thing is happening with the Democrats and Hillary. Why do you think she is having so much trouble with Sanders? I feel safe in saying if Elizabeth Warren or even Joe Biden had gotten into the race Hillary would not be getting the Democratic nomination.

Saying "Joe Biden" is a dumb far rightwing talking point.

Biden tried THRICE for the Presidency and failed.

Talk about establishment.

Get that S*#@T outta heah!!!

The point as usual went right over your head no surprise it's not about establishment it's about family political legacy and not simply giving them something because of their name. Can't help but notice you ignored the other name I mentioned Warren also no surprise as that name didn't fit in with your talking point.

 

[g5000]

George Bush did the impossible. He made Bill Clinton look good.

Nevertheless, the American people did not want to be forced to choose between another Clinton and another Bush. It makes us feel like we are being made to lick up our own vomit.

We wanted fresh blood. That's why Sanders and Trump are tribal leaders, and Bush has been kicked off the island.

Two kooks and a Clinton are left at the top of the pile. My, my, my. I certainly don't feel as if we are better off!

 

[MarcATL]

It means people are not interested in having a legacy President the same thing is happening with the Democrats and Hillary. Why do you think she is having so much trouble with Sanders? I feel safe in saying if Elizabeth Warren or even Joe Biden had gotten into the race Hillary would not be getting the Democratic nomination.

Saying "Joe Biden" is a dumb far rightwing talking point.

Biden tried THRICE for the Presidency and failed.

Talk about establishment.

Get that S*#@T outta heah!!!

The point as usual went right over your head no surprise it's not about establishment it's about family political legacy and not simply giving them something because of their name. Can't help but notice you ignored the other name I mentioned Warren also no surprise as that name didn't fit in with your talking point.

Oh, I got your point well, quite well in fact. You are the average dumb partisan rightwinger, throwing Biden into the mix because you want to see the Democrats lose.

I will address Warren now. Would you ever vote for Warren? I'll help you, no, you never, ever, ever, would. Not even in your wildest dreams. I've seen how Republicans and rightwingers on here have spoken about Warren, as if she's some crazy far right loot out for anarchy. Although she's actually fighting for YOU, yes, you specifically. But you view her as far left, so you hate her, although she has done nothing for you to hate her. All you lunatics keep bringing up about her is this dumb "quarter American Indian" meme that is just so played and stupid it's not funny. Nothing more than that. So yes, Democrats are far more SENSIBLE not to have someone that is so outright unelectable.

We're not as stupid, dumb and partisan are you Republican rightwingers are you know.

The faster you get that through your thick skulls the better off you'll be.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

From my analysis it means that the total Bush meme, about "Bush kept us safe" which was used as a way to proport that his Administration was successful, is totally, completely and finally put to rest.

Case in point, T-Rump, went to South Carolina, the known and stated Bush stronghold and said to a crowded room full of Republicans that Bush DID NOT keep us safe. Moreover, he stated that they KNEW that there were no weapons of mass destruction, and they STILL waged for war, that was a complete and total disaster.

Here's the interesting thing about that. The day after, most to all Republican and right-wing pundits were bashing Trump with the response that it was a Democrat thing to say, or a left-wing talking point, NOT that it was false or a lie, but that it was a left-wing talking point. That argument in itself speaks volumes.

I watched "Morning Joe's" Joe Scarborough repeat that sentiment multiple times on his show the morning after and I was just stunned how him and people like him kept saying that. I listened to Tom Sullivan that day and he said the same thing. I've been tweeting and being re tweeted by Sullivan for months and I've stated to him that the Republicans are going to hang by that meme and sentiment that "Bush kept us safe" because it's a lie and they haven't dealt with that lie, and until they do, they will continue to falter. He tepidly agreed, but didn't outright state it.

Here comes Trump stating what even establishment Democrats didn't have the balls to say, to the establishment Republicans face. They all swore he was going to go down in South Carolina. Turns out that he won and he won DECISIVELY despite of and perhaps because of his statements denouncing the Bush lie.

Now you've all seen me stating the same exact thing T-Rump said on here for years, and just as the establishment response, all the USMB RWers respond with sentiments that it's just a far left thing to say. Well it's not, it never has been, the only partisan response is the response that DEFENDS the Bush lies lo these many years.

I thank God for Trump for being the one to FINALLY bring this lie to a screeching halt. Despite what the defenders will say, it's a lie, because the Bush name is now mud, and this is by YOUR OWN standards, the fact that his brother has, had, and never had a change in hell to make it this election cycle.

Now we have a man who went down in a STUNNINGLY embarrassing way ending his career in total defeat a and collapse. Here's what the Young Turks had to say about it...



I say good riddance to bad rubbish. What say you?

This election has NOTHING to do with people's perception of Bush keeping us safe or not. I'm not surprised you have your head so far up your own ass that, that is what you think this election is about or what it settles.

This election is 100% about fixing what Obama has done to our country for Republicans. For Democrats it's about extending Obama's agenda even further.

 

[g5000]

So yes, Democrats are far more SENSIBLE not to have someone that is so outright unelectable.

If that were true, they would not be running Sanders. Warren is more electable than Sanders.

No matter who the Dems put up, there are people who will never, never vote for them. It makes no difference if it is Warren or Clinton.

There are different reasons behind Warren not running, and I would bet it is because she didn't want the disgrace of being beat by Clinton for the nomination. She's keeping her powder dry. Deep down inside, she's probably hoping Clinton will lose to whatever GOP candidate so that she (Warren) will have a shot in 2020/2024.

I suspect this because you don't see her out there lending her name to Clinton's campaign.

It's also possible she is going to be Clinton's VP so that all of Sanders's voters will rally around.

 

[easyt65]

Who cares what it means...he's gone!