Skip to comments.Jeb Bush is wrong: Ronald Reagan could have won the 2012 Republican nomination easily
Posted on 06/11/2012 9:34:32 AM PDT by US Navy Vet
Jeb Bush says that if Ronald Reagan was alive today he would struggle to win the Republican presidential nomination. I should think so the great man would be 101 (that gag is copyrighted to Jonah Goldberg).
What Bush meant was that Reagans history of compromise with Democrats would make him unacceptable to the GOP base. He told Bloomberg reporters that Reagan and Bush's father, President George HW Bush, "got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan support. [Reagan] would be criticized for doing the things that he did. The remark is electoral gold for Obama as it conforms to the narrative of Republican extremism vs Democratic centrism. It confirms a widely held view that the GOP, thanks to the Tea Party, is more Rightwing than ever before. Ronald Reagan would struggle to get nominated today and George HW Bush wouldn't have a hope in Hell.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
Well, he's got that part right. We wouldn't have Gulf War II going on all this time if his daddy would have finished Gulf War I.
Look at the screeching tantrum that team Romney threw when Santorum encouraged union members to vote for him.
Mitty would have a had a stroke over Reagan walking into union shops and campaigning directly to them.
Struggle against who? He was certainly more conservative than the field we just voted on.
Reagan would have cleaned Romney’s clock.
And crushed Zero the commie. I would love to see Reagan take on Zero. Reagan was better at crushing commies than anyone, and Zero and his commie friends would have presented a target rich environment.
This is such nonsense. The left can take whoever they want to consider the most rabid Tea Party extremist out there and I dare them to show me where that person’s platform differs from Reagan’s in the slightest.
You missed an “H”.
All Bushes, and Clintons, are always wrong. They belong to a deluded group known as Merovingians, that believe that they rightfully posess a Life Estate on positions of authority, because they are descended from Jesus Christ.
This is no joke; they truly believe that. If you wish to waste your time, pray for their eternally lost souls.
Easily? Even against RINO Romney forces’ millions of dollars & their scorched earth primary campaign? Mitt would have demonized Reagan in the GOP primaries even worse than Dems did back in the 1980 general.
“We wouldn’t have Gulf War II going on all this time if his daddy would have finished Gulf War I.”
It was the price we paid for forming/entering a UN coalition the Dems demanded. We could have easily kicked Hussein out of Kuwait and removed him from Iraq, without the aid of all those other countries, but the Dems wanted cover.
The UN coalition demanded the limited objective of freeing Kuwait and forbad eliminating/removing Saddam in exchange for their cooperation. HW should have said FUUN, but as an honorable/ethical man HW didn’t. HW’s biggest fault was in believing the Donks were patriots, instead of the partisan socialist liars they were.
The the future, especially since the advent of Obama, such naivete in a president is a luxury we can no longer afford.
If we had had conservative nominees instead of the two Bushes, we could have avoided federalizing the number of handicapped parkings spaces throughout the fifty states (the ADA) (Bush I) and the federal prescription drug benefit, invasion of Iraq and “global democratic revolution” (Bush II), among other things.
Reagan was known as a true radical right winger when he ran in the tail end of 1960s/Vietnam/Watergate America in 1979, his challenge was to overcome fear of the dangers of taking a chance with someone so genetically conservative.
Today, candidate Reagan would be much more conservative because the political climate would allow it, with rebellion stirring, the tea party, Palin, a republican Congress, republican Governors and state legislatures, knowing that he would probably be getting a republican Senate.
The reason that it was so important to get Romney in for the GOPe is to try to dampen down and end this conservative energy.
Reagan would have been in hog heaven with this political climate and with such a large conservative activist base, he would be using his economic degree and expertise to take the right to a 63% victory.
and Reagan would have turned it right around on Mitt, just like he did GHWB and any other establishment favorite of the time. New players today, but the same game. The tepid DC insiders vs. principled, bold leadership. Reagan had it, just as the tea party movement does today.
ATTENTION JEB BUSH!
Please go away - Your 15 minutes is up.
Not the first time Jeb missed the mark.
Please do NOT nominate Jeb as V.P. , no more RINO B.S.
He needs to go away and take the rest of the rino’s with him.
Some Republicans will never get Reagan. That being the case, I wish they’d re-register as a Democrat and be done with it.
I expect these types of comments out of Carter, Clinton, and Obama. I don’t expect them out of middle-aged Republicans who should know better.
I agree with your take on it.
Bush family, thank you for those positive things you did, now shut up and go away. You have passed the point of diminishing returns.
Reagan returned might well win as a left Democrat. His persona and his approach- a couple of strong issues persistently and without sidelining- were a big part of that. Then again, I can’t imagine any liberal with Reagan’s persona. When your ideology is fantasy you can’t easily project it with firm conviction and that firm conviction is awfully difficult to fake.
The Bushes hate Reagan. Nuff said.
Isn't that redundant?
And just WHAT were these “Positive Things” the Bush Family did? Name a few?
I was really just trying to be polite, but there are a few things. I’ll give GHWB credit for assembling a coalition for Gulf War Part One, though he didn’t finish the job. He put Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court, when he could have bailed on him. W was a strong leader in the aftermath of 9/11, put two solid Justices on the Court, and his tax cuts were a good thing. He also kept Al Gore and John Kerry from becoming President. Jeb was a reasonably good governor of Florida. Yep, it’s a pretty short list.
If you cant think of any there is something seriously wrong with you
Spoken like a TRUE BushBot!
Jeb Bush is a fool.
It's George HW that, in hind sight could not get the top spot after Reagan but he ran on "this will be the Reagan third term." Never happened and that's why GHWB couldn't win his second term against Clinton.
Never forget, GHWB's famous, "Read my lips, no new taxes," and lied!!!
Sorry Jebby, it's you and the rest of your moderate GOP, pro-amnesty, family that couldn't get the nomination!
W fought the war against the "religion of peace" thank God and placed pro-life justices in place but other than those things for which I will be eternally grateful, the Bush family are not what America needs today.
>> “HW should have said FUUN, but as an honorable/ethical man HW didnt.” <<
You’re dreaming 49er. - No Bonesman is an honorable man. He took a blood oath to favor his lodge and brothers over truth and the general good.
It doesn’t matter how the people vote; Masons and Bonesmen are put in power to do the kinds of things that Bush and Boehner and Clinton do.
The dems need no ‘cover,’ the media are in their pockets; the agenda is all that matters.
2 Words for all of “W’s” “pro-life justices”, “Harriet Miers”.
“HWs biggest fault was in believing the Donks were patriots, instead of the partisan socialist liars they were.The the future, especially since the advent of Obama, such naivete in a president is a luxury we can no longer afford.”
I would have to disagree that George H.W. Bush was a naive man.
The following words are those of a man of purpose, who fully knows what he intends to accomplish.
From President George H.W. Bush’s New World Order Speech.
“A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment! The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation! Out of these troubled times, our fifth objectivea new world ordercan emerge: A new erafreer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony.
A hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor, and today that new world is struggling to be born. A world quite different from the one we’ve known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak.
This is the vision that I shared with President Gorbachev in Helsinki! He and the other leaders from Europe, the gulf and around the world understand that how we manage this crisis today could shape the future for generations to come!”
>> “Bush family, thank you for those positive things you did” <<
Could you name a dozen or so of them?
>> “ Jeb was a reasonably good governor of Florida” <<
Then why is Terry Schiavo dead?
If you can think of any you’re deluded.
“I would have to disagree that George H.W. Bush was a naive man.”
You post goes a long way to illustrate his naivete.
I would have to disagree that George H.W. Bush was a naive man.
The other possible theory is that he knew and didn't care. Is that the theory you prefer?
You misread my meaning. Once Bush committed to UN/coalition action he was stuck. He couldn’t turn back or go back on that committment. As I said “HW should have said FUUN,.....”
I have serious doubts that College club/society loyalities/oaths last much beyond college years, except as shared experience.
“. Is that the theory you prefer?”
Not me! HW was too trusting of others, as I said “naivete.”
The RINO extraordinair who let Teri Schievo go to her death should join the democratic party.
Jeb Bush is wrong: Ronald Reagan could have won the 2012 Republican nomination easilyCould have and would have. No contest.
Reagan would still win.
But he would banned here.
>> “I have serious doubts that College club/society loyalities/oaths last much beyond college years, except as shared experience” <<
You may wish to believe that, but the visible, and documented evidence says that it is the strongest bond on Earth.
I do not subscribe to the whole bot thing as I think calling someone a bush bot or any other kund of bot dismisses someone with contrary views.
The Bush family sacrificed a lot to run for public office and take on the mantle of Governor, congressman, and president ,
Since you purport to be a vet (according to your moniker) you should be more aware than most what that means. The fact that you consider the Bush family “bad” gives you a rotten stench in my book no matter who you are
IT IS REALLY PATHETIC WHEN PEOPLE SUPPOSEDLY ON THE RIGHT ACT THE WAY YOU DO
THE BUSH FAMILY IS THE ENEMY ? ....SCREW YOU
“Is that the theory you prefer? Not me! HW was too trusting of others, as I said naivete.
Forty-niner, you are the one excusing Bush’s mistakes due to his supposed “naivete” and said “HWs biggest fault was in believing the Donks were patriots”.
So you think all of a sudden this war scenario emerges and Bush gets duped by the Euros and everybody, and they are therefore the ones responsible for the fiasco, and not Bush?
You think the leader of the free world, ex-Director of the CIA, eight years as VP under Reagan, son of a promonent U.S. Senator, WWII veteran, hard-nosed oilman whose real family business is politics can be excused because he is too “trusting of others” NAIVE??
No. Being a true believer in the Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, H.G. Wells, Progressive, United Nations theories of the New World Order only means you are a true believer in those things, same as the rest of them - and if belief in all that is naivete, then the world is run by naive people.
Of course you can make the case that all of the true believers are naive because they believe The New World Order can change man’s fundemental nature, or The New World Order can control mankind’s evil, selfish, warlike impulses, or that man can be made to be somehow different from what man has demonstrated he is throughout history, or the cycle of birth, life, and collapse and death that has happened to every civilization known to history can be averted by the policies of The New World Order.
But that does not make Bush less culpable or better than any other leader who leads his nation into disastrous misfortune by his misjudgements.
Its really pathetic when fools try to run cover for our enemies.
All masonic adepts are our enemies. All takers of the Luciferian blood oaths are our enemies.
I hope that doesn’t include you, but if it does, so be it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.