Skip to comments.Bush 44? [Jeb Bush for President]
Posted on 08/09/2005 3:06:48 AM PDT by The Raven
He denies he's even interested, and a long list of political analysts have already written him off with the belief that the appearance of political nepotism would be too unseemly for voters to put the brother of the current president in the Oval Office. But in politics timing is everything, and as the clock advances towards 2008, things are starting to fall into place to give Jeb Bush the momentum he needs to win the White House. And this isn't contingent on Hillary Clinton emerging as the Democrats' nominee--though if she does, the path will be all the smoother for another Bush.
Let's first dispense with the idea that Jeb's biggest liability would be his last name. Since when does name recognition hurt in politics? It's true that many of this brother's political adversaries would simply cross out "George" in their campaign literature and ink in "Jeb" above it. MoveOn.org and other Democratic interest groups would find plenty of willing donors. George Soros would likely make another multimillion-dollar pledge to drive the Bushes from Washington. But then again, they did all that last time, and we aren't discussing who will challenge President Kerry.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Hasn't Jeb said "No" to this a multitude of times???
How many will it take before the media gets it???
Some people will support it just for the history making, 3-Bush Presidents thing. But Jeb has not impressed me as presidential material. Let the dynasty end here. To do otherwise is somewhat creepy and disturbing.
And what has George P. done to make you believe he should be the President of the United States?
I agree no more Bushes for awhile say 20-30 years. Lets find someone else to back. I liked the days when Republican's elected self made men like Reagan lets lay off the Trust fund babies for awhile thats too much like what the democrats do.
Here's another vote he'd get.
Jeb would have my vote over anybody I can think of that the GOP has mentioned as a possible candidate (I would vote for Cheney over Bush if Cheney ran, but they say that isn't going to happen either.)
Maybe Tom Selleck. (end/sarcasm) Self made men? Reagan, as much as I liked him, was a movie star. I have a hard time calling a movie star a "self made man."
It must be observed: every GOP Presidential ticket since 1976 had either a Bush or a Dole on it.
Jeb Bush has done a very good job as governor- even moderate Democrats here accept that. In his second inaugural address, he said that he plans to measure his success by the number of empty state office buildings around Florida.
The dynasty issues is a concern. Yes, FDR was elected 4 times. His last two races however weren't exactly landslides, and the election of 1944 was surpisingly close (becuase most voters were choosing between Truman and Dewey). Of course the dynasty issues would be mooted if Hillary ran as the dems would have the same problem. Jeb would have a lot more to show for 8 years in Tallahassee than Hillary would have for 8 years in the Senate.
Jeb would make a fine president, regardless of his name (even if it were, shudder, Clinton).
As of now, he's given no indication he intends to run in '08. If he changes his mind, he'll have my support. I think it's more likely he'll run at some later point.
you don't want Jeb for president. he can't run florida -- florida runs him.
What in boils down to in my mind is that a Governor (or perhaps a mayor of a large city) of a major state would make a better president that a Senator. A Governor has many administrative duties which he has to perform well, while a Senator only has to make sure that his foot is not in his mouth and that he gets some face time. IMHO.
You may have a hard time calling him that but his background wasn't as a pampered rich man's son. Reagan actually worked for a living and succeeded on his own merit not on his father's dime.
I like Jeb too, but wouldn't vote for him. Having so many people from the same family ascent to the Presidency in so short a time would set a bad precedent. Almost like those Arab countries where the same family rules for decades.
Thank you. Another very good reason not, besides the creepy and disturbing aspect of course, is that a push for Jeb would REALLY make us rank and file conservatives seem like sheeple for doing it. The name of Bush has had its turn for a good long while in my opinion. There have to be many other options available and we have plenty of time left to find and push him or her.
Better a Bush dynasty than a Clinton dynasty. *~*
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.