People are giving Hillary shit about being in the Senate from New York, because she isn’t “from” there. So how did it work out that Jeb was able to go and be gov in Florida? I thought the Bush’s were from Texas, so how come I don’t hear people saying how Jeb shouldn’t be gov in Florida?
Jeb actually LIVED in Florida, before he ran for Governor.
Two brothers, living in two states, ran for Governor and won. Simple really, their Dad WAS president.
I couldn’t find the exact date, but I think Jeb Bush moved to Florida around 1980. His wife is, I believe, a lifelong resident of the state. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, moved to New York only a few months before the election. Not that there’s necessarily anything wrong with that. Dick Cheney moved back to Wyoming (where he’s from originally) only a few months before the election. George Bush (the father) was only nominally a resident of Texas when he was elected to the White House. He had lived in Washington for years, and owned a home in Maine. (He did actually live in Texas from the mid-1940s to the mid-1960s, though).
Yes, Jeb lived in Miami for a long time. He was a lawyer down there and hard-wired into that city’s big-money cabal. The first time Jeb ran for Governor (1994) he lost to the incumbent Governor, native Floridian, and beloved populist Lawton Chiles, who died in office in 1998.
As far as why two Bushes ended up being Governor, I think it was a result of a right wing electrified into fund-raising and bloc-voting by their blinding hate for the 42nd President … anything they could do to relive the “glory days” before the peasants, women, and minorities were ungrateful enough to elect Bill Clinton.
They saw hope in a pair of woefully inexperienced frat boys with the advantage of a familiar “brand name”, pushed by vampiric and dynasty-obsessed parents eternally bitter about being one-termers.
(They couldn’t get Neil to run for Governor of Colorado, of course. He’s still tainted goods for being up to his ears in the S&L ripoff. )
The voters of Florida are as entitled to decide who’s a “real” Floridian as the voters of New York are entitled to decide who’s a “real” New Yorker. In both cases, the candidates’ out-of-state roots apparently were not a deciding issue with a majority of the voters.
Can you spell nepotism?
Of course, this same point can be applied to how Al Gore became vice president… or how Al Gore Sr. became a senator… or how George Bush Sr. became President… or how Prescot Bush became a senator… Politics is an incestuous biz’ness…
Re: RTA’s statement on Jeb
Ironic that, although he lost in the election to Jeb, Buddy McKay still ended up being Governor of Florida upon the death of Lawton Chiles (died in December 1998, a month before Jeb was to take over the office). Really messed up all the book printers who had Jeb as the 41st (or some number like that) Governor of the State of Florida.
That statement hit me like a three dollar bill. It is worth about the same as well.
Sorry, I do not have a dictionary available so I cannot give you an exact definition, but I believe nepotism is being given a job by a family member. Unless Jeb Bush is related to the entire state of Florida, I do not see how that statement makes sense. Sure, the examples you cited may have been riding the popularity of a family member, but they were not “given” the job by that family member. They were definitely voted in by the populace.
Now, if Jeb were to get a cabinet seat in George W.'s staff, THAT could be considered nepotism. Your other statement does not make sense.
Regards.
RE: RTA
Is all that venom and hatred really necessary? Talk about mean-spirited. You’ve obviously got strong opinions - try to express them without resorting to name-calling and vitriol.
When this subject comes up, why is it that no one points to the endless parade of Kennedys willing to capitalize on Jack’s martyrdom? When nepotism is mentioned, why is it that Bobby Kennedy’s name never comes up?
Like it or not, voter’s decisions can be based on trivial or irrelevant criteria - like a familiar surname, or because the candidate wears briefs instead of boxers. But who knows… maybe that candidate with the familiar last name was elected because he or she was a better candidate.
It also helped that Jeb Bush had a warehouse full of non-dated signs, hats, and other election paraphenalia in storage from the 1994 election (lost to Chiles) to re-use in the 1998 election (won against MacKay), therefore saving several hundred thousand dollars in printing and distribution costs, freeing up money to be used elsewhere within the campaign.
As far as better, I’m still waiting to see on that one.
Sorry, hanz, but I generally don’t respond to newbies.
String 100 posts together without being banned (or banned again, if that applies to you), and maybe we’ll talk.
Nothing I said is name-calling or vitriol - for that I refer you to the GOP, who has spewed both in unprecedented abundance for many years. I merely provide apt descriptions; if the plain truth burns the right-wing like holy water, I am not the one at fault here.
[Moderator Hat]
Hold it right there, RTA. If you have reason to believe that evilhanz is a returned troll, then present the evidence to a moderator via e-mail, and we’ll take care of it. If not, then don’t imply it. You are, of course, free to refrain from replying to any poster you choose, but it’s just plain rude to reply only to say “I’m not replying to you just 'cause you’re new, nya nyaaa!”. Rudeness does not belong in this forum.
[/Moderator Hat]
Shame on you. We were all newbies once. You give the impression of being as elitist as the Republicans (as you portray them).
I believe the OP has been answered. Perhaps this thread should be moved to Great Debates, if only to allow those who wish to indulge in “sore loser” or “ungratious winner” behavior to continue sniping at one another and their respective parties.
~~Baloo
RTA: Just for the record…
I’ve never been banned, nor is it reasonable to consider what I posted to be “trolling”. After reading this board for a very long time … I recently decided to participate. The fact that I chose to do so at a much later date than yourself does not invalidate the opinion I expressed.
People of the conservative political persuasion are often maligned for their views as supposedly hateful and divisive. But it is interesting to note where the hostility, elitism, and contradictory standards originated. I tried to make a valid comparison between the view of the politicians of both the Bush and Kennedy families. Why was it a good thing for the Kennedy’s to use their connections to become politicians, while it’s “evil” for the Bush’s to do so? Instead, I’m personally attacked. That’s unforunate. I really was expecting a thoughtful opinion on the subject. (As a side note, both President Bush and Kennedy were fairly decent officeholders…neither exceptional, nor exceptionally bad. The other various hangers on are another matter).
I’ll second Baloo’s motion that this just continue in GD.
Bean:
Actually, my point is much more complex than that.
First, nepotism is favoritism to relatives of people in power, not necessarily restricted to one’s own immediate family. It’s entirely likely that Jeb received a lot of votes in the Florida election simply because he was the son of a President. That’s a form of nepotism. Now I’m not going to say anything about whether he deserved the position, because I’m not familiar with his record. In fact, rarely is nepotism alone, enough. However, being from Texas and being very familiar with Dubya’s record, I think it’s fair to say that, given he had absolutely no pratical political experience prior to his election in Texas, I feel that this same sort of nepotism was LARGELY responsible for HIS winning the Governorship. Given that there are a number of more competent Republicans who could have led that party, it’s clear that Dubya was chosen more because of who his father was than because of his qualifications. That, my friend is nepotism.
Second point. Generally (Dubya being the notable exception), successful politicians don’t simply spring up out of thin air. They generally have to “pay their dues” by working in lesser political roles. Many of these roles are not elected positions, but rather appointments. Clearly prominant political lineage (i.e. nepotism) plays a huge role in this early process. These folks are handed opportunities that others have to work very hard for and in some cases, the opportunities never manifest themselves. In other words, early “nepotunistic” events facilitate a later election opportunity…
I stand by my earlier statement. And I’m not saying that nepotism is necessarily a bad thing, BTW. Al Gore Jr. had the opportunity to learn a lot from his father and that’s a very good thing. Likewise, George Bush Sr. learned a lot from his grandfather. In cases like these, nepotism is simply a catalyst. However, it remains to be seen if Dubya has learned anything relevant from his dad. He probably highlighted the point to the contrary best himself when he jokingly said: