I really don’t think the 2000 elections will affect him that much. Most people blame Katherine Harris.
I kind of agree with this. Plus, the SCOTUS is the party that made the key decision. Really there is no one person to blame for the fuck up in how the Florida election was handled in 2000. Florida law designed a system which meant in a close election it was going to be very difficult to actually discern who the voters had “intended” to elect that day. Additionally the challenge process allowed Gore to only ask for manual recounts in a few select counties designed for his benefit, which also sullied the process. Stupid ballots, stupid review process etc. Florida collectively bears the blame for that for generations of electing legislators who wrote laws like that.
It would be easy to remind people if it came to that, though.
Hard to see how Jeb would inspire anybody if he ran - “I’m the *smart *one!” isn’t likely to fire up the base *or *the swing vote.
How can anyone possibly be that delusional?! It’s like there’s no such thing as opinion polls!
They’re all skewed, as we’ve been repeatedly told here.
Have you met people? People be crazy.
There are folks still convinced that Obama is a Muslim socialist foreigner setting up FEMA death camps. By comparison, going more conservative than Romney is perfectly reasonable.
This is why I don’t currently support Clinton - I think she’s qualified and capable; but there are other qualified and capable Democrats who don’t happen to have already lived in the White House for eight years. I’d prefer not to vote for a Clinton OR a Bush. (Although I will still go with Clinton over any Republican who would get the nomination).
If I have to, I will. I was already gritting my teeth and getting ready way back when I thought she would beat Obama for the nomination. Making hard choices, even repugnant choices is my duty as a citizen, and I have never not voted.
As for “snide”, guilty as charged. Due to abundant defects in character, snarkasm is always my first choice when expressing political truth. Fortunately, the Republican Party offers an abundance of opportunity to express richly deserved contempt.
Plus, I suck at sincere. To my mind’s ear, I always sound portentous and preachy when I’m sincere. 'Course, I am preaching, I just don’t want to sound like it.
Isn’t the Florida primary one of the earlier ones? That could make a “lose his home state” effect more prominent: Voters in other states might decide that Floridians know him better than they do, and if they rejected him, maybe there’s a reason.
And I, too, dislike dynasties. I thought it was a bad idea when W was elected, I think it would be a bad idea for Hillary, and I think it was a bad idea when Q and Ben Harrison did it. If (as I consider unlikely) the 2016 election comes down to Hillary vs. a Republican, I’ll probably hold my nose and vote for Hillary, but I won’t like it, and I’ll do what I can to prevent it from coming down to that.
I’m not thrilled with the idea of another Bush, but anything…even a somehow-brought-into-the-real-world Geoffrey Barratheon…is preferable to Hillary.
Hell, Oak, we’re mirror images. I’d likely vote for Nehemiah Scudder than another Bush. And I think Jeb is probably a good guy and I liked GHWB. But GWB is indicative of everything wrong with the Republican party at this point…and now we have to add in the tea party folks, too.
But if you dismiss both the Tea Party wing and the Bushes’ bizcon wing, what’s left of the GOP? Libertarians? They can’t carry it alone, they’re too few.
Well, true that. But I generally like a party that isn’t nutty and keeps some thought to how to pay for everything.
We just don’t have one of those in the Republican party at this point.
Jeb joining the race with Hillary already the presumptive candidate would not look good for either of them. That’s fine with me, I’d prefer we don’t have any more dynastic presidents, but this part is really sad, they may be the lesser of all evils in each of their parties.
The 2000 election really sold the “lesser of two evils” argument to a generation of voters.
What’s the problem with having someone in the office who’s already been close enough to it for it to constitute real experience and preparation? Why would you want to disqualify someone for that, because they happen to be an actual family member and not just a close confidant? I don’t see the reasoning there. It’s simply undemocratic.
The presidency is not a hereditary dynasty. We do have elections, right on schedule every four years despite the occasional nonsense about how Clinton or Obama is going to cancel them. Don’t like someone’s name or family, you don’t have to vote for 'em. But that seems like a pretty silly basis for such an important decision.
ETA: I’m also philosophically opposed to term limits, btw, for a similar reason. Why disqualify someone from a job because they have *too much *experience?
President Jeb Bush 
or is it Jeb Bush for president?
I like that sound … someone told me Jeb Bush would win, but I forget who … but I remember He was a very important person.
my memory isn’t what it use to be lol
after all I turned 70 today
I only voted for W once. The second time, I voted for Kerry. If the election was W against Hillary, I’d probably write myself in, or pick some third party candidate. There is no circumstance where I’d vote for either of those two. Jeb–I dunno. Maybe. Christie–hmmm–he’s tainted from Bridgegate, and I find myself highly skeptical of his explanations therefor. Either way, it’s bad for Zathras.
Two words make JEB worse than any likely Democratic candidate: Terri Schiavo. Fuck him.
Why do we think he’s thinking about running again?