Washington Examiner: 5 reasons Jeb Bush will win

[dudeabides]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Discuss….

[Lief 🗽]

You need to get a life dude. No one cares about Jeb Bush. I hope he's paying you for this.

[dudeabides]

You need to get a life dude. No one cares about Jeb Bush. I hope he's paying you for this.

Can you stop trolling? Seriously, your reaction.

[WVdemocrat]

You need to get a life dude. No one cares about Jeb Bush. I hope he's paying you for this.

Can you stop trolling? Seriously, your reaction.

That is literally all of our reactions. Seriously.

[bballrox4717]

Okay, I'll bite on this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'll give you this. Bush certainly takes the Hispanic vote seriously, and definitely cares about their culture and values. If he wins the GOP nomination without flip flopping to the extent of Romney or McCain, it will certainly be a testament to the GOP's desire to move past it's xenophobic tendencies. However, Bush has been inconsistent on the guarantee of path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, while Obama and Hillary are doing whatever possible to guarantee this right. Bush will likely gain votes lost in 2008 and in 2012 by Republican xenophobia, but it won't be enough.

This doesn't even mention the fact that both Romney and McCain were in serious danger of losing the nomination due to a perception that they were for amnesty, and I expect it to be no different for Bush. The popularity of Trump right now proves that. Bush's strength here is a weakness in the primary. Moreover, the national media will give him no room to pivot on the issue, since it's Bush's calling card towards an expanded Republican electorate.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is tenuous at best. Polls in July before any real debates are virtually meaningless in a close race. Whereas Clinton has shown remarkable stability in keeping the support of a majority of the Democratic electorate (which is likely to grow once Biden is out) for the better part of a year, Bush and other Republican rivals have bounced around constantly since the media began paying attention to the race.

Dramatic swings are very real possibilities in primary elections as well. Obama supposedly had New Hampshire locked up before Hillary swept it from under his feet. Romney was inevitably winning in both Iowa and South Carolina, until Santorum and Gingrich came out of nowhere to beat him.

What is clear right now is that Bush has not opened up a lead, his unfavorable ratings among Republicans are way too high for a frontrunner to feel comfortable, few endorsements, and he has multiple credible challengers with money to sustain themselves. Sure, Bush has outraised them all so far, but we've seen time and time again that while money sure is helpful, it doesn't decisively decide races as much as candidates think it should.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course they are. They're running in a Republican primary election for Christ's sake. I don't see why this helps Bush at all.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course she is. The Democratic Party shifted to the left during Obama's presidency. Obama, like or not, hasn't shed voters because of this and has more or less retained his coalition. Hillary has seen the success of the Obama coalition and knows she needs it to be elected. This is the part that drives conservatives like you crazy: the country is mostly fine with it. Most of the country accepts that wages are a problem, that same sex marriage is totally fine, that climate change is a serious problem, and they more or less don't want more conflict in the world. Whenever liberals have made a steadfast defense of these policies, they've won. Whenever they do a terrible job of supporting it, they get creamed like in 2014.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I first want to discredit your comparison to HW Bush, who lost because he alienated his base by breaking his "read my lips, no new taxes"promise, and by being seen by the country as aloof at best towards their problems, and uncaring at worst. By the time W Bush ran, it was generally agreed that there was no need to raise taxes, so it wasn't even an issue. W Bush also aggressively made sure he connected with the average voter, and made up for his moderate economic message by making his "family values" evangelism a central part to his campaign. He successfully differentiated himself from his father, who by the way, was not nearly as divisive of a president and was regarded as a moderately successful president.

There is no way to differentiate Jeb with W Bush in this primary. W Bush massively cut taxes and added new governmental programs. W Bush (unsuccessfully) tried to pass immigration reform. W Bush started two wars and alienated allies by belligerence to other countries that disagreed with American interests. There is literally no discernible difference between Jeb and George on policy. Sure, Jeb might sound a bit smarter than George, but even if independent voters have forgotten, the vast, vast majority of the Democratic base bitterly remembers not only the disastrous events of the Bush years, but the way that Bush was elected in the first place. A Jeb candidacy will not only increase Democratic turnout for Hillary, but also actively discourage any liberal third party candidacy. Hell, this is already happening considering Sanders is running as a Democrat even though he has never been a Democrat in his life.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but Bush isn't going to beat Hillary unless the economy and/or international affairs trend downwards significantly. If I were a Republican, I'd choose Rubio, Walker and Kasich before I'd even start to seriously consider Bush as my nominee.

[pbrower2a]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Aren't all politicians who have any sense in a party that still wants more power and has lost the Presidency twice intent on 'growing' their Parties? The Republican Party needs to grow if it is to win the Presidency in 2016, hold the Senate, and strengthen its hold in the House. It must poach off Democrats who aren't completely satisfied with the results of the last nine years. Of course it needs to make its views more attractive to people willing to pay attention.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And if the Democrats choose to tone down the rhetoric because Jeb Bush is less strident?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When nobody breaches 40%, then the "lead" is not so relevant. The lead within the GOp has been bouncing around.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Jeb is less strident, but he would still consolidate the Republican constituencies that will offend Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters. He will have to cut deals with people who want low wages, the gutting of the welfare state, wars for profit, imposition of Protestant Fundamentalist culture,  sell-off of most of the pubic sector, evisceration of unions, and sponsorship of horrible business practices.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

America was better when college education was more subsidized, when people graduating from college got to make career choices based upon doing good and not on paying off student loans, and when a college grad who ended up doing retail due to a surplus of college grads didn't have basically a house payment to meet while having to return to the parents' home.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Basically, he is not yet as objectionable as the others. As he consolidates the Republican nomination he will have to make promises to supporters of Cruz, Rubio, Trump, Huckabee, Paul, and Walker that will alienate anyone not on the Right.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

2. He's already in the lead.

So was Rudy Giuliani.

[bedstuy]

Yeah, predictions are fun. 

[Mehmentum]

3 Reasons why he might not.

1.) The GOP establishment isn't sold on him yet.  Look at the endorsements, which are a good indicator of who is winning the 'invisible primary'.  In 2012, Romney was dominating with endorsements, and McCain had a healthy lead over Romney in 2008.

At this point, almost nobody currently holding office has endorsed anybody.  This means that establishment has doubts about Bush, and is waiting to see if there's an alternative out there.

2.) The GOP electorate views him unfavorably.  Polls consistently show that over a third of the primary electorate views him unfavorably.  In PPP's Virginia poll, Bush had higher unfavorables and lower Favorables among his own party than Trump, Cruz, and every other major candidate except for Christie.

3.) Bush has credible opposition.  In 2012, there was only one sitting Governor or Senator in the race.  This year there are 9. 

Walker and Rubio are far superior candidates than Bachmann, Cain, etc.  Not only that, but Bush has some competition on the moderate side of his party (in the form of Christie and Kasich).

I'm not saying he won't win. So far Bush has raised a ton of money and has run a solid campaign, which are definitely points in his favor.  However, there are serious obstacles ahead of him and I think people tend to overstate his chances.

[King]

There's no way Jeb can win. Jeb isn't going to get humiliated, but his ceiling is below victory.

The only slither of hope the Republicans have in 2016 is to call Hillary an entitled DC insider old lady. Jeb is old and related to two Presidents. If this becomes about the Clintons' 3rd term or the Bush family's fourth, people are going to vote CLINTON all the way.

Issues like economy, immigration, and foreign policy favor the Democrats; and even if you disagree with that point there are better candidates than Jeb that can win on those issues. If you support Jeb at all, you're a twit.

The Republicans only hopes are the Marco Rubio or Rand Paul magic bullets. Hillary is the odds on favorite against them as well.

[dudeabides]

There's no way Jeb can win. Jeb isn't going to get humiliated, but his ceiling is below victory.

The only slither of hope the Republicans have in 2016 is to call Hillary an entitled DC insider old lady. Jeb is old and related to two Presidents. If this becomes about the Clintons' 3rd term or the Bush family's fourth, people are going to vote CLINTON all the way.

Issues like economy, immigration, and foreign policy favor the Democrats; and even if you disagree with that point there are better candidates than Jeb that can win on those issues. If you support Jeb at all, you're a twit.

The Republicans only hopes are the Marco Rubio or Rand Paul magic bullets. Hillary is the odds on favorite against them as well.

Jeb is several years younger than Hillary.

Historically, Republicans have done well on foreign policy while Democrats have done well on the economy. I do agree with you on immigration, which is part of the reason why I believe only Bush or Rubio could win, the rest of this field has pandered too much on immigration reform. I also think Bush and Rubio do best on the economy - Rubio because he's a fresh face, Bush because he's been successful both in the private sector and government.

3 Reasons why he might not.

1.) The GOP establishment isn't sold on him yet.  Look at the endorsements, which are a good indicator of who is winning the 'invisible primary'.  In 2012, Romney was dominating with endorsements, and McCain had a healthy lead over Romney in 2008.

At this point, almost nobody currently holding office has endorsed anybody.  This means that establishment has doubts about Bush, and is waiting to see if there's an alternative out there.

2.) The GOP electorate views him unfavorably.  Polls consistently show that over a third of the primary electorate views him unfavorably.  In PPP's Virginia poll, Bush had higher unfavorables and lower Favorables among his own party than Trump, Cruz, and every other major candidate except for Christie.

3.) Bush has credible opposition.  In 2012, there was only one sitting Governor or Senator in the race.  This year there are 9. 

Walker and Rubio are far superior candidates than Bachmann, Cain, etc.  Not only that, but Bush has some competition on the moderate side of his party (in the form of Christie and Kasich).

I'm not saying he won't win. So far Bush has raised a ton of money and has run a solid campaign, which are definitely points in his favor.  However, there are serious obstacles ahead of him and I think people tend to overstate his chances.

I agree with you on the establishment thing. I think in the end, the establishment will back him but they were sold on Romney in 2012, W in '00, Dole in '96, and Bush in '88 well before this point in those elections.

I don't completely agree about the GOP electorate disliking him. The far right of the party doesn't like him, that is for sure. But the far right rarely gets it's way in presidential primaries. The center-right either likes him, thinks he's adequate, or is open to him.

In my view, his obstacle is the primaries. Putting aside my bias for a second, he's a weak front-runner. I get that. Iowa is going to be very difficult for him. What makes me optimistic, being a supporter, is that the conservative vote will be divided and the majority of moderates will back him.

I agree about the credible opposition part as well.

2. He's already in the lead.

So was Rudy Giuliani.

Rudy ran a horrible campaign, so far Bush isn't doing that. Also, Rudy Giuliani is pro-choice, for gun control, for more gay rights than the religious right, and he does not take a hard line approach on illegal immigration.

Your point is well taken though, anything could happen. But Giuliani was running against John McCain, who had name I.D. and the respect of many people. Bush's opponents this year don't have that same name I.D.

bballrox4717: I completely agree with you on #1 to an extent. Which is why I think Bush is a better general election candidate than a primary candidate. However, McCain won the nomination despite taking a position more liberal than Bush's - the same position Rubio has.

I also agree with you on #2 because polls can change.

I do think that as the others shift right, it helps Bush in two ways. One, it helps him solidify his support with the center-right. Two, Republicans who are concerned about electability may take a second look at him even if he wasn't their first choice initially.

You and I fundamentally disagree on the Bush issue. Jeb Bush is more conservative than George W. Bush on fiscal and economic issues, though arguably more moderate on same-sex marriage since he never supported a constitutional ban. George Bush lost in 1992 because of Ross Perot and the recession.

probrower2a:

Ted Cruz is trying to win by rallying the base. He fails to realize that isn't good enough long term. 61% of young Republicans support same-sex marriage, yet Cruz is calling for a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

I have heard Governor Bush say he isn't looking to gut the safety net. I've also heard him say that seeing rising incomes should be a priority of the next President. No, he's not going to support a federal minimum wage increase. Also, he's not a big government Republican like Rick Santorum on social issues. He's socially conservative, but a state's rights guy.

I have to concede one point. Being for subsidizing college, which has made college less affordable, is a popular position politically.

Bush will make a deal with supporters of Rubio, Huckabee, Paul, and Walker. He'll be with them 80% of the time and defeat Clinton in the general. Trump and Cruz are going to get so few votes it's hardly worth mentioning.

Well, if he wins the primary (which could be a big if), he will win the presidential election.

Agreed, I think he's probably going to win the nomination. But Walker could do better than I expect, or even Huckabee. Paul and Rubio won't be nominated but they are formidable.

[bedstuy]

King is right.  The major viable attack narrative against Hillary is to paint her as out of touch, yesterday's news and part of the same old sclerotic Washington machine. 

Jeb Bush immediately takes that narrative off the table.  It becomes Bush vs. Clinton, a referendum on which political family America prefers.  The Clintons will win that battle any day.  People have concerns about the Clintons, but they ultimately like them and see them as competent leaders.  People see the Bush family as out of touch and incompetent.  The Clintons hearken back to the great economy of the 1990s.  The Bushes hearken back to the Iraq War, the Financial crisis and the failed Dubya Presidency.  It's no contest. 

[dudeabides]

King is right.  The major viable attack narrative against Hillary is to paint her as out of touch, yesterday's news and part of the same old sclerotic Washington machine. 

Jeb Bush immediately takes that narrative off the table.  It becomes Bush vs. Clinton, a referendum on which political family America prefers.  The Clintons will win that battle any day.  People have concerns about the Clintons, but they ultimately like them and see them as competent leaders.  People see the Bush family as out of touch and incompetent.  The Clintons hearken back to the great economy of the 1990s.  The Bushes hearken back to the Iraq War, the Financial crisis and the failed Dubya Presidency.  It's no contest. 

I disagree that with Jeb Bush as the GOP nominee, it automatically becomes a contest between two families. At first, that may be the case, but as both candidates put forth their vision and talk about their credentials, I think that will change.

Putting aside my bias for a minute, each candidate has a different strength on the issues and in terms of experience. Jeb Bush has executive government and private sector experience, while Hillary Clinton has 12 years of foreign policy experience. Bush's vision for 4% growth and Hillary Clinton's discussions about ending income inequality are strengths both candidates have. However, Bush is vulnerable to some of the statements he made in his failed 1994 gubernatorial campaign, and Hillary Clinton is vulnerable to being attacked as a Washington insider.

You are right that Bill Clinton is more popular than George Bush and way more popular than George W. Bush. However, as I have pointed out, Bush 41 had disapproval numbers similar to W's in January 1993, and yet the son was still elected in 2000. Secondly, Jeb Bush has been far more open to reporters questions, and he has done more to appear as an everyday average Joe during the course of this campaign than Hillary Clinton. Stories like Secretary Clinton being in disguise when she visited a Chipote and her not allowing reporters more access to her hurt her image. Additionally, statements she has made in the past, such as not driving a car since 1996, hurt her image as well.

Also, one more thing, and this might seem odd, but I think it could make a minor difference when it comes to the Hispanic vote. Jeb Bush speaks spanish and says he does so at home. Hillary Clinton does not.

[bedstuy]

You're a joke. #Chipotleghazi.  

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This doesn't even mention the fact that both Romney and McCain were in serious danger of losing the nomination due to a perception that they were for amnesty, and I expect it to be no different for Bush.

Romney was never in danger of losing the nomination because of a "perception that he was for amnesty". He was in danger of losing the nomination because of healthcare, his flip flops on abortion and guns, and his image as an establishment guy. Romney had been defined by his running against Rudy and McCain on the illegal immigration and most of his tea party opponents were weaker than Romney on the issue (Perry and Gingrich for instance) and only Santorum had a record that was arguably stronger than his. Romney used the issue to leverage and outflank his more conservative opponents and proved that base votes value it as high as the top three to the extent that candidates far more conservative than Romney were rendered "imperfect" and thus no better then Mittens by virtue of them being weaker on it. 

[Blair]

lol Jeb speaks Spanish so he'll get Hispanics. That's like saying wasps vote for a candidate who speaks english

[Fuzzy Bear]

King is right.  The major viable attack narrative against Hillary is to paint her as out of touch, yesterday's news and part of the same old sclerotic Washington machine. 

Jeb Bush immediately takes that narrative off the table.  It becomes Bush vs. Clinton, a referendum on which political family America prefers.  The Clintons will win that battle any day.  People have concerns about the Clintons, but they ultimately like them and see them as competent leaders.  People see the Bush family as out of touch and incompetent.  The Clintons hearken back to the great economy of the 1990s.  The Bushes hearken back to the Iraq War, the Financial crisis and the failed Dubya Presidency.  It's no contest. 

I disagree that with Jeb Bush as the GOP nominee, it automatically becomes a contest between two families. At first, that may be the case, but as both candidates put forth their vision and talk about their credentials, I think that will change.

Putting aside my bias for a minute, each candidate has a different strength on the issues and in terms of experience. Jeb Bush has executive government and private sector experience, while Hillary Clinton has 12 years of foreign policy experience. Bush's vision for 4% growth and Hillary Clinton's discussions about ending income inequality are strengths both candidates have. However, Bush is vulnerable to some of the statements he made in his failed 1994 gubernatorial campaign, and Hillary Clinton is vulnerable to being attacked as a Washington insider.

You are right that Bill Clinton is more popular than George Bush and way more popular than George W. Bush. However, as I have pointed out, Bush 41 had disapproval numbers similar to W's in January 1993, and yet the son was still elected in 2000. Secondly, Jeb Bush has been far more open to reporters questions, and he has done more to appear as an everyday average Joe during the course of this campaign than Hillary Clinton. Stories like Secretary Clinton being in disguise when she visited a Chipote and her not allowing reporters more access to her hurt her image. Additionally, statements she has made in the past, such as not driving a car since 1996, hurt her image as well.

Also, one more thing, and this might seem odd, but I think it could make a minor difference when it comes to the Hispanic vote. Jeb Bush speaks spanish and says he does so at home. Hillary Clinton does not.

I think dudeabides is in a bit of denial of the "Bush" issue.  There will be the image of the 2000 election hanging in the balance and W talking to Jeb, who then gets on his laptop and . . . does whatever he did.  A good part of America has decided that Jeb Bush is part of the stealing of Florida for his brother's benefit.  That's a BUSH FAMILY issue, and it's there.  Like the allegation that Bush 41 flew to Paris in 1980 and delayed the release of the hostages until after the election.  That's still out there, too.  Or the last minute Bush 41 pardon of Cap Weinberger, which precluded Weinberger from ever having to testify about Bush 41's role in Iran-Contra; that's out there, too.

Jeb is part of the Bush Family, and America, and the GOP, has a problem with that.  It's not the same with the Clinton family; they're not the kind of establishment old-money that the Bush Family is.  If he weren't a Bush, he'd be a stronger candidate, but he IS a Bush, and there is Bush fatigue in BOTH parties.

[dudeabides]

You're a joke. #Chipotleghazi.  

I didn't make up the story, it was reported in the news and was kind of a big deal. It's just another episode of how Hillary Clinton is out of touch with ordinary Americans. Jeb Bush is very wealthy and from a wealthy family, but thus far he has been more effective at downplaying that.

lol Jeb speaks Spanish so he'll get Hispanics. That's like saying wasps vote for a candidate who speaks english

It shows that he is not just pandering to hispanics, but that he actually cares.

King is right.  The major viable attack narrative against Hillary is to paint her as out of touch, yesterday's news and part of the same old sclerotic Washington machine. 

Jeb Bush immediately takes that narrative off the table.  It becomes Bush vs. Clinton, a referendum on which political family America prefers.  The Clintons will win that battle any day.  People have concerns about the Clintons, but they ultimately like them and see them as competent leaders.  People see the Bush family as out of touch and incompetent.  The Clintons hearken back to the great economy of the 1990s.  The Bushes hearken back to the Iraq War, the Financial crisis and the failed Dubya Presidency.  It's no contest. 

I disagree that with Jeb Bush as the GOP nominee, it automatically becomes a contest between two families. At first, that may be the case, but as both candidates put forth their vision and talk about their credentials, I think that will change.

Putting aside my bias for a minute, each candidate has a different strength on the issues and in terms of experience. Jeb Bush has executive government and private sector experience, while Hillary Clinton has 12 years of foreign policy experience. Bush's vision for 4% growth and Hillary Clinton's discussions about ending income inequality are strengths both candidates have. However, Bush is vulnerable to some of the statements he made in his failed 1994 gubernatorial campaign, and Hillary Clinton is vulnerable to being attacked as a Washington insider.

You are right that Bill Clinton is more popular than George Bush and way more popular than George W. Bush. However, as I have pointed out, Bush 41 had disapproval numbers similar to W's in January 1993, and yet the son was still elected in 2000. Secondly, Jeb Bush has been far more open to reporters questions, and he has done more to appear as an everyday average Joe during the course of this campaign than Hillary Clinton. Stories like Secretary Clinton being in disguise when she visited a Chipote and her not allowing reporters more access to her hurt her image. Additionally, statements she has made in the past, such as not driving a car since 1996, hurt her image as well.

Also, one more thing, and this might seem odd, but I think it could make a minor difference when it comes to the Hispanic vote. Jeb Bush speaks spanish and says he does so at home. Hillary Clinton does not.

I think dudeabides is in a bit of denial of the "Bush" issue.  There will be the image of the 2000 election hanging in the balance and W talking to Jeb, who then gets on his laptop and . . . does whatever he did.  A good part of America has decided that Jeb Bush is part of the stealing of Florida for his brother's benefit.  That's a BUSH FAMILY issue, and it's there.  Like the allegation that Bush 41 flew to Paris in 1980 and delayed the release of the hostages until after the election.  That's still out there, too.  Or the last minute Bush 41 pardon of Cap Weinberger, which precluded Weinberger from ever having to testify about Bush 41's role in Iran-Contra; that's out there, too.

Jeb is part of the Bush Family, and America, and the GOP, has a problem with that.  It's not the same with the Clinton family; they're not the kind of establishment old-money that the Bush Family is.  If he weren't a Bush, he'd be a stronger candidate, but he IS a Bush, and there is Bush fatigue in BOTH parties.

Putting aside my bias: It's a minor issue. So far, he's handled it well. In the end, voters are going to decide on individual merit. He has name I.D. because of his last name, that doesn't guarantee victory. However, it also doesn't guarantee defeat.

My view: What Al Gore did in 2000, trying to steal the election, was unpatriotic, immoral, and dishonest. No one in Florida rigged the election for George W. Bush, and the only people who are delusional enough to believe George W. Bush stole the election won't be voting for any Republican. More people in Florida voted for George W. Bush than Al Gore, that is a fact. Bush therefore won the electoral college and thus, the election. Al Gore's unwillingness to concede for six weeks showed he didn't run for the country, but for his own ego. He could have conceded and had a chance in 2004 given how close the 2000 popular vote was.

[Fuzzy Bear]

You're a joke. #Chipotleghazi.  

I didn't make up the story, it was reported in the news and was kind of a big deal. It's just another episode of how Hillary Clinton is out of touch with ordinary Americans. Jeb Bush is very wealthy and from a wealthy family, but thus far he has been more effective at downplaying that.

lol Jeb speaks Spanish so he'll get Hispanics. That's like saying wasps vote for a candidate who speaks english

It shows that he is not just pandering to hispanics, but that he actually cares.

King is right.  The major viable attack narrative against Hillary is to paint her as out of touch, yesterday's news and part of the same old sclerotic Washington machine. 

Jeb Bush immediately takes that narrative off the table.  It becomes Bush vs. Clinton, a referendum on which political family America prefers.  The Clintons will win that battle any day.  People have concerns about the Clintons, but they ultimately like them and see them as competent leaders.  People see the Bush family as out of touch and incompetent.  The Clintons hearken back to the great economy of the 1990s.  The Bushes hearken back to the Iraq War, the Financial crisis and the failed Dubya Presidency.  It's no contest. 

I disagree that with Jeb Bush as the GOP nominee, it automatically becomes a contest between two families. At first, that may be the case, but as both candidates put forth their vision and talk about their credentials, I think that will change.

Putting aside my bias for a minute, each candidate has a different strength on the issues and in terms of experience. Jeb Bush has executive government and private sector experience, while Hillary Clinton has 12 years of foreign policy experience. Bush's vision for 4% growth and Hillary Clinton's discussions about ending income inequality are strengths both candidates have. However, Bush is vulnerable to some of the statements he made in his failed 1994 gubernatorial campaign, and Hillary Clinton is vulnerable to being attacked as a Washington insider.

You are right that Bill Clinton is more popular than George Bush and way more popular than George W. Bush. However, as I have pointed out, Bush 41 had disapproval numbers similar to W's in January 1993, and yet the son was still elected in 2000. Secondly, Jeb Bush has been far more open to reporters questions, and he has done more to appear as an everyday average Joe during the course of this campaign than Hillary Clinton. Stories like Secretary Clinton being in disguise when she visited a Chipote and her not allowing reporters more access to her hurt her image. Additionally, statements she has made in the past, such as not driving a car since 1996, hurt her image as well.

Also, one more thing, and this might seem odd, but I think it could make a minor difference when it comes to the Hispanic vote. Jeb Bush speaks spanish and says he does so at home. Hillary Clinton does not.

I think dudeabides is in a bit of denial of the "Bush" issue.  There will be the image of the 2000 election hanging in the balance and W talking to Jeb, who then gets on his laptop and . . . does whatever he did.  A good part of America has decided that Jeb Bush is part of the stealing of Florida for his brother's benefit.  That's a BUSH FAMILY issue, and it's there.  Like the allegation that Bush 41 flew to Paris in 1980 and delayed the release of the hostages until after the election.  That's still out there, too.  Or the last minute Bush 41 pardon of Cap Weinberger, which precluded Weinberger from ever having to testify about Bush 41's role in Iran-Contra; that's out there, too.

Jeb is part of the Bush Family, and America, and the GOP, has a problem with that.  It's not the same with the Clinton family; they're not the kind of establishment old-money that the Bush Family is.  If he weren't a Bush, he'd be a stronger candidate, but he IS a Bush, and there is Bush fatigue in BOTH parties.

Putting aside my bias: It's a minor issue. So far, he's handled it well. In the end, voters are going to decide on individual merit. He has name I.D. because of his last name, that doesn't guarantee victory. However, it also doesn't guarantee defeat.

My view: What Al Gore did in 2000, trying to steal the election, was unpatriotic, immoral, and dishonest. No one in Florida rigged the election for George W. Bush, and the only people who are delusional enough to believe George W. Bush stole the election won't be voting for any Republican. More people in Florida voted for George W. Bush than Al Gore, that is a fact. Bush therefore won the electoral college and thus, the election. Al Gore's unwillingness to concede for six weeks showed he didn't run for the country, but for his own ego. He could have conceded and had a chance in 2004 given how close the 2000 popular vote was.

I voted for Bush in Florida in 2000; it's one of the votes I truly regret.

If people were truly trying to be fair in Florida, all parties could have agreed to recount all ballots by hand.  It was the Bush folks that stopped the recounting, and Jeb's interaction with Katherine Harris (FL Sec. of State) on Election Night and afterward gave the appearance of impropriety that still sticks with Americans.  You're characterization of Gore as "unpatriotic" and "for his own ego" is a reflection of your own bias and denial of the fact that Gore had an obligation to press on not just for himself, but for his supporters, and for the number of persons who cast ballots nationwide for Gore/Lieberman (which was greater than the number of persons who cast ballots for Bush/Cheney). 

Jeb Bush doesn't seek fairness; he seeks victory for HIS objectives.  That's great for Master Splinter to tell the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, but the administration of our elections are to be conducted with fairness, and not with one side's campaign chair serving as Sec. of State in the state where the whole thing is being decided. 

[Xing]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is meaningless rhetoric unless he can actually break away from the establishment in various ways to appeal to more than Republican primary voters.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Barely, and not by a margin that suggests he's invulnerable. His remark about Americans needing to "work more hours" was poorly worded, and if he makes similar comments in the future, his small lead could easily disappear.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, but this fact alone won't help him win the general election. It'll simply allow him to make the argument that he's more electable than they are, which in itself isn't saying much.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, she isn't. With the exception of foreign policy, Clinton has always been fairly liberal. She's no leftwing extremist, however, and I doubt that Bush is closer to being moderate than she is. He's still quite conservative, he's just not as conservative as the likes of Cruz, Rubio, Walker, etc.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe not, but by the same logic, Hillary Clinton doesn't have a "Bill" problem, at least not this time. Even if people can recognize that he isn't his dumber brother, that doesn't mean that he's well-positioned to be the next president.

[dudeabides]

You're a joke. #Chipotleghazi.  

I didn't make up the story, it was reported in the news and was kind of a big deal. It's just another episode of how Hillary Clinton is out of touch with ordinary Americans. Jeb Bush is very wealthy and from a wealthy family, but thus far he has been more effective at downplaying that.

lol Jeb speaks Spanish so he'll get Hispanics. That's like saying wasps vote for a candidate who speaks english

It shows that he is not just pandering to hispanics, but that he actually cares.

King is right.  The major viable attack narrative against Hillary is to paint her as out of touch, yesterday's news and part of the same old sclerotic Washington machine. 

Jeb Bush immediately takes that narrative off the table.  It becomes Bush vs. Clinton, a referendum on which political family America prefers.  The Clintons will win that battle any day.  People have concerns about the Clintons, but they ultimately like them and see them as competent leaders.  People see the Bush family as out of touch and incompetent.  The Clintons hearken back to the great economy of the 1990s.  The Bushes hearken back to the Iraq War, the Financial crisis and the failed Dubya Presidency.  It's no contest. 

I disagree that with Jeb Bush as the GOP nominee, it automatically becomes a contest between two families. At first, that may be the case, but as both candidates put forth their vision and talk about their credentials, I think that will change.

Putting aside my bias for a minute, each candidate has a different strength on the issues and in terms of experience. Jeb Bush has executive government and private sector experience, while Hillary Clinton has 12 years of foreign policy experience. Bush's vision for 4% growth and Hillary Clinton's discussions about ending income inequality are strengths both candidates have. However, Bush is vulnerable to some of the statements he made in his failed 1994 gubernatorial campaign, and Hillary Clinton is vulnerable to being attacked as a Washington insider.

You are right that Bill Clinton is more popular than George Bush and way more popular than George W. Bush. However, as I have pointed out, Bush 41 had disapproval numbers similar to W's in January 1993, and yet the son was still elected in 2000. Secondly, Jeb Bush has been far more open to reporters questions, and he has done more to appear as an everyday average Joe during the course of this campaign than Hillary Clinton. Stories like Secretary Clinton being in disguise when she visited a Chipote and her not allowing reporters more access to her hurt her image. Additionally, statements she has made in the past, such as not driving a car since 1996, hurt her image as well.

Also, one more thing, and this might seem odd, but I think it could make a minor difference when it comes to the Hispanic vote. Jeb Bush speaks spanish and says he does so at home. Hillary Clinton does not.

I think dudeabides is in a bit of denial of the "Bush" issue.  There will be the image of the 2000 election hanging in the balance and W talking to Jeb, who then gets on his laptop and . . . does whatever he did.  A good part of America has decided that Jeb Bush is part of the stealing of Florida for his brother's benefit.  That's a BUSH FAMILY issue, and it's there.  Like the allegation that Bush 41 flew to Paris in 1980 and delayed the release of the hostages until after the election.  That's still out there, too.  Or the last minute Bush 41 pardon of Cap Weinberger, which precluded Weinberger from ever having to testify about Bush 41's role in Iran-Contra; that's out there, too.

Jeb is part of the Bush Family, and America, and the GOP, has a problem with that.  It's not the same with the Clinton family; they're not the kind of establishment old-money that the Bush Family is.  If he weren't a Bush, he'd be a stronger candidate, but he IS a Bush, and there is Bush fatigue in BOTH parties.

Putting aside my bias: It's a minor issue. So far, he's handled it well. In the end, voters are going to decide on individual merit. He has name I.D. because of his last name, that doesn't guarantee victory. However, it also doesn't guarantee defeat.

My view: What Al Gore did in 2000, trying to steal the election, was unpatriotic, immoral, and dishonest. No one in Florida rigged the election for George W. Bush, and the only people who are delusional enough to believe George W. Bush stole the election won't be voting for any Republican. More people in Florida voted for George W. Bush than Al Gore, that is a fact. Bush therefore won the electoral college and thus, the election. Al Gore's unwillingness to concede for six weeks showed he didn't run for the country, but for his own ego. He could have conceded and had a chance in 2004 given how close the 2000 popular vote was.

I voted for Bush in Florida in 2000; it's one of the votes I truly regret.

If people were truly trying to be fair in Florida, all parties could have agreed to recount all ballots by hand.  It was the Bush folks that stopped the recounting, and Jeb's interaction with Katherine Harris (FL Sec. of State) on Election Night and afterward gave the appearance of impropriety that still sticks with Americans.  You're characterization of Gore as "unpatriotic" and "for his own ego" is a reflection of your own bias and denial of the fact that Gore had an obligation to press on not just for himself, but for his supporters, and for the number of persons who cast ballots nationwide for Gore/Lieberman (which was greater than the number of persons who cast ballots for Bush/Cheney). 

Jeb Bush doesn't seek fairness; he seeks victory for HIS objectives.  That's great for Master Splinter to tell the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, but the administration of our elections are to be conducted with fairness, and not with one side's campaign chair serving as Sec. of State in the state where the whole thing is being decided. 

I agree, Gore had a right to request recounts given the circumstances. But once the results were certified on November 26, 2000, it was time for Gore to concede the election. Subjecting the country to a Supreme Court decision was wrong. Bush won, Gore lost.

Jeb Bush recused himself from having any role in the election recount.

[bedstuy]

You're a joke. #Chipotleghazi.  

I didn't make up the story, it was reported in the news and was kind of a big deal. It's just another episode of how Hillary Clinton is out of touch with ordinary Americans. Jeb Bush is very wealthy and from a wealthy family, but thus far he has been more effective at downplaying that.

There's a point where being a partisan hack goes beyond ridiculous.  And, then there's a point beyond that where you criticize politicians for eating burritos.   

Chipotle is one of the most popular fast foods places in America.  Eating at Chipotle is not out of touch with ordinary Americans.  A meal there is about $10.  Does Hillary Clinton need to only patronize gas stations for her meals?  Or, is it that you think Hillary Clinton was pandering to Hispanics or young people by eating at Chipotle?  Or, is it that Hillary Clinton did something and it just has to be bad in some way because you disagree with her politics? 

But, I guess we just have to strap ourselves in for the Fox News media campaign.  "LOL! Hillary Clinton did something, what a bitch!" X 100,000,000³

[dudeabides]

You're a joke. #Chipotleghazi.  

I didn't make up the story, it was reported in the news and was kind of a big deal. It's just another episode of how Hillary Clinton is out of touch with ordinary Americans. Jeb Bush is very wealthy and from a wealthy family, but thus far he has been more effective at downplaying that.

There's a point where being a partisan hack goes beyond ridiculous.  And, then there's a point beyond that where you criticize politicians for eating burritos.  

Chipotle is one of the most popular fast foods places in America.  Eating at Chipotle is not out of touch with ordinary Americans.  A meal there is about $10.  Does Hillary Clinton need to only patronize gas stations for her meals?  Or, is it that you think Hillary Clinton was pandering to Hispanics or young people by eating at Chipotle?  Or, is it that Hillary Clinton did something and it just has to be bad in some way because you disagree with her politics?  

But, I guess we just have to strap ourselves in for the Fox News media campaign.  "LOL! Hillary Clinton did something, what a bitch!" X 100,000,000³

Eating at Chipotle is not the issue.

Here is the issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/04/14/hillary-clinton-chipotle/25752159/

Hiding from people does not help her appeal with average everyday people.

Plus, this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/16/politics/jeb-bush-hillary-clinton-chipotle/

[Mehmentum]

So Clinton *gasp* wears sunglasses and doesn't draw attention to herself when ordering at a restaurant.  Scandal!  (/sarcasm)

[Vega]

Perhaps people didn't notice her because the general American populace is under informed and rather apathetic about the primary elections (especially this early on)?