George W. endorsing brother Jeb: would it help Jeb or hurt him?

[heatmaster]

I can't wait for the Donald to point out what a sh**tty President he was.

I have had it with people being critical of President George W. Bush without looking at the entire picture. Also, Trump is such an idiot no one will take his criticisms seriously but his supporters who are generally angry people anyway.
You are right on the money dudeabides,  good for you, as for you Devils30,  what planet are you on? An observation, you are so stuck in the Democratic bubble. You think the echo chamber you inhabit, is the real world, well the question which begs to be asked, is according to whom? The U.S.A. has, under Obama's stewardship, doubled the national debt, and all due to Obama's social engineering and his half-assed liberal agenda, and then you assert that Democrats will slaughter Jeb Bush, how? All I see is common sense approaches to significant problems which need addressing. Hillary is no more equipped to address these problems, than Donald Trump is. I sincerely doubt your theories will work out as you imagined, but as dudeabides said, Trump is an idiot and delusional,  and so are you my friend😑 As for Donald Trump, his inconsistencies on a whole swath of issues, are way off the beam, when it comes to the grassroots and these inconsistencies will be Trump's undoing as they become more evident.

Yes, Bush doubled the size of the Department of Education, increased the national debt by $5 trillion in eight years, continued to support Bill Clinton's policies of having the government promote home ownership, and he had awful Federal Reserve chairmen during his tenure.

However, President Bush's policies kept Americans safe, and we even saw some modest economic growth during 6 of his 8 years. Thanks to policies he implemented, such as the Patriot Act, 60 terrorist plots were prevented since 2001. Thanks to his doubling of agents at our southern border, illegal border crossings are down. In 2002, President Bush was given intelligence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Hussein had lied to weapons inspectors for years, and he kicked out inspectors in 1998. While it is true we shared some of the same enemies as Saddam, he also hated the U.S. The fact of the matter is, Saddam Hussein might have sent some of his weapons into Syria. He definitely had the capacity to produce such weapons. He was responsible for 2 million murders and the imprisonment of thousands and millions of innocent Iraqis. When we went into Iraq, we did so for our security and to promote freedom in a part of the world where it is all to rare. We made some strategic errors, but by 2007, Iraq was a functioning young Democracy that faced challenge, but most people were better off in 2007 in Iraq than under Saddam. Unfortunately, Iraq has made a turn for the worst since, but that is not Bush's fault contrary to popular belief. Bush's actions in Iraq also led to Libya abandoning their weapons program all together. The President toppled the Taliban in Afghanistan, that not only made us more safe, but it was a victory for human rights. The President's policies also weakened Iran's ability to go nuclear. The bottom line: President Bush made some mistakes, but he kept this country safe and made the world just a little bit more free.

Even on economic policy, where Bush has a rather mixed record, he still did far better than our current President. The financial collapse and recession were caused by a housing bubble, federal tax policy, and Federal Reserve policy. President Bush tried to increase regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both created by Bill Clinton. This was in 2005, three years before the financial crisis. Congress didn't allow Bush to make any changes. In 2001, the U.S. entered into a recession after seven years of healthy and robust economic growth, but also during a time in which we had an internet bubble. However, thanks to the President's tax relief programs, the recession was the shallowest in U.S. history. In the three years following the recession, GDP growth averaged around 4%, and worker productivity rose 16.6% between 2000 and 2005. Under President Obama, we have not had such consistent and robust economic growth. Americans saw six years of modest growth, where as under President Obama, we've had three years of a worsening recession and three years of consistent stagnation. Some of the economic challenges we face today were present under Bush. Since 2000, we've seen falling median incomes. But we also saw a slow growth in wages during the mid-1990s.

President Bush also can point to a record of sending vaccines to third world countries, banning partial-birth abortion, and appointing strict-constructionist judges.

Let me take a moment here and do something I rarely do: defend President Barack Obama. I disagree with Obama on 99.999% of the issues, but I am willing to give him credit where credit is do. Obama kept in place many of Bush's homeland security policies, he was right to have the surge in Afghanistan, and he is right to push for trade promotion authority. Despite my strong opposition to virtually all of Obama's other policies, I am going to stick to the issues. Obama was born in the United States, period, end of subject. For Donald Trump to have to accuse Obama of being born elsewhere proves he doesn't know what he's talking about, he's delusional, he doesn't care about issues, and he is really isn't very bright.

The point is, Donald Trump doesn't know how to attack anyone. He has been critical of President Bush for being tough on terrorism. He has been critical of President Obama for not being born in the U.S. because Trump can't stand a black man as President. He has been critical of John McCain because McCain was captured in Vietnam, McCain is a hero and Trump is a loser. He has been critical of Marco Rubio for taking a water break during a speech, and has referred to him as "over rated" because Trump is clueless about issues or Rubio's backround. He has said that Rick Perry is wearing glasses to look smart, well mission accomplished Perry is smarter than Trump. Trump has said Bush has no energy, if that's the worst he can come up with, then Bush will be the 45th President, no problem. He's attacked Walker for poor finances in Wisconsin when Trump has been bankrupt four times. He gave out Lindsey Graham's phone number, which is just lame.

Donald Trump knows nothing about economics, he's made that clear with all of his positions on a 14% wealth tax, protectionist trade policies, socialized medicine etc. He knows nothing about managing money because he's gone bankrupt and ran a sporting league into the ground. He knows nothing about foreign policy, and he's for abortion.

The typical Trump supporter is a 62 year old white male who is angry because his manufacturing job went to China or Mexico. He doesn't want to go to a 3 month program at his local community college so he can take one of the 500,000 manufacturing jobs sitting there that require newer skills. He is angry at the immigrants moving into his neighborhood because they look different and he therefore feels threatened, but without full time work he can't afford to move. He watches Jeb Bush talk about growing the economy at 4%, Bush is not pissed off and that makes this guy mad. Hillary Clinton is too busy talking about social issues. He then sees Trump as angry as he is, blaming immigrants and globalization for all of America's problems, and suddenly this 62 year old white male says "yeah, he makes sense."

[heatmaster]

Here's an idea pbrower2a,  Republicans will remind how lousy a President Barack Obama is, particularly at the Republican convention,  and pound on this theme right through election day. Trust me! There is a lot of fodder on which to work on. Every statement, every policy, every statement and every promise Obama has made will be scrutinized and examined. All our party has to say, is "Had enough? ...then help is on the way", Hillary is now in a place where Republicans are very comfortable,  no bragging rights as far as Secretary of State goes. Yep plenty of negatives about Obama-Hillary, so go on pound on George W. Bush, but in case you forgot, what was good in 2008, ain't relevant in the 2016 cycle. Blaming Dubya only works for a limited period, think the well is empty. But Obama is a perfect target, he's the incumbent, not Dubya LOL😀😀

[heatmaster]

Well said dudeabides,  there are a few on this thread, who refuse to understand your well presented arguments. They seem to assume based on his past statements, that Trump will "mop the floor with Jeb". My response to that, is what premise do you go by to support your arguments. I and many others contributing to this thread would like to understand how you reached your conclusions. I for one, have only seen Donald the blow-hard in action, all we hear is "I" and "me" and an awful lot of bragging and little else. What will happen and I hope and believe this, Trump will self-destruct, he is unable to articulate positions on issues, because he has none. His positions if he has any, will likely reveal inconsistencies and bye-bye Trumpster the Dumpster☺

[heatmaster]

Fuzzy bear, you are so entrenched in this idea of "political correctness" and Romney's unfortunate gaffe about the "47 percent" was exactly that, a gaffe. Folks getting bent out of shape, for other people telling it like it is, is precisely why America is where it is. No one can say exactly what is on there mind for fear of being pounded on. If it is a gaffe which Romney committed,  I agree with his sentiments,  you have shift less layabouts,  who prefer the government to take care of there needs. All because they are takers and naturally vote Democrat, because "Mommy" takes care of everything. "Daddy" who represents the Republicans doesn't want to deny the less fortunate those supports they need. But what we do take great exception to, is those layabout waste of spaces, most of whom make up the 47 percent is to get off their collective a#$%! for a change, and contribute to society,  instead of being moronic parasites. Maybe "Fuzzybear" thinks things are okay and we shouldn't make the hard choices, maybe you Secretly are a Democrat parading as an Independent, maybe you are not offended with the idea that Donald Trump should be President, if so, could you please explain to me, what has that blow-hard ever contributed to society? he would be better served running as a Democrat,  he shares every position that most Democrats advocate.  As for this idea he should have the right to participate in a important debate, why? Because he is polling at 18% in most polls? Because he is a moronic loud - mouth who hasn't a clue on any of the issues? He's good for one thing,  mouthing off  tasteless smart ass zingers, he should be running for comedian-in-chief, not commander-in-chief, he has been unable to behave in a responsible manner,  it shows in his choice of a wife, does this country need a manipulative bimbo as first lady? Please give us a break Fuzzy bear and other's who secretly & publicly support the dumpster😑

[heatmaster]

Here's an idea pbrower2a,  Republicans will remind how lousy a President Barack Obama is, particularly at the Republican convention,  and pound on this theme right through election day. Trust me! There is a lot of fodder on which to work on. Every statement, every policy, every statement and every promise Obama has made will be scrutinized and examined. All our party has to say, is "Had enough? ...then help is on the way", Hillary is now in a place where Republicans are very comfortable,  no bragging rights as far as Secretary of State goes. Yep plenty of negatives about Obama-Hillary, so go on pound on George W. Bush, but in case you forgot, what was good in 2008, ain't relevant in the 2016 cycle. Blaming Dubya only works for a limited period, think the well is empty. But Obama is a perfect target, he's the incumbent, not Dubya LOL😀😀

Very well said my friend.

When Mitt Romney made his "47%" gaffe, he did so by exaggerating numbers.

The vast majority of people on public assistance are hard working people who are victims of a bad economy. They don't want to rely on government, but they are forced to.

That being said, there are always going to be those who want to rely on government. The Democrats offer free cell phones, food stamps, and free health care via medicaid. So, Romney was not wrong when he said some will vote Democrat no matter what.

However, for the vast majority of Americans, these are tough economic times. But I refuse to believe that the vast majority of those who are poor want to remain poor, I refuse to believe the vast majority on food stamps want to be on food stamps, and I know people want rising incomes again.

The choice in this election will be clear. If you believe that government regulation of the economy is a good thing, that we should be willing to accept record poverty and food stamp use, if you believe that we shouldn't grow at more than 2%, if you believe that increasing our national debt by $8 trillion in 6 years and 7 months is acceptable, if you believe small businesses should not open or expand, and if you believe in record low labor participation, then Hillary Clinton would love to have your vote.

But, if you think we can grow at 4% with the right policies and that we should work to reform our entitlement programs and tax code to reduce our national debt, than the Republican candidate - so long as it's not Donald Trump - is how you should vote.

 

That wasn't a "gaffe" by Romney; it was an unintended window into his soul.  

Romney's elitist contempt for the less fortunate came through loud and clear, and that's why, in the end, he lost an election he should have won.  

Mitt Romney has donated large sums of money to charity, though he never bragged about it because he's a good man.

You seem to dislike competent and smart people.

If I recall the vast proportion of Romney's charitable giving was to his Church.

Also, the fact that you repeat generalizations.... wait, how old are you?

I will treat that remark about generalizations with the contempt it deserves;  no rebuttal or points to buttress, what would very likely be weak or moronic arguments, and is that "wait, how old are you?""a smart - assed Trumpism,  you come from his neighborhood or maybe work for him, right?😊

[heatmaster]

Then again Obama, going on the campaign trail (hope to god she's the nominee, damaged goods and all), will hopefully cost Hillary a few winnable states. Considering what's been happening over the past few days, definitely will impact even more negatively on Hillary. 

[heatmaster]

Using George W. Bush, would be a distraction and the objective of Jeb's campaign is about change and making the idea of a Jeb Bush Presidency as appealing and attractive as possible,  Jeb I would consider a shrewd and deliberate man and no way is he going to allow Democrats to use George W. Bush as a tar baby. On the other hand, Hillary is a sitting target and she doesn't come across as likeable, toughness and strengths, two traits she has going for her, are not going to be enough for her to win, the odour of dishonesty and untrustworthiness is too strong to overcome.  I can see her having to defend herself against incompetence. What is happening to her is weirdly similar to what happened to Dukakis in 1988, all his positives, such as competence were inverted and his negatives skyrocketed. He never stood a chance.  Hillary is not as smart as Bill is and she has a tendency of saying things that come back to haunt her later on. Her handicaps are overshadowing the qualities that she had expected to use to her advantage (e.g. her period as Secretary of State). Her vulnerabilities are far more problematic in the final analysis. She will have her work cut out for her, trying to tackle Jeb Bush.