Does anybody here really think Jeb will be the nominee anymore?

[dudeabides]

Newt Gingrich completely destroyed everyone during the first several GOP debates in 2012. Mitt Romney, like Jeb Bush last night, had steady performances. Newt won two states.

In 2008, same thing - Mike Huckabee stood out as the best in debates, and he didn't win the nomination. John McCain had steady performances. Some would argue that McCain did better in the 2000 primary debates against Bush as well.

I'm a Jeb supporter, and I give him a grade of a B+ Christie did better, and Rubio did slightly better.

[dudeabides]

I'm a loyal Republican and will be supporting the nominee unless it's Trump.

The problem with the Republican Party today can be summed up in two words. Tea Party. What I'm about to say does not apply to everyone in the tea party, but it does apply to the majority. The Republican Party was redefined in a sense in the 1980 election with Ronald Reagan. The party became the party that is pro-military, for free markets and limited government, and a party that was socially conservative. However, conservatives like myself recognized that there is always a give and a take. For example, conservatives like me believe that taxes should be low, regulations should be at a minimal, and the federal government should spend only on those things it is designated to be responsible for in the constitution, plus the safety net which is social security, medicare, and medicaid. My point being, we believe in limited government, but not no government. In response to Barack Obama and to a lesser extent, George W. Bush, the tea party was formed. In the beginning, the tea party was about opposing government over reach and out of control spending.

The tea party has become a joke. It's now not folks opposing big government, it's old white folks who buy into conspiracy theories, who believe that immigrants are taking over the country, and who oppose Common Core. They have these ridiculous litmus tests that if you disagree with them on one issue, you are automatically a "RINO." The tea party has recently become a parody of it's former self. They now are opposed to free trade and yet, they claim to be for free markets. The reality is, the majority of those in the tea party do not understand the world they live in. They don't understand trade policy or economic policy in general. They fear anyone who looks different than them.

In 2010, the GOP won control of congress because of Obamacare. The tea party prevented us from winning the U.S. Senate, and we lost ground in 2012 because of the tea party. By 2014, Republican leaders confronted the tea party and we did very well. In this election, you basically have four tea party candidates. The first is Donald Trump. He's old, angry, white, and stupid. He's everything the tea party is made up of. You then have Ben Carson. There are some in the tea party who want to prove that their dislike of Obama isn't based on race, so they support Ben and besides, they hate all politicians. Ted Cruz has sought tea party backing more than anyone else, and because he comes up with great talking points, he has been successful in gaining their support. Rand Paul has tea party support, probably less so than the other three, because his father's supporters who are libertarian are in the tea party.

So, here comes Jeb Bush. He's definitely a free market supporter, he reduced taxes and the size and scope of state government. He's pro-military, pro-life, and for traditional marriage. He wants the federal government to be limited and yet, he's for the safety net. Moderates like him, some conservatives don't completely trust him, and the tea party hates him. Why? Well, for many conservatives, his position on immigration is just not where they stand. For the tea party, his position means he wants more brown people in America and is for amnesty, despite him opposing amnesty consistently. Finally, he believes in Common Core. Look, I disagree with him on this, but to go crazy over one differing position? That's silly.

My point is not to rant here, it's to prove a point. Jeb's opposition does come from some mainstream conservatives, but it mainly comes from the crazies. The same can be said about multiple candidates. With the crazy vote divided, Trump, Cruz, and Carson have no chance at this nomination. Santorum, Pataki, Fiorina, Graham, Gilmore, Perry, and Jindal either aren't connecting with voters and or have no money. That leaves us with Bush, Christie, Walker, Rubio, Huckabee, Kasich, and Paul. Paul's base of support is very limited, most mainstream conservatives and moderates won't back him. Huckabee has the loyalty of many social conservatives, but that isn't as large a part of the party as it once was. Mainstream conservatives who are distrustful of Bush are likely to either go with Walker, Kasich, or Rubio. Ideologically, Kasich and Rubio are most similar to Bush. Therefore, Bush being in the race essentially hurts Kasich and Rubio the most, but the fact that moderates are backing him over Chris Christie hurts Christie as well. That is why I believe Scott Walker is Jeb Bush's biggest challenger for the nomination. If it comes down to a choice between them, I can tell you anyone who wants to win should support Bush because Walker is Romney 2.0

[dudeabides]

I'm a loyal Republican and will be supporting the nominee unless it's Trump.

The problem with the Republican Party today can be summed up in two words. Tea Party. What I'm about to say does not apply to everyone in the tea party, but it does apply to the majority. The Republican Party was redefined in a sense in the 1980 election with Ronald Reagan. The party became the party that is pro-military, for free markets and limited government, and a party that was socially conservative. However, conservatives like myself recognized that there is always a give and a take. For example, conservatives like me believe that taxes should be low, regulations should be at a minimal, and the federal government should spend only on those things it is designated to be responsible for in the constitution, plus the safety net which is social security, medicare, and medicaid. My point being, we believe in limited government, but not no government. In response to Barack Obama and to a lesser extent, George W. Bush, the tea party was formed. In the beginning, the tea party was about opposing government over reach and out of control spending.

The tea party has become a joke. It's now not folks opposing big government, it's old white folks who buy into conspiracy theories, who believe that immigrants are taking over the country, and who oppose Common Core. They have these ridiculous litmus tests that if you disagree with them on one issue, you are automatically a "RINO." The tea party has recently become a parody of it's former self. They now are opposed to free trade and yet, they claim to be for free markets. The reality is, the majority of those in the tea party do not understand the world they live in. They don't understand trade policy or economic policy in general. They fear anyone who looks different than them.

In 2010, the GOP won control of congress because of Obamacare. The tea party prevented us from winning the U.S. Senate, and we lost ground in 2012 because of the tea party. By 2014, Republican leaders confronted the tea party and we did very well. In this election, you basically have four tea party candidates. The first is Donald Trump. He's old, angry, white, and stupid. He's everything the tea party is made up of. You then have Ben Carson. There are some in the tea party who want to prove that their dislike of Obama isn't based on race, so they support Ben and besides, they hate all politicians. Ted Cruz has sought tea party backing more than anyone else, and because he comes up with great talking points, he has been successful in gaining their support. Rand Paul has tea party support, probably less so than the other three, because his father's supporters who are libertarian are in the tea party.

So, here comes Jeb Bush. He's definitely a free market supporter, he reduced taxes and the size and scope of state government. He's pro-military, pro-life, and for traditional marriage. He wants the federal government to be limited and yet, he's for the safety net. Moderates like him, some conservatives don't completely trust him, and the tea party hates him. Why? Well, for many conservatives, his position on immigration is just not where they stand. For the tea party, his position means he wants more brown people in America and is for amnesty, despite him opposing amnesty consistently. Finally, he believes in Common Core. Look, I disagree with him on this, but to go crazy over one differing position? That's silly.

My point is not to rant here, it's to prove a point. Jeb's opposition does come from some mainstream conservatives, but it mainly comes from the crazies. The same can be said about multiple candidates. With the crazy vote divided, Trump, Cruz, and Carson have no chance at this nomination. Santorum, Pataki, Fiorina, Graham, Gilmore, Perry, and Jindal either aren't connecting with voters and or have no money. That leaves us with Bush, Christie, Walker, Rubio, Huckabee, Kasich, and Paul. Paul's base of support is very limited, most mainstream conservatives and moderates won't back him. Huckabee has the loyalty of many social conservatives, but that isn't as large a part of the party as it once was. Mainstream conservatives who are distrustful of Bush are likely to either go with Walker, Kasich, or Rubio. Ideologically, Kasich and Rubio are most similar to Bush. Therefore, Bush being in the race essentially hurts Kasich and Rubio the most, but the fact that moderates are backing him over Chris Christie hurts Christie as well. That is why I believe Scott Walker is Jeb Bush's biggest challenger for the nomination. If it comes down to a choice between them, I can tell you anyone who wants to win should support Bush because Walker is Romney 2.0

tl;dr you hate Trump, tea partiers and libertarians you drool over Jebbo, we all know this...

I had so much fun watching Chris Christie mop the floor with Rand Paul last night. I'm not even for Christie, but it was classic.

[dudeabides]

I'm a loyal Republican and will be supporting the nominee unless it's Trump.

The problem with the Republican Party today can be summed up in two words. Tea Party. What I'm about to say does not apply to everyone in the tea party, but it does apply to the majority. The Republican Party was redefined in a sense in the 1980 election with Ronald Reagan. The party became the party that is pro-military, for free markets and limited government, and a party that was socially conservative. However, conservatives like myself recognized that there is always a give and a take. For example, conservatives like me believe that taxes should be low, regulations should be at a minimal, and the federal government should spend only on those things it is designated to be responsible for in the constitution, plus the safety net which is social security, medicare, and medicaid. My point being, we believe in limited government, but not no government. In response to Barack Obama and to a lesser extent, George W. Bush, the tea party was formed. In the beginning, the tea party was about opposing government over reach and out of control spending.

The tea party has become a joke. It's now not folks opposing big government, it's old white folks who buy into conspiracy theories, who believe that immigrants are taking over the country, and who oppose Common Core. They have these ridiculous litmus tests that if you disagree with them on one issue, you are automatically a "RINO." The tea party has recently become a parody of it's former self. They now are opposed to free trade and yet, they claim to be for free markets. The reality is, the majority of those in the tea party do not understand the world they live in. They don't understand trade policy or economic policy in general. They fear anyone who looks different than them.

In 2010, the GOP won control of congress because of Obamacare. The tea party prevented us from winning the U.S. Senate, and we lost ground in 2012 because of the tea party. By 2014, Republican leaders confronted the tea party and we did very well. In this election, you basically have four tea party candidates. The first is Donald Trump. He's old, angry, white, and stupid. He's everything the tea party is made up of. You then have Ben Carson. There are some in the tea party who want to prove that their dislike of Obama isn't based on race, so they support Ben and besides, they hate all politicians. Ted Cruz has sought tea party backing more than anyone else, and because he comes up with great talking points, he has been successful in gaining their support. Rand Paul has tea party support, probably less so than the other three, because his father's supporters who are libertarian are in the tea party.

So, here comes Jeb Bush. He's definitely a free market supporter, he reduced taxes and the size and scope of state government. He's pro-military, pro-life, and for traditional marriage. He wants the federal government to be limited and yet, he's for the safety net. Moderates like him, some conservatives don't completely trust him, and the tea party hates him. Why? Well, for many conservatives, his position on immigration is just not where they stand. For the tea party, his position means he wants more brown people in America and is for amnesty, despite him opposing amnesty consistently. Finally, he believes in Common Core. Look, I disagree with him on this, but to go crazy over one differing position? That's silly.

My point is not to rant here, it's to prove a point. Jeb's opposition does come from some mainstream conservatives, but it mainly comes from the crazies. The same can be said about multiple candidates. With the crazy vote divided, Trump, Cruz, and Carson have no chance at this nomination. Santorum, Pataki, Fiorina, Graham, Gilmore, Perry, and Jindal either aren't connecting with voters and or have no money. That leaves us with Bush, Christie, Walker, Rubio, Huckabee, Kasich, and Paul. Paul's base of support is very limited, most mainstream conservatives and moderates won't back him. Huckabee has the loyalty of many social conservatives, but that isn't as large a part of the party as it once was. Mainstream conservatives who are distrustful of Bush are likely to either go with Walker, Kasich, or Rubio. Ideologically, Kasich and Rubio are most similar to Bush. Therefore, Bush being in the race essentially hurts Kasich and Rubio the most, but the fact that moderates are backing him over Chris Christie hurts Christie as well. That is why I believe Scott Walker is Jeb Bush's biggest challenger for the nomination. If it comes down to a choice between them, I can tell you anyone who wants to win should support Bush because Walker is Romney 2.0

tl;dr you hate Trump, tea partiers and libertarians you drool over Jebbo, we all know this...

I had so much fun watching Chris Christie mop the floor with Rand Paul last night. I'm not even for Christie, but it was classic.

Cause we all know you're an elitist and a statist who'd rather just endlessly search people's records without due process, we get it.

We all get that you care more about the civil liberties of terrorists than the security of American citizens.

[dudeabides]

I'm a loyal Republican and will be supporting the nominee unless it's Trump.

The problem with the Republican Party today can be summed up in two words. Tea Party. What I'm about to say does not apply to everyone in the tea party, but it does apply to the majority. The Republican Party was redefined in a sense in the 1980 election with Ronald Reagan. The party became the party that is pro-military, for free markets and limited government, and a party that was socially conservative. However, conservatives like myself recognized that there is always a give and a take. For example, conservatives like me believe that taxes should be low, regulations should be at a minimal, and the federal government should spend only on those things it is designated to be responsible for in the constitution, plus the safety net which is social security, medicare, and medicaid. My point being, we believe in limited government, but not no government. In response to Barack Obama and to a lesser extent, George W. Bush, the tea party was formed. In the beginning, the tea party was about opposing government over reach and out of control spending.

The tea party has become a joke. It's now not folks opposing big government, it's old white folks who buy into conspiracy theories, who believe that immigrants are taking over the country, and who oppose Common Core. They have these ridiculous litmus tests that if you disagree with them on one issue, you are automatically a "RINO." The tea party has recently become a parody of it's former self. They now are opposed to free trade and yet, they claim to be for free markets. The reality is, the majority of those in the tea party do not understand the world they live in. They don't understand trade policy or economic policy in general. They fear anyone who looks different than them.

In 2010, the GOP won control of congress because of Obamacare. The tea party prevented us from winning the U.S. Senate, and we lost ground in 2012 because of the tea party. By 2014, Republican leaders confronted the tea party and we did very well. In this election, you basically have four tea party candidates. The first is Donald Trump. He's old, angry, white, and stupid. He's everything the tea party is made up of. You then have Ben Carson. There are some in the tea party who want to prove that their dislike of Obama isn't based on race, so they support Ben and besides, they hate all politicians. Ted Cruz has sought tea party backing more than anyone else, and because he comes up with great talking points, he has been successful in gaining their support. Rand Paul has tea party support, probably less so than the other three, because his father's supporters who are libertarian are in the tea party.

So, here comes Jeb Bush. He's definitely a free market supporter, he reduced taxes and the size and scope of state government. He's pro-military, pro-life, and for traditional marriage. He wants the federal government to be limited and yet, he's for the safety net. Moderates like him, some conservatives don't completely trust him, and the tea party hates him. Why? Well, for many conservatives, his position on immigration is just not where they stand. For the tea party, his position means he wants more brown people in America and is for amnesty, despite him opposing amnesty consistently. Finally, he believes in Common Core. Look, I disagree with him on this, but to go crazy over one differing position? That's silly.

My point is not to rant here, it's to prove a point. Jeb's opposition does come from some mainstream conservatives, but it mainly comes from the crazies. The same can be said about multiple candidates. With the crazy vote divided, Trump, Cruz, and Carson have no chance at this nomination. Santorum, Pataki, Fiorina, Graham, Gilmore, Perry, and Jindal either aren't connecting with voters and or have no money. That leaves us with Bush, Christie, Walker, Rubio, Huckabee, Kasich, and Paul. Paul's base of support is very limited, most mainstream conservatives and moderates won't back him. Huckabee has the loyalty of many social conservatives, but that isn't as large a part of the party as it once was. Mainstream conservatives who are distrustful of Bush are likely to either go with Walker, Kasich, or Rubio. Ideologically, Kasich and Rubio are most similar to Bush. Therefore, Bush being in the race essentially hurts Kasich and Rubio the most, but the fact that moderates are backing him over Chris Christie hurts Christie as well. That is why I believe Scott Walker is Jeb Bush's biggest challenger for the nomination. If it comes down to a choice between them, I can tell you anyone who wants to win should support Bush because Walker is Romney 2.0

tl;dr you hate Trump, tea partiers and libertarians you drool over Jebbo, we all know this...

I had so much fun watching Chris Christie mop the floor with Rand Paul last night. I'm not even for Christie, but it was classic.

Cause we all know you're an elitist and a statist who'd rather just endlessly search people's records without due process, we get it.

We all get that you care more about the civil liberties of terrorists than the security of American citizens.

American civil liberties come first, not the endless fear of being attacked.

Thanks to the policies of George W. Bush, 60 terrorist plots were stopped since 2001. Under the Patriot Act, civil liberties are balanced with security. Obama has done things outside the scope of the Patriot Act, but that doesn't mean we should get rid of the NSA and repeal the Patriot Act.

[dudeabides]

They have these ridiculous litmus tests that if you disagree with them on one issue, you are automatically a "RINO."

Dude

Christie on style and substance. Paul sounded more like a Democrat.

Cruz should ask Paul why he's so similar to Obama on foreign policy and criminal justice issues.

Your neo-con slurping is unnecessary. We get that you are a big government moderate

Your RINO comments are what is unnecessary. I get that you are a tofu eating, Volvo driving, Michael Moore loving leftist.

I love how the libertarian RINOs love to call everyone who believes in American leadership globally a neo-con.

Chris Christie (RINO-NJ) obviously has no respect for state's rights.

I'm glad you brought this up. Rand Paul opposed the Patriot Act, opposed Iranian sanctions, opposed the surge in Afghanistan, doesn't believe it's bad if Iran goes nuclear, he is for allowing felons to vote, he has cautioned GOP Governors on voter I.D. laws, he has reservations about capital punishment - these positions are not just one or even three issues where he disagrees with Republicans, they are a departure from Republican orthodoxy big time.

Chris Christie embraced the Obamacare medicaid expansion, he's thrown millions of dollars at expensive failing schools, he's presided over record corporate welfare, he's re-appointed liberal judges, he became upset when the NYPD conducted surveillance on terror suspects in New Jersey, again - these are issues where he has departed from the GOP in some major ways.

Perhaps on Christie, I did take it to far, Christie is a moderate Republican, you got me there.

I'm a loyal Republican and will be supporting the nominee unless it's Trump.

The problem with the Republican Party today can be summed up in two words. Tea Party. What I'm about to say does not apply to everyone in the tea party, but it does apply to the majority. The Republican Party was redefined in a sense in the 1980 election with Ronald Reagan. The party became the party that is pro-military, for free markets and limited government, and a party that was socially conservative. However, conservatives like myself recognized that there is always a give and a take. For example, conservatives like me believe that taxes should be low, regulations should be at a minimal, and the federal government should spend only on those things it is designated to be responsible for in the constitution, plus the safety net which is social security, medicare, and medicaid. My point being, we believe in limited government, but not no government. In response to Barack Obama and to a lesser extent, George W. Bush, the tea party was formed. In the beginning, the tea party was about opposing government over reach and out of control spending.

The tea party has become a joke. It's now not folks opposing big government, it's old white folks who buy into conspiracy theories, who believe that immigrants are taking over the country, and who oppose Common Core. They have these ridiculous litmus tests that if you disagree with them on one issue, you are automatically a "RINO." The tea party has recently become a parody of it's former self. They now are opposed to free trade and yet, they claim to be for free markets. The reality is, the majority of those in the tea party do not understand the world they live in. They don't understand trade policy or economic policy in general. They fear anyone who looks different than them.

In 2010, the GOP won control of congress because of Obamacare. The tea party prevented us from winning the U.S. Senate, and we lost ground in 2012 because of the tea party. By 2014, Republican leaders confronted the tea party and we did very well. In this election, you basically have four tea party candidates. The first is Donald Trump. He's old, angry, white, and stupid. He's everything the tea party is made up of. You then have Ben Carson. There are some in the tea party who want to prove that their dislike of Obama isn't based on race, so they support Ben and besides, they hate all politicians. Ted Cruz has sought tea party backing more than anyone else, and because he comes up with great talking points, he has been successful in gaining their support. Rand Paul has tea party support, probably less so than the other three, because his father's supporters who are libertarian are in the tea party.

So, here comes Jeb Bush. He's definitely a free market supporter, he reduced taxes and the size and scope of state government. He's pro-military, pro-life, and for traditional marriage. He wants the federal government to be limited and yet, he's for the safety net. Moderates like him, some conservatives don't completely trust him, and the tea party hates him. Why? Well, for many conservatives, his position on immigration is just not where they stand. For the tea party, his position means he wants more brown people in America and is for amnesty, despite him opposing amnesty consistently. Finally, he believes in Common Core. Look, I disagree with him on this, but to go crazy over one differing position? That's silly.

My point is not to rant here, it's to prove a point. Jeb's opposition does come from some mainstream conservatives, but it mainly comes from the crazies. The same can be said about multiple candidates. With the crazy vote divided, Trump, Cruz, and Carson have no chance at this nomination. Santorum, Pataki, Fiorina, Graham, Gilmore, Perry, and Jindal either aren't connecting with voters and or have no money. That leaves us with Bush, Christie, Walker, Rubio, Huckabee, Kasich, and Paul. Paul's base of support is very limited, most mainstream conservatives and moderates won't back him. Huckabee has the loyalty of many social conservatives, but that isn't as large a part of the party as it once was. Mainstream conservatives who are distrustful of Bush are likely to either go with Walker, Kasich, or Rubio. Ideologically, Kasich and Rubio are most similar to Bush. Therefore, Bush being in the race essentially hurts Kasich and Rubio the most, but the fact that moderates are backing him over Chris Christie hurts Christie as well. That is why I believe Scott Walker is Jeb Bush's biggest challenger for the nomination. If it comes down to a choice between them, I can tell you anyone who wants to win should support Bush because Walker is Romney 2.0

Were it not for the Tea Party, the GOP would be languishing in the wildness unlike any other time since the Great Depression, and it would entirely be because of Bush 43's time in office.

The rebellion against the GOP establishment began with the Immigration issue in 2007. We had passed a comprehensive bill before, but the enforcement never came to pass and there was never the firm desire to make it successful by enforcing the laws thereafter. There were legitimate concerns that one amnesty merely begets another either through intentional inaction or lack of concern for the matter. Either way, there was no desire to trust the same people who broke the system in the first place when they came back with the same promises. However, the real animating factor was the notion that Wall Street got rewarded for destroying the economy whilst middle class Americans who had not had a raise since the Clinton years, got left high and dry. The Tea Party in its first two years allowed for the running against both the Democrats who failed ot fix the economy and the Bush era GOP. The problem is that fringe, peripheral and perenial joke candidates like Angle and O'Donnel hopped on the bandwagon and hijacked the movement in several primaries costing us seats we should have won. The very thing that destroyed the Tea PArty was its inherent anger and mistrust of the people who got the country into the current mess.

I don't completely disagree with you. The tea party was started with good intentions. But I think they have strayed from what they originally were. You and I happen to disagree as to when the tea party began. The 2007 immigration bill had one major flaw, and that is that it had a pathway to citizenship as opposed to legal status, but I think that would have been better than the status-quo. In life, there are compromises. There is a time to fight for ideology, but also a time to govern. The tea party is only interested in ideology.

[dudeabides]

I'm a loyal Republican and will be supporting the nominee unless it's Trump.

The problem with the Republican Party today can be summed up in two words. Tea Party. What I'm about to say does not apply to everyone in the tea party, but it does apply to the majority. The Republican Party was redefined in a sense in the 1980 election with Ronald Reagan. The party became the party that is pro-military, for free markets and limited government, and a party that was socially conservative. However, conservatives like myself recognized that there is always a give and a take. For example, conservatives like me believe that taxes should be low, regulations should be at a minimal, and the federal government should spend only on those things it is designated to be responsible for in the constitution, plus the safety net which is social security, medicare, and medicaid. My point being, we believe in limited government, but not no government. In response to Barack Obama and to a lesser extent, George W. Bush, the tea party was formed. In the beginning, the tea party was about opposing government over reach and out of control spending.

The tea party has become a joke. It's now not folks opposing big government, it's old white folks who buy into conspiracy theories, who believe that immigrants are taking over the country, and who oppose Common Core. They have these ridiculous litmus tests that if you disagree with them on one issue, you are automatically a "RINO." The tea party has recently become a parody of it's former self. They now are opposed to free trade and yet, they claim to be for free markets. The reality is, the majority of those in the tea party do not understand the world they live in. They don't understand trade policy or economic policy in general. They fear anyone who looks different than them.

In 2010, the GOP won control of congress because of Obamacare. The tea party prevented us from winning the U.S. Senate, and we lost ground in 2012 because of the tea party. By 2014, Republican leaders confronted the tea party and we did very well. In this election, you basically have four tea party candidates. The first is Donald Trump. He's old, angry, white, and stupid. He's everything the tea party is made up of. You then have Ben Carson. There are some in the tea party who want to prove that their dislike of Obama isn't based on race, so they support Ben and besides, they hate all politicians. Ted Cruz has sought tea party backing more than anyone else, and because he comes up with great talking points, he has been successful in gaining their support. Rand Paul has tea party support, probably less so than the other three, because his father's supporters who are libertarian are in the tea party.

So, here comes Jeb Bush. He's definitely a free market supporter, he reduced taxes and the size and scope of state government. He's pro-military, pro-life, and for traditional marriage. He wants the federal government to be limited and yet, he's for the safety net. Moderates like him, some conservatives don't completely trust him, and the tea party hates him. Why? Well, for many conservatives, his position on immigration is just not where they stand. For the tea party, his position means he wants more brown people in America and is for amnesty, despite him opposing amnesty consistently. Finally, he believes in Common Core. Look, I disagree with him on this, but to go crazy over one differing position? That's silly.

My point is not to rant here, it's to prove a point. Jeb's opposition does come from some mainstream conservatives, but it mainly comes from the crazies. The same can be said about multiple candidates. With the crazy vote divided, Trump, Cruz, and Carson have no chance at this nomination. Santorum, Pataki, Fiorina, Graham, Gilmore, Perry, and Jindal either aren't connecting with voters and or have no money. That leaves us with Bush, Christie, Walker, Rubio, Huckabee, Kasich, and Paul. Paul's base of support is very limited, most mainstream conservatives and moderates won't back him. Huckabee has the loyalty of many social conservatives, but that isn't as large a part of the party as it once was. Mainstream conservatives who are distrustful of Bush are likely to either go with Walker, Kasich, or Rubio. Ideologically, Kasich and Rubio are most similar to Bush. Therefore, Bush being in the race essentially hurts Kasich and Rubio the most, but the fact that moderates are backing him over Chris Christie hurts Christie as well. That is why I believe Scott Walker is Jeb Bush's biggest challenger for the nomination. If it comes down to a choice between them, I can tell you anyone who wants to win should support Bush because Walker is Romney 2.0

Were it not for the Tea Party, the GOP would be languishing in the wildness unlike any other time since the Great Depression, and it would entirely be because of Bush 43's time in office.

The rebellion against the GOP establishment began with the Immigration issue in 2007. We had passed a comprehensive bill before, but the enforcement never came to pass and there was never the firm desire to make it successful by enforcing the laws thereafter. There were legitimate concerns that one amnesty merely begets another either through intentional inaction or lack of concern for the matter. Either way, there was no desire to trust the same people who broke the system in the first place when they came back with the same promises. However, the real animating factor was the notion that Wall Street got rewarded for destroying the economy whilst middle class Americans who had not had a raise since the Clinton years, got left high and dry. The Tea Party in its first two years allowed for the running against both the Democrats who failed ot fix the economy and the Bush era GOP. The problem is that fringe, peripheral and perenial joke candidates like Angle and O'Donnel hopped on the bandwagon and hijacked the movement in several primaries costing us seats we should have won. The very thing that destroyed the Tea PArty was its inherent anger and mistrust of the people who got the country into the current mess.

You're sort of wrong(well like 25%) on the 1986 Immigration Reform. The illegal immigrant surge didn't start off till 1995 and lasted till 2007( a total of 8 million illegal immigrants were added to the population rolls during this time.) It wasn't right after the 1986 Immigration Reform that the surge of illegal immigrants started. There were 4 million illegal immigrants living in the US  still in 1994. I think in 1986 there were 3 million illegal immigrants living in the US.

True about the GOP languishing with or without the Tea Party like they did when FDR was President. The Dems languished under Reagan too and the GOP languishes under Obama. I think FDR, Reagan, and Obama are were just way too charismatic for the other side to beat. Obama did have a 50% approval rating on Election Day to boot.

As far as Angle goes she blew that race because she lost Latinos 92-8% to Harry Reid. Her anti-immigrant ad killed her with Latino's. O'Donnell was just a bad candidate. I doubt O' Donnell would have beat Castle in 2008 or 2014 but I also believe Castle would have been beaten in 2012 since the Tea Party was still as popular as it was in 2010.

This idea that we are seeing more and more illegal border crossings is a myth. We doubled border patrol agents and have seen lower levels of illegal immigration. We are headed in the right direction, of course we can and should do more.

[dudeabides]

This isnt the Democratic party of Kerry & Gore anymore that lost im two close elections to Dubya; and its time for the GOP party to get that. Or the GOP party will be further left behind.  This is a Democratic party of Latinos, Blks and women that can do well in the electoral college period; established by Obama's landslide victories.

The Bushes established that the mismanages the economy in both administrations. I dont think voters wants to entrust them with another four years.

President Bill Clinton is also to blame for the financial collapse in 2008. President Bush gets blame for not reversing Clinton's policies. The collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as Lehman Brothers, was the beginning of the of the domino effect that led to what happened in the fall of 2008. President Clinton created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It was President Clinton who originally pushed to expand credit to people who really shouldn't have gotten credit.