The Truth About Jeb Bush's Presidential Ambitions

[Matt Collins]

Very good article...


http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...-truth-about-jeb-bushs-presidential-ambitions

 

[Acala]

Ugh. Everything that is wrong with American politics. All about power and nothing about principle.

 

[idiom]

Jeb (along with Romney) is likely the only contestant who could keep pace with the expected Clinton haul in excess of $1.5 billion.

Holy Crap.

Thats going to be some money carpet bombing to keep up with that. You would need money bombs hitting $100-300 Million in a single day. Several times.

Rand is going to have to break out the big guns to inspire a grass roots movement on that scale.

 

[Carlybee]

So basically Hillary can buy the office

 

[mosquitobite]

So basically Hillary can buy the office

And yet again, the establishment will allow the Democrats to be the final decider in who our nominee will be.

It is also striking how many Democrats who have met Jeb Bush tell me they’ve come away both impressed and open to supporting him for president, a crossover capacity that is a rarity in this polarized nation of ours.

Lie.Lie.Lie.

Anyone know of a single Democrat that would vote for a Bush over Clinton? Seriously? What crack are these people trying to sell??

 

[William Tell]

Lie.Lie.Lie.

Anyone know of a single Democrat that would vote for a Bush over Clinton? Seriously? What crack are these people trying to sell??

While you are right, of course that Democrats in general won't support Bush. Some politicians can sway people very well when meeting them in person. Jeb does not seem like that sort to me though. Obviously you can't meet enough people when running for president to effect the outcome, so it's kind of a pointless issue.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Holy Crap.

Thats going to be some money carpet bombing to keep up with that. You would need money bombs hitting $100-300 Million in a single day. Several times.

Rand is going to have to break out the big guns to inspire a grass roots movement on that scale.

Hey, that's only like $25 per vote. lol

 

[William Tell]

Hey, that's only like $25 per vote. lol

Actually, when you put it that way...
Lots of politicians spend more than that per vote.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Actually, when you put it that way...
Lots of politicians spend more than that per vote.

Actually, most races are usually in the single-digit dollars per vote. $15/vote is considered pretty extreme. A handful of legislative seats and MAYBE a US House Seat or two has closed in on $25, but a POTUS campaign @ $25 a vote is historically obscene.

 

[William Tell]

Actually, most races are usually in the single-digit dollars per vote. $15/vote is considered pretty extreme.
A handful of legislative seats and MAYBE a US House Seat or two has closed in on $25,

Maybe in North Carolina, but Texas Legislative Primaries are expensive.
A bunch of Texas House seats were in that range this year. Virtually all incumbents and most of the serious candidates here spent well into the teens at least. A Texas House Seat is worth a few hundred grand to special interests it seems.
Here's a list from our primary this year, the names might not mean much to you: http://www.texastribune.org/2014/03/06/2014-primary-cost-per-vote/

but a POTUS campaign @ $25 a vote is historically obscene.

Yeah.

 

[Matt Collins]

Ugh. Everything that is wrong with American politics. All about power and nothing about principle.

There is nothing wrong with power. Principle and power are not mutually exclusive.

 

[mosquitobite]

There is nothing wrong with power. Principle and power are not mutually exclusive.

They are when it costs upwards of $25 a vote to get that power.

In order to get that kind of $$ you have to bend your principles.

 

[Shane Harris]

There is nothing wrong with power. Principle and power are not mutually exclusive.

No but Power and Liberty are in fact.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

It is also striking how many Democrats who have met Jeb Bush tell me they’ve come away both impressed and open to supporting him for president, a crossover capacity that is a rarity in this polarized nation of ours.

More likely, they want the weakest "respectable" candidate nominated, like a GOP lamb brought to Hillary's slaughter.

And note the potentially greater crossover appeal of Rand goes unmentioned. The steering of the whole 2016 presidential conversation into a Jeb-Hillary contest is well underway.

 

[Working Poor]

The steering of the whole 2016 presidential conversation into a Jeb-Hillary contest is well underway.

You got that right. I could not even hold my nose and vote for either one of them.

 

[Acala]

There is nothing wrong with power. Principle and power are not mutually exclusive.

There is something very much wrong with the pursuit of power for the sake of power. And there is something deeply corrupt about a political system that is concerned only with power. This article is concerned ONLY with power - who has it, who is likely to get more of it. It says NOTHING about what any of the characters involved would DO with power and the neglect of that implies very strongly that principles are irrelevant to the author. And, in fact, principles ARE irrelevant in politics - at least as far as I have seen. Maybe you will help change that. But the thinking betrayed in this article is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

 

[jjdoyle]

There is something very much wrong with the pursuit of power for the sake of power. And there is something deeply corrupt about a political system that is concerned only with power. This article is concerned ONLY with power - who has it, who is likely to get more of it. It says NOTHING about what any of the characters involved would DO with power and the neglect of that implies very strongly that principles are irrelevant to the author. And, in fact, principles ARE irrelevant in politics - at least as far as I have seen. Maybe you will help change that. But the thinking betrayed in this article is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

And, I don't see anybody in talks of running in 2016 that is keeping principles, over trying for power. I see some that don't have talking points, and now flop around like fish out of water in regards to certain positions. So, for 2016 and the potential candidates we see, I would say that principle and power are mutually exclusive. Exactly what is wrong with politics.

So, I do agree with you in what I see from the current field, and it's very unfortunate. Principles are irrelevant in presidential politics in the current field of 2016 potential candidates. Now, if someone like Thomas Massie throws his hat in the race, that could possibly change my opinion.

 

[devil21]

So basically Hillary can buy the office

Reminds me of that de Tocqueville quote about politicians buying the public off with the public's own money. A HUGE amount of the money that gets dumped into federal elections comes from the parties legislating their own bankrolls through stimulus acts, bail outs, "aid programs", and other largesse. Goldman will donate many many millions of AIG bailout money to candidates of their liking, for example. The system is completely broken.

 

[Natural Citizen]

There is something very much wrong with the pursuit of power for the sake of power. And there is something deeply corrupt about a political system that is concerned only with power. This article is concerned ONLY with power - who has it, who is likely to get more of it. It says NOTHING about what any of the characters involved would DO with power and the neglect of that implies very strongly that principles are irrelevant to the author. And, in fact, principles ARE irrelevant in politics - at least as far as I have seen. Maybe you will help change that. But the thinking betrayed in this article is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Yeah, that's well put. Can't really add to it. Wish I could rep but, alas, I must spread some around.

I do maintain, though, that the wrong people are generally attracted to politics. For the most part these are the people who generally seek power itself and care very little of representation of the people. It's flashy to talk about change when seeking power but how many really ever say what they're going to change? Very few. Of course, there are a few good ones but could probably count them on one hand. The PACs I worry about because I think we find many of those kinds of power seekers in those.

And, of course, the media doesn't help. This paper is a prime example.

 

[Matt Collins]

No but Power and Liberty are in fact.

Don't confuse power and force, they are NOT the same thing. Force / coercion is immoral and against liberty. Power is not always connected to force and coercion, in fact most of the time it is not.