No, Jeb is NOT a good choice for the GOP in 2016...

The first criteria is NOT whether the person is "electable". That's why we're in the mess we're in! The first criteria is to find someone who would be a great president. Then MAKE that person electable! We've been going about it backwards.

The first criteria is NOT whether the person is "electable". That's why we're in the mess we're in! The first criteria is to find someone who would be a great president. Then MAKE that person electable! We've been going about it backwards. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Ron Paul will never be made electable with thoughts like this.

"If your city is destroyed by a level 5 hurricane and your home is under 20 feet of water, don't look to FEMA for help. Just fend for yourself, like we did in the 1940's"

Ron Paul - March 2012

NO.

Keeping power in the same family is an evil in its own right.

Even if a particular family member happens to be a good leader.

The harm outweighs the good.

It is a slippery slope. You are disregarding the obvious dangers of nepotism because you think one particular family member may be worth the risk.

That's horse shit.

We have over 300 million people. No matter HOW good a politician is, he or she is only a teensy-tiny bit better than the second best choice.

So pick the second best choice (assuming he is not part of a dynasty) and avoid all the fucking dangers of nepotism.

It really isn't that hard. Originally Posted by ExNYer

I think you seem to think that I think that voting for family names is a good idea...my position is exactly opposite. The democratic party worships the Clinton name but if you look at Hillary there is no accomplishment that she can point at. She quit her job as a senator to become secretary of state, she quit her job as SOS to make money and run for president. She has no accomplishments other than being Mrs. Clinton. Jeb Bush was a governor...was he a good governor, did Florida prosper? If this is true then why not vote for him. Not because he is a Bush but because he got the job done. If he didn't get the job done then I don't care if his name is Ronald Reagan Jr. he shouldn't get the job.

I will not judge anyone for good or bad for their name but I will judge their performance and vote accordingly.

. The democratic party worships the Clinton name but if you look at Hillary there is no accomplishment that she can point at. She quit her job as a senator to become secretary of state, she quit her job as SOS to make money and run for president.. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Senator and SoS yet you claim she has done nothing!

She quit her job as a senator to become secretary of state, she quit her job as SOS to make money and run for president.. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Senator and SoS yet you claim she has done nothing! Originally Posted by WTF

What does JD know? He's an Idiot!

Ron Paul will never be made electable with thoughts like this.

"If your city is destroyed by a level 5 hurricane and your home is under 20 feet of water, don't look to FEMA for help. Just fend for yourself, like we did in the 1940's"

Ron Paul - March 2012 Originally Posted by flghtr65

Ron Paul is not running. There are others.

Senator and SoS yet you claim she has done nothing! Originally Posted by WTF

Joe Biden was Senator and VP, what's he done?
Dan Quayle was Senator and VP......

Ron Paul will never be made electable with thoughts like this.

"If your city is destroyed by a level 5 hurricane and your home is under 20 feet of water, don't look to FEMA for help. Just fend for yourself, like we did in the 1940's"

Ron Paul - March 2012 Originally Posted by flghtr65

Well, we've got to find a happy medium between then and now. Now, if you can't find your dick because you're too fucking fat, you blame it on anything other than your own laziness and sloth, and get the government to help you sue someone. You could eat right and exercise, rise early, not drink and stay out late, do your job, pay your fucking taxes, hire workers and pay their appropriate taxes, etc.
Now, America is full of losers, stem to stern. We became a great country when people where much more self reliant than now.

I wouldn't vote for Jeb Bush; but if the 2 November 2016 choices are Bush vs. Clinton, then Bush is the better alternative...especially if the Tea Party continues with electoral wins (local, state and federal offices).

The first criteria is NOT whether the person is "electable". That's why we're in the mess we're in! The first criteria is to find someone who would be a great president. Then MAKE that person electable! We've been going about it backwards. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yeah, that is exactly the reason why the candidate you favor for POTUS will never be elected. It just doesn't work that way. No matter how much you like Gary Johnson or how great a president you think he might make, he's not electable.

Ron Paul is not running. There are others. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Who?

One issue not mentioned here yet is Florida went Blue last election cycle. Jeb can turn that around. It is likely the difference in the 2016 election. Bottom line: If you want a democrat in the WH don't vote Jeb. Florida is the definitive state in 2016.

I do not want another Bush, but I want a Dem MUCH, MUCH LESS.

I think you seem to think that I think that voting for family names is a good idea...my position is exactly opposite. The democratic party worships the Clinton name but if you look at Hillary there is no accomplishment that she can point at. She quit her job as a senator to become secretary of state, she quit her job as SOS to make money and run for president. She has no accomplishments other than being Mrs. Clinton. Jeb Bush was a governor...was he a good governor, did Florida prosper? If this is true then why not vote for him. Not because he is a Bush but because he got the job done. If he didn't get the job done then I don't care if his name is Ronald Reagan Jr. he shouldn't get the job.

I will not judge anyone for good or bad for their name but I will judge their performance and vote accordingly. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I think you seem to think that I think ... Donald, is that you ?

I think you seem to think that I think that voting for family names is a good idea...my position is exactly opposite. The democratic party worships the Clinton name but if you look at Hillary there is no accomplishment that she can point at. She quit her job as a senator to become secretary of state, she quit her job as SOS to make money and run for president. She has no accomplishments other than being Mrs. Clinton. Jeb Bush was a governor...was he a good governor, did Florida prosper? If this is true then why not vote for him. Not because he is a Bush but because he got the job done. If he didn't get the job done then I don't care if his name is Ronald Reagan Jr. he shouldn't get the job. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Even if Jeb did a good job as governor of Florida, the dangers of nepotism NEVER go away.

It isn't just the candidate that is the problem.

It is all the hangers-on that surround the candidate, looking to feed off the teat.

The problem is also the laziness that it instills in the electorate.

And really, no matter how good a job Jeb did, do you really think he is THAT much better than the next best candidate? Or that there aren't other candidates that might be still better than him?

Yeah, that is exactly the reason why the candidate you favor for POTUS will never be elected. It just doesn't work that way. No matter how much you like Gary Johnson or how great a president you think he might make, he's not electable. Originally Posted by timpage

If the choice is between Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton, how is voting for either of them good for America? They are both "electable", and both disastrous anti-freedom corporatist crony capitalists.

We need to work on making better people "electable".

I'd support any candidate if I thought s/he was honest, and meant what they said. Even a liberal or conservative. It would be such a refreshing change.

None of the current prospects on either side meet those criteria. And no, not even Rand Paul.