Jeb's run to the White House has been unraveling for a few months now. The rise of Trump, combined with his constant attacks of the junior Bush for being low energy and not ready has exposed Jeb's issues and that, in fact, he does not appear to be ready for the various challenges that comes with running for president. At first, Jeb struggled with questions about his brother's invasion of Iraq, that he did not handle well. Now, Trump and Bush are at it again this time over George W. Bush and the question was the 9/11 attack his fault. Digby did a great piece on the conflict in Salon. Jeb should have known that questions about George W. Bush's record on foreign policy, Iraq, and 9/11 would be coming, but continues to stumble on those questions. Jake Tapper on CNN further exposed Jeb's problems with dealing with his brother's legacy. In the case, it deals with if 9/11 is not W's fault, how can the Republicans blame the Benghazi attack on Hillary Clinton? Even if you do not think the question is fair, and some Republicans support the idea that the question is not fair, it is a lot like Hillary Clinton's problem of dealing with the email scandal. Even if you don't think the question is fair, how a candidate deals with questions like this is a window into how they would deal with a crisis. For both Clinton and Bush, the results of dealing with their problem questions have been mixed at best.
Considering the last two Republican presidents have been Jeb's father and brother, you have to examine how the three men compare to each other, and how the presidencies of the two older Bushes reflects what Jeb might do in the White House. One common trait I would say that all three men have are that while they are conservative, none of them appear to be hard core ideologues. Also, while all three men have moments of temper, for the most part, they tend to be a little more laid back and are not the kind of extreme version of conservatism that is popular now. George H. W. Bush seemed to be always fighting the image of not being conservative enough. Being tied with the very popular Reagan White House was good enough to get him elected president, but it was not good enough to win a second term. George W. Bush was a two term president who was unquestionably conservative, but the compassionate conservative candidate with a more modest foreign policy disappeared after 9/11. Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and some of the people that worked for them were the true believers in that White House, and 9/11 was their opening to enact the policies they had been thinking about for at least a decade. W. seemed to like the idea being the big picture CEO president, and let the policy nerds take care of the details, in the case of foreign policy, by the neocons. Many of the more extreme ideas of George W. Bush's White House came from the Vice President, and it is been Cheney and not W that has had the most robust defense of those years. At the end of the day, W was president and he had the final say in what was done, but it would be interesting to see what his presidency would have looked like if the neocons were not running the foreign policy show. Even with the love that most conservative Republicans had for W, you saw the occasional column lamenting that W wasn't quite conservative enough. Which brings us back to Jeb and his efforts to be the third President Bush. Even though he might be the most conservative of the three men, the two older Bushes never had to deal with as a extreme and vocal faction of conservatives from within their own party. Although you could argue that the desire for conservative purity got it's start when H. W. Bush was president. By not using the name Bush in his logo, it looks like an attempt by Jeb to prove that he is own man. But, for a better or worse, he is tied to his father and brother and simply not using the name Bush in your logo fools no one, especially when many of your advisers are from the previous two Bush administrations.
If you are working on team Jeb! you have to take comfort with the 2008 John McCain campaign, who was written off as dead, but managed to win the nomination. Jeb is facing an uphill battle now, and the Jeb! 2016 effort is starting to see the your campaign is doomed articles. Jeb on the stump has been a bit of train wreck, and if you look back he had a few doozies from the stump, when he was running for governor of Florida. This time around, you had at least five times that his campaign had to say, "This is what Governor Bush really meant" situations. For all of the issues most people have with George W. Bush's job as president, the one thing he was good at was retail politics, and being able to deal with the donor class and the average voter. Even with facing a lot of negatives, Jeb still has money and his Super PAC is pouring money into Iowa and New Hampshire for ads. Jeb's campaign may not be dead, but with the Iowa caucuses getting closer and closer, Jeb's campaign is at a crucial crossroads, and if he is going to make a move it needs to be soon. If nothing else, a good start would be to figure how to deal with the legacy of his brother's presidency, because those questions are not going away. Jeb probably has to finish no worse than third in Iowa, and if you don't win New Hampshire, you can't do worse than a narrow loss. If he finishes in the middle of pack in early contests, even with money, you will not be able to shake that idea that Jeb! 2016 can't win. If Jeb can't turn his campaign around the only thing he will be competing for is the title of most disappointing campaign of the 2016 cycle, and that includes Scott Walker's.
Considering the last two Republican presidents have been Jeb's father and brother, you have to examine how the three men compare to each other, and how the presidencies of the two older Bushes reflects what Jeb might do in the White House. One common trait I would say that all three men have are that while they are conservative, none of them appear to be hard core ideologues. Also, while all three men have moments of temper, for the most part, they tend to be a little more laid back and are not the kind of extreme version of conservatism that is popular now. George H. W. Bush seemed to be always fighting the image of not being conservative enough. Being tied with the very popular Reagan White House was good enough to get him elected president, but it was not good enough to win a second term. George W. Bush was a two term president who was unquestionably conservative, but the compassionate conservative candidate with a more modest foreign policy disappeared after 9/11. Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and some of the people that worked for them were the true believers in that White House, and 9/11 was their opening to enact the policies they had been thinking about for at least a decade. W. seemed to like the idea being the big picture CEO president, and let the policy nerds take care of the details, in the case of foreign policy, by the neocons. Many of the more extreme ideas of George W. Bush's White House came from the Vice President, and it is been Cheney and not W that has had the most robust defense of those years. At the end of the day, W was president and he had the final say in what was done, but it would be interesting to see what his presidency would have looked like if the neocons were not running the foreign policy show. Even with the love that most conservative Republicans had for W, you saw the occasional column lamenting that W wasn't quite conservative enough. Which brings us back to Jeb and his efforts to be the third President Bush. Even though he might be the most conservative of the three men, the two older Bushes never had to deal with as a extreme and vocal faction of conservatives from within their own party. Although you could argue that the desire for conservative purity got it's start when H. W. Bush was president. By not using the name Bush in his logo, it looks like an attempt by Jeb to prove that he is own man. But, for a better or worse, he is tied to his father and brother and simply not using the name Bush in your logo fools no one, especially when many of your advisers are from the previous two Bush administrations.
If you are working on team Jeb! you have to take comfort with the 2008 John McCain campaign, who was written off as dead, but managed to win the nomination. Jeb is facing an uphill battle now, and the Jeb! 2016 effort is starting to see the your campaign is doomed articles. Jeb on the stump has been a bit of train wreck, and if you look back he had a few doozies from the stump, when he was running for governor of Florida. This time around, you had at least five times that his campaign had to say, "This is what Governor Bush really meant" situations. For all of the issues most people have with George W. Bush's job as president, the one thing he was good at was retail politics, and being able to deal with the donor class and the average voter. Even with facing a lot of negatives, Jeb still has money and his Super PAC is pouring money into Iowa and New Hampshire for ads. Jeb's campaign may not be dead, but with the Iowa caucuses getting closer and closer, Jeb's campaign is at a crucial crossroads, and if he is going to make a move it needs to be soon. If nothing else, a good start would be to figure how to deal with the legacy of his brother's presidency, because those questions are not going away. Jeb probably has to finish no worse than third in Iowa, and if you don't win New Hampshire, you can't do worse than a narrow loss. If he finishes in the middle of pack in early contests, even with money, you will not be able to shake that idea that Jeb! 2016 can't win. If Jeb can't turn his campaign around the only thing he will be competing for is the title of most disappointing campaign of the 2016 cycle, and that includes Scott Walker's.
No comments:
Post a Comment