And the Coronation Goes To... (Reflections on this point in the presidential nomination race)

We can save the bother of waiting a year, and spending a lot of money and time on a primary season, by just giving the nomination to Jeb Bush now.

His grandfather was a senator, his father was president, his brother was president. It’s in his genes.

But on top of all that, he has genuine accomplishments of his own; Jeb Bush is a successful two-term governor of a critically important state, the electoral college powerhouse and sometime swing state of Florida. Add to all this the fact that his marriage to a Hispanic wife gives him some undefinable cred in the Hispanic community, and you have a guaranteed win machine for November, 2016.

The problem with the above narrative, of course, is that it only lists the positives of a Jeb Bush candidacy. While it’s certainly all true – he has a resume that would normally spell electoral gold – it leaves out some critical negatives.

While Jeb Bush started out in politics as a conservative – people certainly thought of him as a member of the conservative wing when he first ran for governor – he has gradually moved toward the left, as is common with members of his family. His baffling lack of discomfort with Common Core and his apparently considerable liberalism in the area of immigration, in particular, put him at odds with what is generally known as the Republican Base.

Worst of all, though, Jeb Bush’s biggest positive is also his biggest negative: his name.

The Democratic Party has succeeded in demonizing the Bush name in a way rarely seen in American politics. A broad cross-section of the American electorate has been taught, throughout two presidencies in quick succession, to detest and distrust politicians named Bush. It’s not fair, but it’s a fact, without which it’s inconceivable that an untested socialist senator named Barack Hussein Obama could have been elected and reelected to the presidency.

Their demonization of Jeb’s brother, George W. Bush, is what made his elections possible. The Left has been so successful in this pernicious quest, even today when you poll the average voter on his opinion of the Obama residency in the White House, a shocking number of people still let the incumbent off the hook for his myriad failures, blaming George W. Bush for everything, even six-plus years out.

For this reason, even more than any other, Jeb Bush is considered by many to be the only certain loser in a November that by all rights ought to be a Republican victory year. After eight years of Obama joblessness numbers, Obama foreclosure numbers, Obama scandals, and Obama foreign policy disasters, the White House ought to fall to a Republican no matter who the GOP runs. But the Bush name is assumed to be poison, at least for now.

Even if the Bush name didn’t have this unfair disadvantage, the surprisingly close presidencies of Jeb’s father and brother would already lead one to think twice about the idea of a third one running.

John Adams and his son John Quincy Adams were both elected president, but 24 years passed – a whole generation – between the administrations of our second and sixth presidents. William Henry Harrison and his grandson, Benjamin Harrison, were also presidents, but there were 48 years between the administrations of our ninth and 23rd presidents – two full generations. Even the Roosevelts, Theodore and Franklin, were separated in office by a full generation. They weren’t even close relatives, being fifth cousins, but sharing the same name, their relationship must be considered (FDR was actually a closer relative to a couple of other presidents than he was to Teddy)… and their terms were 24 years apart.

The point is, until the Bushes came along, this nation that was founded partially on a repudiation of hereditary monarchy had never put relatives in the White House in close succession before, but now George W. moved into the office just eight years after George H.W. left it.

The American people aren’t particularly hostile to that fact, after all these years, but it is fairly predicted that the electorate would react with severe disfavor if the GOP were to nominate a third Bush in a generation in 2016. It may not be fair to Jeb, but that’s just how it goes; he may well be the only Republican who would be almost guaranteed to lose the White House in 2016, no matter who the Democrats nominate.

Jeb Bush is both a talented politician and, we are learning now, a very lucky man.

Much has been made of his impressive tapping of the establishment donor coffers as this campaign has begun; while a two-term governor of a major state would be expected to do well in this game anyway, his status as a Bush has helped him to start at the top instead of at the bottom. Politicians new to the national scene, like Governors Walker, Perry and Martinez, are still being introduced to the donor class, while Jeb Bush has known them well for decades.

But even more important is luck, and that’s a problem for the party, because Jeb Bush’s luck has given him a path to the nomination that looks unreasonably easy, and may in fact set up the party for a fall in November. Consider:

There are, essentially, two wings in the Republican Party, the conservatives and the moderates. This is admittedly an oversimplification, but it is sufficient for a primary season analysis.

At the moment, there are only a few moderates in this race: Governors Bush and Christie, Senator Graham, and businessmen Trump and Fiorina. How is the moderate race shaking out?

Lindsey Graham is having trouble catching fire, at least somewhat because of the many times his “gangs of eight and fourteen” stabbed the Republican caucus in the back during his many years in the senate. Republicans remember that his near-clone, John McCain did poorly in 2008, and assume that Graham might be a repeat of the same. Chris Christie has fallen from grace as his governorship hasn’t turned out to be nearly as impressive as the fireball with which it began. He’s still terrific on the stump, but between his status as a so-so governor (whether fair or not) and a national party revulsion at his post-Sandy photo op tour that many think tipped the scales in 2012 to reelect Barack Obama, Christie’s presidential hopes aren’t developing nearly as well as most of us expected a year ago. Trump and Fiorina were always unlikely to go anywhere, but they are surprisingly campaigning as conservatives instead of as the moderates that their past history would indicate them to be, so even though the average Republican thinks of them as moderates, they have generally ceded that arena to the aforementioned governors and senator. As a result, Jeb Bush largely has the moderate field to himself. He may well be the only candidate for the moderate wing – or the only one with actual money, volunteers, and polling position – by the time New Hampshire and Iowa roll along.

By contrast, the conservative field is packed with popular leaders. Governors Scott Walker and Rick Perry are doing well, while fellow Governors Bobby Jindal, John Kasich, and Mike Pence may be waiting in the wings for an opportunity. Senators Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul are all pitching to different shares of the Right, all still doing well in their respective segments. Even outsiders Dr. Ben Carson, former Senator Rick Santorum, and former Governor Mike Huckabee seem to be making a credible pitch for tea party or evangelical segments of the Right.

At this writing, it looks likely that the conservative movement will be evenly split between at least four candidates by the time the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary arrive. Picture, for example, the conservative vote being evenly split five ways, between Walker, Cruz, Paul, Huckabee, and the all the also-rans at a point each.

The moderate voting block may be unified behind Jeb Bush, while the conservative block is splintered between an abundance of impressive, eloquent and principled candidates.

Conservatives have long complained about the primary calendar, and with good reason. There are states in which only declared, permanently self-identified Republicans can vote in a primary or caucus (known as “closed primary” states), and there are states in which anyone can show up and take a Republican ballot, whether they have ever identified themselves as a Republican or not (known as “open primary” states). In many of these, a person could have attended a Democratic party fundraiser in the morning and still show up without a tinge of guilt and take a Republican ballot that afternoon.

The first two states in the primary calendar are such “open primary” states. In fact, they could be viewed even more radically, as “wildly open primary” states, because of their special status as the first two states in the calendar.

People are raised in Iowa and New Hampshire to believe that they have a special obligation to participate in the presidential nomination process, just by virtue of living in these two states. If they know nothing of economics, foreign policy, history or political philosophy, that’s no barrier; they still feel a special duty to show up on election day and cast their uninformed vote based on how personable the candidates were when they met them at a diner, commuter stop, cookout or state fair.

In many other states – obviously in the closed primary states, but generally, in most states further along in the schedule – the only participants are the true believers – real Democrats in the Democratic primary, real Republicans in the Republican primary, and that’s as it should be, of course. Only people who know what a party stands for, and who generally identify with it, really have any business selecting that party’s standard-bearer.

But the popular culture of Iowa and New Hampshire invites two more groups into the primaries, two groups whose presence unduly pollutes the voting process: the people who don’t identify with a party but participate just because they’ve been told they should, and members of the opposition party who jump in because it’s a more interesting race.

This latter group varies from year to year; if Democrats have a real fight, fewer Democrats will take Republican ballots to meddle in that one, just as when Republicans have a real fight, fewer Republicans will take Democrat ballots to meddle in that one. But it’s always an issue to some extent.

Now, what do we think of the primary electorates in New Hampshire and Iowa? If it were just the real Republicans – the self-identified ones, ranging from conservative to moderate, from tea party to establishment – it would at least be a conservative-leaning electorate. But since these electorates are often populated with a third or more, even half sometimes, of students, independents, Democrats, and other non-Republicans, the electorate of these two early states is skewed against the conservative block from the start.

In short, with Jeb Bush likely having half the votes in those early states to himself, and the conservatives in the field splitting up the other half, it’s almost certain that the numbers will look something like this: Bush 35%, Walker 15%, Cruz 15%, Paul 15%, Huckabee 10%, and the also-rans.

Even though later states behave more rationally than the early ones, the winners of those early states are almost always propelled forward with such momentum – “Big Mo,” in fact, as Jeb’s father George H. W. referred to it in 1980 – that It’s almost inconceivable at this writing that Jeb Bush could lose the nomination.

And that is why, at this point, less than a year out, the Republican party faithful – the conservatives in particular – must call for two critical agreements:

First, the conservative movement needs to unify this year, long before the primary season actually begins. The GOP has only nominated two conservatives in the postwar period, and it happened both times by unity before the primary season began. In 1964, the conservatives pre-selected Senator Barry Goldwater as their champion (not a general election campaign to emulate, by the way!), and in 1980, the conservatives pre-selected Governor Ronald Reagan, and rode his nomination to two November landslides.

Only if the conservative movement can unify behind a single conservative frontrunner will there be a chance of beating the natural edge that the primary schedule gives to the moderate candidates.

And Second… and this may be even harder… the party must find a way to convince Jeb Bush to drop out, to give up his almost certain nomination, because he has to know… as all America knows… that the odds of the American electorate actually electing a third Bush to the White House in a generation are incredibly, painfully, slim.

At this writing, Jeb Bush has it. The calendar, the geography, the field all point to a Jeb Bush nomination. That doesn’t mean anyone’s forcing him on the country; it doesn’t mean there’s any dirty backroom dealmaking propelling him forward. There’s nothing underhanded about it at all. It’s just an unavoidable combination of circumstances. But the fact remains that it’s working out in Jeb Bush’s favor.

The problem – for him personally as well as for the rest of us – is that no matter how good or bad Jeb Bush is on the issues – no matter whether you or I agree with him on Common Core or Amnesty or taxes or spending or anything else – his last name, in all likelihood, renders him unelectable in November. That must be the first issue for a party to consider.

Can Jeb Bush be persuaded to drop out when the nomination is almost certainly his?

And so, fellow Americans, we must find conservative unity in this race, because only with the conservative movement unifying behind a single standardbearer to do we have a chance at both the nomination and the presidency in 2016.

John F. Di Leo is a Chicago based international trade compliance trainer. A former minor party official and activist, he served as Milwaukee County Republican Party Chairman in the mid-1990s and used to write campaign literature for candidates, and has now been a recovering politician for over seventeen years (but, like any addiction, you’re never really cured).

Permission is hereby granted to forward freely, provided it is uncut and the IR URL and byline are included. Follow John F. Di Leo on Facebook or LinkedIn, or on Twitter at @johnfdileo or at his own page at www.johnfdileo.com.

I really really tried to conjure up an appropriate reply here...only to reluctantly come to the conclusion that the writer is most probably correct.

Oh well, I’ve given up on the GOP anyway, but this still hurts.

I really really tried to conjure up an appropriate reply here...only to reluctantly come to the conclusion that the writer is most probably correct. Oh well, I’ve given up on the GOP anyway, but this still hurts.

Ted Cruz is the reply, the Constitution is the reason, and God is the answer.

The GOPe has taken itself out of the question.

Jeb Bush is a maggot.

We are lucky to have Cruz and Walker in the race, but we will need to coalesce behind one or the other early on in the primaries or the COC breaths will have succeeded in buying the presidency for Jebllary.

Right now all my money is going to Ted. I will be behind whomever is leading after the first three primaries/caucuses who is not named Jeb.

“...I really really tried to conjure up an appropriate reply here...only to reluctantly come to the conclusion that the writer is most probably correct...”

I’m of the same opinion. The path to a conservative victory is to coalesce around the best conservative candidate *early*. I’ll go with most anyone that is more conservative than Bush. I have my preference, but if we unify around someone else, I’ll go with it. I’m bloody desperate!

But we won’t. Worse yet, we know full well we won’t. It must be some sort of diagnosable compulsion...

Even here on FR, we’ll squabble, bicker, claim this one is more conservative than that one, and after it’s all over and done we will *then* (once it’s too late) realize most any of the more conservative candidates would have been far better than what we end up with.

So, as usual, We will form our circular firing squad and dismiss acceptably conservative candidates - not because we *can’t* agree, but because we *won’t* allow ourselves to agree. And it requires no outside (GOPe-Rino/HuffPo/Liberal-conspiracy) interference. We will do it ourselves.

Just dammit.

He's right about New Hampshire, though really, I'm not sure that the state is really that different from other states in the region. That is to say, people do vote because the New Hampshire primary is part of their culture, but they don't vote differently from other people in the Northeast.

I don't think he's right about Iowa, though. It's a caucus state -- you have to show some commitment and initiative to put up with all the rigamarole. The candidates who get the nod may not be your candidates (Huckabee, Santorum, Bush, Dole, Bush, Reagan), but they do represent something close to the base of the party, even down to the evangelical twist. McCain didn't win there. Neither did Romney.

The calendar, the geography, the field all point to a Jeb Bush nomination

The calendar and rules have been shaped to nominate the amnesty candidate that The RNC has been paid to deliver by The Cheap Labor Express. They own the levers of power within the GOP. There is a slight chance we can upset their apple cart but it will require every conservative get behind Ted Cruz. Not sure it can be done.

Why do you think that it’s a conspiracy? There’s no such evidence of a conspiracy.

When has the conservative movement EVER made a serious attempt to change the primary schedule to make it more rational.

The simple fact is, the conservative movement is too confident in the rightness of our message, and to impractical to admit that we need to concentrate on correcting the flaws in the process.

Most conservatives figure we just need to be better at explaining, and better at organizing. The fact is, we need to correct the errors in the rules.

But that doesn’t mean the moderates have “fixed” it against us. They haven’t. The right could easily unite and switch the primary state order, but we never even try.

I’ve watched the last two GOP primaries very closely. McCain was broke, flying coach by himself in June 2007 , about as popular as poison ivy after pushing amnesty TWICE, yet by March 2008, he’s the GOP nominee.
Mitt Romney, father of Romneycare, blueprint for Obamacare, father of gay-marriage who nobody wanted because he neutralised two of the biggest issues, yet by March 2012 he’s clinched the nomination before many red states voted.
Yes, I do think the RNC has the process rigged to get the nominee they want.
You watch, by next March Jebster will be the presumptive nominee and FreeRepublic will become a free-fire zone between the noseholders and real conservatives who will rightly refuse to vote for Jebster.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.