Inside Report: Jeb For Veep?

RealClearPolitics ^ | March 12, 2005 | Robert Novak

[Tench_Coxe]

"The very thought of Jeb running will be his death sentence. Rats will never tolerate such a dynastic move. "

Its not just Democrats that won't tolerate dynastic moves.

[normy]

Would Queen Hillary be dynastic? Would Jeb vs. Hillary mean a defeat for Jeb? I doubt it. Would 1.5 million voters decide to vote for a Dem solely on the issue of family name? I seriously doubt it.

Jeb is actually a stronger candidate than George W. was.

[bert]

.....Thought it was the voters who got to decide.....

Sirhan Sirhan

[AlGone2001]

"I think a rust belt VP for the Republicans would be a great move also. Pennsylvania, Michigan or Ohio would be huge."

Would Engler be a good choice?

[bert]

....if these guys were named Kennedy and were Democrats the media would be falling all over themselves to promote "Camelot"......

They aren't named Kennedy. The reverse is true. The cities will revolt if Jeb is nominated.

All this has nothing to do with his abilities or record. His obstacle is his name.

I like the man and would vote for him

[AlGone2001]

"The cities will revolt if Jeb is nominated."

What cities? The large inner-cities that already wouldn't vote for him?

[normy]

I would be willing to bet that before the campaign was over, people would be wondering why the media attacks this guy solely on his name and ignore his great record. In the end it would be good for Jeb.

Do you think there is a state W. won in the last election that would ignore the Jeb Bush record and vote for the Dem candidate who undoubtedly is far less accomplished? I really just don't think it would happen. Bush would win every southern state, his Hispanic wife and charismatic son would swing the majority Hispanic vote to Bush, that helps in California and Colorado as well as New Mexico. Jeb Bush would win and probably in a land slide.

[Thermalseeker]

Didn't know they had a say in it. Thought it was the voters who got to decide.

Actually, it's the delegates in the Electoral College who decide......

[Wonder Warthog]

"A lousy ticket; Jeb is far more qualified then Condi."

Yes, but Jeb isn't electable in 2008. It would be perceived as "too many Bushes in a row", and I agree with that perception. It WOULD be "too many Bushes in a row".

[AlGone2001]

All can be sure there'll be a southerner or a Californian on the winning ticket in 2008.

Consider these winning tickets:

2004:George W. Bush-Former Governor of Texas
2000:George W. Bush-Former Governor of Texas
1996:Clinton-Former Governor of Arkansas
1992:Clinton-Former Governor of Arkansas
1988:George H.W. Bush-ties to Texas, and former VP to President Reagan of California
1984:Reagan-Former governor of California
1980:Reagan-Former governor of California
1976:Carter-Former governor of Georgia
1972:Nixon-Former Senator from California (served a short term), and former VP to President Eisenhower.
1968:Nixon-Former Senator from California (served a short term), and former VP to President Eisenhower.
1964:Johnson-Former US Senator from Texas (for twelve years), and formerly VP to President John Kennedy.
1960:Kennedy-Active US Senator

A few things can be observed from history for all winners back to 1960.

1-There has not been a President who came directly from the US Senate since 1960.

2-Every winning ticket since 1960 has had at least one person from either the south or California. In fact, it goes back further-Nixon was Eisenhower's VP, and Eisenhower served from 1953-1961.

3-Seven of the last eight winners were state governors (two for George W. Bush, two for President Clinton, two for President Reagan, and one for President Carter).

[normy]

If Jeb was a Patrick or Ted Kennedy type, just cashing in on the name, then I would agree. Having the name Bush is no reason to vote for him. Jeb however has a great record and to disqualify him because his name is Bush seems just as bad as voting for him due to his last name.

All things considered, he is the best candidate for President. He has proven himself outside of the name Bush and is a better candidate than W. was in 2000. He is actually a better candidate than Clinton, Gore, W. Bush, Dole and Kerry were. Would he be a better president than W.? Who knows, but as candidates go he is very good.

[normy]

I don't know enough about Engler, but I do know this. Candidates must be perceived as real men, phonies we spot right away. The VP spot usually doesn't get you any states, but a popular rust belt governor might, if he is real.

I say this because so many Senators from both parties seem to be phonies after a few years in the Senate.

[floridavoter2]

How about Jeb Bush/Rick Santorum for 2008??? That would shore up FL and PA electoral votes for sure. Certainly the media would go ballistic w/ 2 practicing Catholics on the ticket...

[eddie willers]

Rats will never tolerate such a dynastic move.

And neither will I.

Not only no, but HELL no!

[normy]

Thats my dream ticket, and I'm not even Catholic.

[ARCADIA]

It WOULD be "too many Bushes in a row".

A rose by any other name...

I would rather run a competent candidate then an incompetent one. Who cares about the name; who can we run who has more competence then Jeb?

[Wonder Warthog]

"I would rather run a competent candidate then an incompetent one. Who cares about the name; who can we run who has more competence then Jeb?"

Guiliani--but he's too liberal for me.

[Williams]

It makes me sick to read garbage with no basis in reality. There is ZERO reason another "Bush" cannot run for president. Are they afraid people can't tell them apart? If so that's fine, because this one just won.

[Wonder Warthog]

"If Jeb was a Patrick or Ted Kennedy type, just cashing in on the name, then I would agree. Having the name Bush is no reason to vote for him. Jeb however has a great record and to disqualify him because his name is Bush seems just as bad as voting for him due to his last name."

I dislike family dynasties of any flavor. The US has plenty of qualified folks without getting into the "hereditary leader" schtick.

[Williams]

"Bush probably would be the front-runner for the party's next presidential nomination if he only had a different last name."

Bush would be the front runner except only for the fact he keeps saying he won't run. Period. Gee, he's a highly successful governor who got positive press during the hurricanes, and because he's the Prez's brother, and he isn't viewed as wanting the presidency as an inheritance.

And there's that little matter of the state of Florida being crucial to any victory.