Bush said after criticizing the deal itself before a crowd of 100 peopleTo Jeb 100 people is a crowd.
Posted on 07/21/2015 12:43:37 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Suddenly, the gloves are off between Scott Walker and Jeb Bush.
Surprisingly, Bush threw the first punch, sparking a back-and-forth between the two leading Republican candidates in early-state polls, both eager to highlight what they see as the other’s fatal flaw — Bush as the establishment shill and Walker as the foreign policy lightweight.
It started during a town hall in Nevada Friday, when Bush took an unprovoked shot at Walker, portraying him as unserious and unsophisticated over a promise he made in his announcement speech last Monday to repeal the nuclear deal with Iran “on the very first day in office.”
“One thing that I won’t do is just say, as a candidate, ‘I’m going to tear up the agreement on the first day,’” Bush said after criticizing the deal itself before a crowd of 100 people. “That’s great, that sounds great but maybe you ought to check in with your allies first, maybe you ought to appoint a secretary of state, maybe secretary of defense, you might want to have your team in place before you take an act like that.”
Speaking to reporters afterward, Bush doubled down. “If you’re running for president, you know, I think it’s important to be mature and thoughtful about this,” he said, without referring to Walker by name.
Far from being put on the defensive, Walker’s campaign saw an opening to go after Bush as someone too plodding, in Walker’s view, to be a tough commander in chief.
“I believe that a president shouldn’t wait to act until they put a Cabinet together or for a certain period of time,” Walker said on Saturday. “I believe that they should be prepared to act on the very first day they take office.”
And Walker went even further, telling reporters he’d be open to authorizing military action against Iran hours after the oath.
“It’s very possible, God forbid that this would happen, but it’s very possible that the next president could be called on to take aggressive actions, including military actions, on their very first day in office, and I don’t want a president who is not prepared to act on Day One.”
This particular argument, likely to spill into the first GOP debate next month, splits right down the party’s traditional fault line separating its grass roots and establishment wings and will likely serve to harden the perceptions primary voters already have about the two candidates.
It also lays bare Walker and Bush’s mutual disregard for each other that predates the current spat over Iran.
Bush’s political ethos — his stated philosophy of refusing to pander to the right to win the primary only to become unelectable in the general election — is itself an implicit rebuke of Walker, who has flipped his positions on immigration and Common Core to better align with the primary electorate (the two issues for which Bush remains opposite the prevailing GOP orthodoxy).
For his part, Walker views Bush as a scion of a tarnished political dynasty, another establishment moderate who, like Mitt Romney before him, will struggle to excite the conservative base should he become the GOP nominee.
“It’s going to be a nonstop slugfest between these two,” said Rick Wilson, a GOP strategist who’s advised presidential campaigns. “The Iran deal has been universally condemned by the Republican side. It’ just a matter of whose condemnation resonates.”
Walker first said in March he’d immediately roll back the Iran agreement, months before it was finalized. His remark hardly stood out in a crowded primary field replete with hawkish candidates reflecting the concerns of a primary electorate focused on foreign policy and addressing emerging global threats.
Bush, who blasted the Iran deal as “appeasement” in a reaction last week that fully aligns with the rest of the GOP field, opted to separate himself from Walker based on a literal reading of the “Day One” promise — notable, a Bush ally said, for a candidate who is “deeply competitive but mostly tries to avoid confrontations with other candidates.”
The verbal scuffle got online tongues wagging.
The Weekly Standard issued a long takeout of the dispute [Stephen F. Hayes], and Max Boot, a fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in Commentary Magazine that a Republican Party dispute even more significant than the Donald Trump fiasco was unfolding.
Boot gave points to each side.
“Bush is right that unraveling the accord won’t be simple — and not only because it will take a while for the next administration to get its foreign policy team in place,” he wrote.
While Bush may be right on the substance, Walker might also be right in terms of the politics, continued Boot, who has advised Bush and Walker but remains unaffiliated.
“Symbolically Walker is sending the right message of resolute opposition to the deal, and Bush is (inadvertently, I hope) creating doubts about whether opposition to the deal will be a defining feature of his administration,” he wrote.
Walker’s advisers say the Wisconsin governor is not off his rocker by saying he could take dramatic actions on Day One. They pointed out that Walker, who’s been meeting for months with foreign policy advisers, could effectively plot out the first 45 days of his administration during the transition period prior to taking office.
Bush responded to Walker’s criticism with a new statement Sunday reiterating his opposition to the Iran deal, and drawing attention back to his larger point that a new president, however prepared and determined, can’t credibly undermine Iran or a multilateral agreement on their own.
“I have repeatedly said it is a terrible deal,” Bush said in a statement, urging Congress to block the deal and promising, if that fails, to employ a “comprehensive strategy” to get the U.S. out of it.
“It will require sustained diplomatic efforts to put significant financial, diplomatic and military pressure on Iran to change its behavior,” Bush said. “And because of the massive sanctions relief provided by this terrible deal, the impact of unilateral U.S. sanctions will be limited and it will be important to work with our allies to reimpose multilateral sanctions and pressure.”
Both campaigns believe the quarrel serves their candidate well. But in the early rounds of what’s sure to be a raucous primary fight, projecting toughness, even at the expense of nuance, may carry more punch.
“I think Jeb and his team wanted to go out of their way to show how sophisticated they are, and implicitly paint Walker and his team as rubes who don’t understand how things really work in Washington,” said Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard who has not endorsed a candidate, but has been critical of Bush. “Walker was smart to hit back.
“Bush seems more Bush-like, and Walker seems more Reagan-like; and being more Reagan-like is probably a little better in a Republican primary. I think Walker showed a certain toughness and confidence in being willing to mix it up with Bush, and that toughness usually serves politicians well.”
If Walker dont fry Yeb.... he doesnt deserve to be a candidate,,,
I’ve got a feeling Jeb is desperate to get some attention.
He sees Trump getting it by being brash, so he probably thinks that’s the way to go.
What Bush didn’t notice, is that Trump hasn’t picked out Conservatives to level his ire at. Naturally Jeb didn’t pick up on that, so now he’s lobbing grenades into his own tent.
The last president Bush never impressed me intellectually, but compared to Jeb the man was brilliant.
If the next generation of the Bushes sinks any lower, we’re talking some serious slippage back towards prehistoric levels, in just a few short generations.
Heb Bush is so boring. I know we don’t elect a president based on personality - or do we? We, at least. want him to have one. Bush needs to take a peso and buy one. He is acting like he is the front runner, and as Gomer Pyle would say.......surprise, surprise, surprise - he isn’t. Notice how he talks like he knows what a president should do. None of them really know until they get into the Oval Office because things change and come at you on a daily basis. It’s good to have some outlines for what ifs, but, for him to say this is what a president should or shouldn’t do - just rubs me the wrong way. Heck, HE rubs me the wrong way.
Bush said after criticizing the deal itself before a crowd of 100 peopleTo Jeb 100 people is a crowd.
When you're in the sack for Bush I suppose it's impossible to be honest, but 'surprisingly'? How about desperately or inevitably or expectedly?
A RINO grudge match.
I don’t want either of them...
Are you ignoring everything Walker has done as governor? I don’t think he’s a RINO.
This election cycle is becoming a Barnun & Bailey Circus. They are all throwing darts at each other, and so far, only Trumnp’s darts are hitting the target. It will be interesting to see who ends up with the nomination. If it’s Heb - count me out. Ditto with Rubio and the other pikers. Only three have my attention at this point.
Maybe Bush would be more comfortable in a democrat candidacy.
“Walker as the foreign policy lightweight.”
Anyone that can get rid of the Union, which is the equivalent of the mafia, is not a lightweight. We already know Jeb’s foreign policy as far as illegals go. So no thank you.
As long as you have been here, you should know better than to post garbage words like that...
He is acting like he is the front runner, and as Gomer Pyle would say.......surprise, surprise, surprise - he isn’t.
Actually Yeb (is ) the Gomer Pyle of this contest..
Walker and Bush trade blows on the campaign trail.
FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this wisconsin interest ping list.
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.