2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

jank

Brian? wrote: »

I agree, Jeb has the hard right already in his back pocket. Jeb ticks all the boxes for a GOP candidate, I've been predicting he'll get the nomination since 2012. The only part of the GOP he doesn't have squared away are the libertarians, Rand Paul might put up a fight for a few primaries and then fade away.

Wrong there, the hard right is generally thought of as the Tea Party within the GOP, who is no fan of Jeb Bush. Jeb Bush is actually seen by some as the establishment candidate (even though he has been out of politics 8 years) or a moderate candidate.

His record points to the latter with big achievements in education reform and environmental protection. He is still quite popular in Florida which is seen as a bell weather state. He is married to a Hispanic and himself speaks fluent Spanish. Hard right, he ain't. The hard right will want someone like Rubio, Cruz or the libertarian wing would want Paul. When the final list of nominations are out, Jeb Bush will be seen as one of the moderates, like Christie if he decides to run.

Black Swan

It's a long way before November 2016, but if forced to guess today, I see Jeb Bush vs. Hilliary Clinton. Don't have the slightest idea who each would pick as VP running mates.

eire4

jank wrote: »

Wrong there, the hard right is generally thought of as the Tea Party within the GOP, who is no fan of Jeb Bush. Jeb Bush is actually seen by some as the establishment candidate (even though he has been out of politics 8 years) or a moderate candidate.

His record points to the latter with big achievements in education reform and environmental protection. He is still quite popular in Florida which is seen as a bell weather state. He is married to a Hispanic and himself speaks fluent Spanish. Hard right, he ain't. The hard right will want someone like Rubio, Cruz or the libertarian wing would want Paul. When the final list of nominations are out, Jeb Bush will be seen as one of the moderates, like Christie if he decides to run.

I will agree that he tries to portray a moderate image. His record does not fit that though. He it was that made the big government move to pass a law in Florida to force the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube a move later deemed unconstitutional.
He cut taxes by some $19 B much of it to the benefit of big business and wealthy investors such as a repeal of the tax on investments. He had a school voucher syetm allowing students to use public money for private school tuition. That was later struck down by the state supreme court.
His one Florida programme aimed to end affirmative action in state contracting and university enrollment. He took over control of judicial nominees which previously had been shared with the bar association. He approved a choose life license plate to promote his abortion opposition. He signed the stand your ground law enhanced conceal carry gun laws. He thinks the jury is still out on climate change, opposed stem cell research and was a big proponent of privatization including prisons.

Black Swan

eire4 wrote: »

I will agree that he tries to portray a moderate image. His record does not fit that though. He it was that made the big government move to pass a law in Florida to force the reinsertion of Terri Schiavo's feeding tube a move later deemed unconstitutional.
He cut taxes by some $19 B much of it to the benefit of big business and wealthy investors such as a repeal of the tax on investments. He had a school voucher syetm allowing students to use public money for private school tuition. That was later struck down by the state supreme court.
His one Florida programme aimed to end affirmative action in state contracting and university enrollment. He took over control of judicial nominees which previously had been shared with the bar association. He approved a choose life license plate to promote his abortion opposition. He signed the stand your ground law enhanced conceal carry gun laws. He thinks the jury is still out on climate change, opposed stem cell research and was a big proponent of privatization including prisons.

With this Florida record as governor, he is not a moderate.

jank

If you look at Jeb's Bushs record in isolation and not on the whole you can make any number of arguments on how hard right wing he is. The fact is that he was elected twice in a state that is seen as a bell weather (along with Ohio) which can swing both to the GOP and Dem would indicate that he enjoyed support of the moderates on both sides. In fact he was the only republican ever to be elected to two terms as Governor of Florida.

All one has to do is Google Jeb Bush and RINO to see what actual hard right wing republicans think of him.
Take this hilarious one sided traditional progressive view on him for example
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/tea-partiers-are-right-jeb-is-a-rino-20141218

Of course, if you are in the Elizabeth Warren camp, then every one to the right of Hillary Clinton is a hard ring wing demigod.

Lastly, I do not know how one could classify things like school vouchers (taking kids from the worse schools in the state to some of the better ones) and ending affirmative action (California a very progressive state did this in 1996) as 'Hard' right wing policies.

Never mind his record on environmental issues and raising education standards in Florida during his tenure.

eire4

jank wrote: »

If you look at Jeb's Bushs record in isolation and not on the whole you can make any number of arguments on how hard right wing he is. The fact is that he was elected twice in a state that is seen as a bell weather (along with Ohio) which can swing both to the GOP and Dem would indicate that he enjoyed support of the moderates on both sides. In fact he was the only republican ever to be elected to two terms as Governor of Florida.

All one has to do is Google Jeb Bush and RINO to see what actual hard right wing republicans think of him.
Take this hilarious one sided traditional progressive view on him for example
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/tea-partiers-are-right-jeb-is-a-rino-20141218

Of course, if you are in the Elizabeth Warren camp, then every one to the right of Hillary Clinton is a hard ring wing demigod.

Lastly, I do not know how one could classify things like school vouchers (taking kids from the worse schools in the state to some of the better ones) and ending affirmative action (California a very progressive state did this in 1996) as 'Hard' right wing policies.

Never mind his record on environmental issues and raising education standards in Florida during his tenure.

I wouldn't be bringing up his education record too much as it just shows his far right policy approach. Yes test scores did inprove in his tenure in Florida modestly it must be said but yes they did improve. However the drop out rate increased substantially (high stakes testing?) and the Florida per pupil spending rate was near the nations worst. Also his voucher programme was right out of the far right play book of attack public education by giving vouchers to allow kids from struggling public schools to move and use public money to go to private schools. In fact Bush's own FEE organization has played a very big role in efforts to privatize education at the state level as much as possible since 2008. This agenda includes using taxpayer money to pay for vouchers to attend private schools, expanding charter schools and even virtual charter schools.

Brian?

jank wrote: »

Wrong there, the hard right is generally thought of as the Tea Party within the GOP, who is no fan of Jeb Bush. Jeb Bush is actually seen by some as the establishment candidate (even though he has been out of politics 8 years) or a moderate candidate.

His record points to the latter with big achievements in education reform and environmental protection. He is still quite popular in Florida which is seen as a bell weather state. He is married to a Hispanic and himself speaks fluent Spanish. Hard right, he ain't. The hard right will want someone like Rubio, Cruz or the libertarian wing would want Paul. When the final list of nominations are out, Jeb Bush will be seen as one of the moderates, like Christie if he decides to run.

Clearly we have different definitions of "hard right". I'm talking about traditionally conservative, not the new fangled type.


The Tea party message is seriously muddied and confused.

jank

Brian? wrote: »

Clearly we have different definitions of "hard right". I'm talking about traditionally conservative, not the new fangled type.


The Tea party message is seriously muddied and confused.

Is hard right to you anything Republican, or someone who has the name 'Bush'?
Jeb Bush has nothing to do with the Tea Party, that would be Cruz and Rubio who would be more to the right than Jeb Bush, like I said before and proves my point. So if Jeb Bush is hard right, what are is Rubio and Cruz and the Tea Party? Extreme hard right? :pac:

jank

eire4 wrote: »

I wouldn't be bringing up his education record too much as it just shows his far right policy approach. Yes test scores did inprove in his tenure in Florida modestly it must be said but yes they did improve. However the drop out rate increased substantially (high stakes testing?) and the Florida per pupil spending rate was near the nations worst. Also his voucher programme was right out of the far right play book of attack public education by giving vouchers to allow kids from struggling public schools to move and use public money to go to private schools. In fact Bush's own FEE organization has played a very big role in efforts to privatize education at the state level as much as possible since 2008. This agenda includes using taxpayer money to pay for vouchers to attend private schools, expanding charter schools and even virtual charter schools.

Well if taking kids who are poor or with disabilities from some of the worst public schools in the state and giving them vouchers so that they can go to a better school of their choice is 'far right' then clearly we are on different wavelengths. I can never understand the opposition by those on the left who claim to represent the poor and disadvantaged to vouchers and charter schools which actually work. Teacher Unions of course hate these as it diminishes their power and leverage but they do help education standards of the most vulnerable. Of course the word 'private' is a dirty word in some circles and is just thrown out there, without actually looking at the facts and data to show that, yes they do have better educational standards, achievements and on the whole work better than public schools.

Anyway...

Test scores improved by more than 500% of the national average, if that is modest in your book you must have very high standards.

Lastly..

It is like saying someone is 'far right' or 'hard right' without explaining why is reason enough to put them in a nice box to label and castigate. Such is politics :rolleyes:

eire4

jank wrote: »

Well if taking kids who are poor or with disabilities from some of the worst public schools in the state and giving them vouchers so that they can go to a better school of their choice is 'far right' then clearly we are on different wavelengths. I can never understand the opposition by those on the left who claim to represent the poor and disadvantaged to vouchers and charter schools which actually work. Teacher Unions of course hate these as it diminishes their power and leverage but they do help education standards of the most vulnerable. Of course the word 'private' is a dirty word in some circles and is just thrown out there, without actually looking at the facts and data to show that, yes they do have better educational standards, achievements and on the whole work better than public schools.

Anyway...

Test scores improved by more than 500% of the national average, if that is modest in your book you must have very high standards.

Lastly..

It is like saying someone is 'far right' or 'hard right' without explaining why is reason enough to put them in a nice box to label and castigate. Such is politics :rolleyes:

Again test scores did increase but now it is becoming a question as to why they did as Floridas results have been struggling. High school graduation rates did rise under Bush but remained substantially lower then other big diverse states such as California New York and Ohio. ACT's scores remained poor. Floridas voters passed an amendment in 2002 to limit class size. There was significantly more money from property taxes as a result of the property boom that coincided with Bush's time in office. Per pupil spending jumped 22% during his tenure it has fallen since as have test scores. In line with Floridas spending rate per pupil being near the worst in the nation.
Annual state studies have shown that low income students moving to private schools using taxpayer money did not do any better at reading or math then their peers. You say private schools are better. These schools however serve siginficantly fewer poorer kids, fewer special needs kids and fewer kids still learning English so it is only natural there scores look better.
A recent Harvard study concluded that the supposed link between Bush's polices and gains in scores is only anecdotal not definitive and the gains have not been sustained.


My oppostion is not against charter schools or private schools it is the defunding of public education by transfering money toward private schools. Public education already has an issue with funding being largely dependant on property taxes which thus produces a circle of poverty in schools in poor ares and the reverse in wealthy areas.
I have noted that one of the Republicans battle cries is small government something that neither the party nor Bush is as he showed in the Terri Schiavo case. They scream government is bad yet then go ahead and look for policies that will make things worse such as taking taxpayer money away from public education in this case and then turn around and say look we told you government was bad after the fact. Charter schools pay teachers on average 10-15% less. You pay lower wages over time and you will attract lower quality employees. Charter schools have higher employee turnover ratio's with all the compliations that arise from that. There are some things in my opinion that should not be run by for profit companies and education is one of them. Bush loves privitization not just in education but period. His record in Florida showed him to be firmly far right. The likes of Cruz or other Tea party guys I would not call far right and would not say Jeb Bush is on the same level as them overall. I would consider the Tea Party really to be the lunatic fringe never mind extreme.

AnotherYear

Who is most likely to win, the Republicans or the Democrats?

eire4

AnotherYear wrote: »

Who is most likely to win, the Republicans or the Democrats?

If your talking about the 2016 presidential election that is a tough call to make this early. The turnout in the last midterm elections was shameful the lowest in over 70 years which speaks to the discontent at best if not outright disgust that the majority of Americans feel toward the dysfunctional 2 party politcal cartel in Washington. In the end who wins may come down to a simple head count of how many people actually vote. The higher the turnout the more it favours Democrats the lower the turnout the more it favours the Republicans.

Brian?

jank wrote: »

Is hard right to you anything Republican, or someone who has the name 'Bush'?
Jeb Bush has nothing to do with the Tea Party, that would be Cruz and Rubio who would be more to the right than Jeb Bush, like I said before and proves my point. So if Jeb Bush is hard right, what are is Rubio and Cruz and the Tea Party? Extreme hard right? :pac:

My point is that Tea Party do not have a unified ethos or message. Some are traditional conservatives like Rubio but more are libertarian leaning. I wouldn't consider libertarians hard right, the don't really fit in the left/right paradigm. I find the whole Tea Party a bit strange, it's a party within a party.

This is all beside the point, Jeb will take the nomination if he wants it. It's what the GOP establishment want.

Brian?

AnotherYear wrote: »

Who is most likely to win, the Republicans or the Democrats?

Depends on the economy. Good= Dems. Bad = GOP.

eire4

Brian? wrote: »

My point is that Tea Party do not have a unified ethos or message. Some are traditional conservatives like Rubio but more are libertarian leaning. I wouldn't consider libertarians hard right, the don't really fit in the left/right paradigm. I find the whole Tea Party a bit strange, it's a party within a party.

This is all beside the point, Jeb will take the nomination if he wants it. It's what the GOP establishment want.

Very valid point you make about Libertarians. Socially they very often are more to the left but economically they are the opposite and more to the right so its hard to really put them into the straight Left v Right model. It will be interesting to see how the actual Libertarian Party does over the next cycle. Chances are not much as both the Republicans and the Democrats do not seem likely to allow it.

jank

Brian? wrote: »

My point is that Tea Party do not have a unified ethos or message. Some are traditional conservatives like Rubio but more are libertarian leaning. I wouldn't consider libertarians hard right, the don't really fit in the left/right paradigm. I find the whole Tea Party a bit strange, it's a party within a party.

This is all beside the point, Jeb will take the nomination if he wants it. It's what the GOP establishment want.

Well he has the establishment name and people will put him in that box, but I don't think he is a classic establishment candidate that some say he is. Many in the establishment would say he is too liberal/moderate for example.

Brian?

jank wrote: »

Well he has the establishment name and people will put him in that box, but I don't think he is a classic establishment candidate that some say he is. Many in the establishment would say he is too liberal/moderate for example.

Jeb Bush is as liberal as Richard Nixon or Reagan. In fact I'd say Nixon was closer to the middle than Bush.

Don't mix up the extremely vocal minority of the GOP with the quiet majority. His record is classic establishment republican.

jank

Brian? wrote: »

Jeb Bush is as liberal as Richard Nixon or Reagan. In fact I'd say Nixon was closer to the middle than Bush.

Don't mix up the extremely vocal minority of the GOP with the quiet majority. His record is classic establishment republican.

Yet, why do so many on the right then call him a RINO.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2014/12/18/rino-hunting-policy-and-history-are-against-jeb-bush-n1933627

He supports amnesty for illegal immigrants and common core for education. Not exactly classic current establishment republicanism. Also, one cannot dismiss his electoral record in Florida, where he also did quite well with african americans and won the majority of Hispanic votes in the state. Again, to summarise on somethings he is classic GOP but on many other things he is not and seems to put pragmatism on play. When the final roll call of the GOP candidates are out there, he will be one of the more moderate and pragmatic voices up there.

Brian?

jank wrote: »

Yet, why do so many on the right then call him a RINO.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2014/12/18/rino-hunting-policy-and-history-are-against-jeb-bush-n1933627

Why do the call him a RINO? Because they want to blacken his name to beat him ahead of a campaign. It's a tactic all sides used, say something enough times and it sticks.

He supports amnesty for illegal immigrants and common core for education. Not exactly classic current establishment republicanism. Also, one cannot dismiss his electoral record in Florida, where he also did quite well with african americans and won the majority of Hispanic votes in the state. Again, to summarise on somethings he is classic GOP but on many other things he is not and seems to put pragmatism on play. When the final roll call of the GOP candidates are out there, he will be one of the more moderate and pragmatic voices up there.

On most things he's classic Republican. Except he shifted his positions to get elected in a state where Latinos and African Americans have a huge influence. This is what makes him a perfect GOP candidate.

You cannot win the Presidency by turning out the GOP vote anymore, you need seeing voters. Jeb can win those votes. He's the establishment candidate because he can win. Rand Paul cannot, Rubio or Cruz might be able to.

20Cent

Sarah Palin speaking at an NRA conference.
I defy anyone to watch this and not thank God almighty she didn't make it to the Whitehouse.

"Waterboarding is baptism for terrorist"

http://youtu.be/lVlQTYDFTTo

Brian?

20Cent wrote: »

Sarah Palin speaking at an NRA conference.
I defy anyone to watch this and not thank God almighty she didn't make it to the Whitehouse.

"Waterboarding is baptism for terrorist"

http://youtu.be/lVlQTYDFTTo

Watched the first minute. Couldn't take it anymore.

Ludo

20Cent wrote: »

Sarah Palin speaking at an NRA conference.
I defy anyone to watch this and not thank God almighty she didn't make it to the Whitehouse.

"Waterboarding is baptism for terrorist"

http://youtu.be/lVlQTYDFTTo

But she might yet...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/01/24/palin-say-shes-seriously-interested-in-2016-campaign/

:eek:

Black Swan

Brian? wrote: »

Watched the first minute. Couldn't take it anymore.

Ludo wrote: »

But she might yet...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/01/24/palin-say-shes-seriously-interested-in-2016-campaign/

:eek:

Sarah Palin appeals to a specific segment of the Republican party, mostly Tea Party advocates, but it is not substantial enough to make her a serious contender for the 2016 GOP primaries. To be serious, she needs to raise hundreds of millions of dollars of donor monies, and such monies will be going to either Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, or Chris Christie, so the well will be dry for Palin. More than likely she is making this election noise to build up her audience and ratings for her cable show, just like Trump did before the 2012 elections for his Apprentice show.

Ludo

Absolutely. She hasn't a hope and is just getting some free publicity as usual. Twould be hilarious if she got the nomination though. Even funnier if she won the presidency... Funny for about 2 minutes until the horror would take over.

PopePalpatine

Ludo wrote: »

Absolutely. She hasn't a hope and is just getting some free publicity as usual. Twould be hilarious if she got the nomination though. Even funnier if she won the presidency... Funny for about 2 minutes until the horror would take over.

On the other hand, share prices in shelter construction companies will skyrocket.

jank

PopePalpatine wrote: »

On the other hand, share prices in shelter construction companies will skyrocket.

Oxymoron.

Paleface

Mitt Romney announces he is not running. I think he really wanted to but was told he wouldn't be the number one preference by GOP donators. Jeb Bush will more than likely win the nomination now I think.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-31062739

Black Swan

Paleface wrote: »

Mitt Romney announces he is not running. I think he really wanted to but was told he wouldn't be the number one preference by GOP donators. Jeb Bush will more than likely win the nomination now I think.

If Romney has officially withdrawn, then it really does look like Jeb Bush will be the primary GOP 2016 candidate.

eire4

Black Swan wrote: »

If Romney has officially withdrawn, then it really does look like Jeb Bush will be the primary GOP 2016 candidate.

The Koch brothers held a billionaires summit recently in California behind closed doors. Given the enormous sums of money they spend under the table so to speak through the various not for profits they use their backing of any specific candidate on the Republican side will possibly be decisive in the Republican primaries if they back a candidate.
What strikes me again given how much dark money they pour into election campaigns is that this event was held in secret just as much of their money is funded into campaigns they support in secret.
If their agenda is really so good for most Americans why all the secrecy?

jank

If this secret meeting really did take place then it's not much of a secret. I am always fascinated by the will to believe is pseudo conspiracies by extremes of both wings.