Mephisto2

REF:http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Bus...568235186.html

Can you imagine?

Whilst I accept there is nothing to prevent such a step, it just kinda makes me a bit uneasy. I don't know much about Jeb Bush, apart from the negative publicity I've seen about him. It's just the idea of one family controlling the presidency of the US for 16 years. Seems a bit... undesireable.


Mr Mephisto


PS - It's about time the PB got a new thread.

Ustwo

I like Jeb and I think he would make a fine president.

I don't think he should run in 2008. That would be too much of a dynasty thing for my taste (not that it would stop me from voting for him should he win the nomination).

America could do a lot worse than Jeb come 2008.

One person comes to mind....

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Ilow

The time is never right for this. To my knowledge he's no more or less qualified than his brother, though. I'm sure he's getting pressure, even now, from some groups to run in '08.

__________________
"Religion is the one area of our discourse in which it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about"
--Sam Harris

samcol

Wow I can't believe this, the election for 2008 is already ruined. I get to choose from Hillary vs. Jeb or Condi, or Gulliani, or Arnold if he gets his way, or (insert neo-con here). Similar to last election, conservatives will succumb to the anyone but Hillary, as the Liberals did against Bush in 2004. Of course most Liberals will vote for Hillary because she's the only viable option from the Democrats camp for 2008.

I can only hope that more people look towards third parties.

pan6467

It's been obvious for at least 4 years that is what members of the GOP have been wanting, why it should surprise anyone is beyond me. And it is no different than what Papa Joe had planned for the Kennedy family.

Although I am seeing Condeelza '08 bumper stickers all over....... lol..... a little early isn't it?

The question is, unfortunately, who do the Dems have???? I cannot nor will ever vote for Hilary. I like many Dems. love Bill and think he was never given the chance to thrive.... but Hilary is a joke.

Truly, Trump has a good chance and I truly believe would make a great president in that he could bring both parties together.......

Gen. (ret.) Clark is a strong candidate for the Dem nomination and Dean is... however, I don't think either of them are strong enough to win the presidency.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Ustwo

I would love a Condi vrs Hilary in 2008 run more than any other.

VS

The implications for both parties would be tremendous.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Mephisto2

Well, partly true. I believe Joe Kennedy was grooming his eldest son for the Presidency and JFK was "second choice". I believe that "Papa Joe" was long dead by the time Robert Kennedy's attempt was cut short by his assassination.

But regardless of motivation, the fact remains that the Kennedys had less than one term in the White House. Quite a bit different from three, maybe four, by the Bushs. [what an amusing plural!).

This is very interesting. Why so much anti-Hillary feeling? I honestly can't, or don't, understand it. What subtleties am I missing over here?

Also, I didn't realize she was even considering running for the Presidency. Personally I think it would be cool to have a woman President of the United States.

You're kidding me, right? Donald Trump? President?

Holy Sweet Mother of God... that would be worse than Arnold! LOL


I like Clark, from what little I know of him. But he got kinda steamrolled in the last election, didn't he?

Why can't the Dems just find a nice, centrist, white male from the Southern States? Bill v2...


Mr Mephisto

samcol

What's so great about bring both parties together? How about bringing the American people together for once. We just saw a bi-partisan fillibuster agreement and how long did that last. I think the American people are hungry for a real leader, although I have no idea where this person could come from. It definetly will not come from a Jeb Bush...

Ustwo

Because the party nomination is dominated by the far left. The Dems had 3 centrists running last election, one of which I would have even felt good about seeing president. They all got destroyed. Howard Dean set the tone early and everyone had to 'out left' Dean. Deans only fault was the electability issue, had he been 6'5" and good looking I'll bet you he would have won the nomination.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Mephisto2

Interesting perspective and commentary. Thanks.


BTW, "far left" in the US means a little to the right of centre... right?


Mr Mephisto

shakran

I must be confused. Surely you're not accusing Kerry of being good looking

Dean's problem was his "yeahhh" cheer which CNN (you know, part of that "liberal media" conspiracy) joyfully played over 200 times in a 24 hour period, making it look like Dean was a whack job instead of a guy who just suffered a defeat and was trying to rally his supporters. And, not to be eclipsed by CNN, the other networks lost no time in jumping on board.

IMO Dean was infinitely more electable than Kerry. He has a personality, and there's no way he'd have stood there letting the Bush camp launch attack after attack with no rebuttals.

samcol

I agree, Dean was definetly the guy to beat Bush. How did Kerry ever get that far? He was such a weak candidate.

shakran

LOL. Ain't that the truth!

jorgelito

Hmmm.....what about McCain? I think he'd make a good candidate regardless of party affiliation.

So, McCain-Rice ticket would be "reasonable".

I've heard Hillary-Obama which is kind of "crazy" but cool in a way. I don't think they could win though, America is still too conservative and "white" to accept that ticket.

Ustwo

Actually I think the true 'far left' has been making a lot of headway in the democratic party. Which is why Bush is president today. I hope they keep moving left, way left.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

samcol

As opposed to how far your Republicans have moved to the left? What ever happened to the conservatives being for small limited government? Bush's budget makes Clinton look like fiscal conservative. When will you realize that the republicans are moving steadily to the left, just as the Democrats are. Again, Jeb will just be more of the same.

shakran

The only trouble is that Bush and his fan club are so far to the right that just about anything looks leftist to them. Back during the campaign I had Bush workers tell me Reagan was far too liberal. Anyone that views Reagan as left of center has a grossly distorted notion of where center lies.

Just look at Iraq. If you're in favor of the war, you're a moderate conservative. If you're not entirely sure the war was such a hot idea, you're an unpatriotic leftist hippie who wants to get soldiers killed. The name calling from the right has stopped being seen as unusually childish and has become the norm. It's gotten to the point now where if people don't hide their liberal views, they're shunned.

It's a disgraceful situation, and frankly conservatives who participate in it should be ashamed. Somehow they've managed to trick the american people into thinking that petty insults and petulant name calling (freedom fries ringing any bells here?) are acceptable forms of political discourse. I, for one, will be happy when adult behavior resurfaces on the political scene.

Elphaba

I was prepared to vote for him until he got knocked out of the running by standing up to the far right religious leadership and some dirty tricks by the Bush campaign. I'm hoping to have a second chance in 2008.

I respect Hillary and I believe she could be a very good president. I also believe that we don't need to go through the billary hate fest once again. It's time to mend fences and come together again. My hope is on McCain to achieve this.

jorgelito

Good insight there.

So, since we're playing "make-believe hypothetical", what about a McCain-Hillary ticket? Or even a Jeb-Hillary ticket. McCain-Powell? McCain-Rice? Idunno, sounds like some interesting combos to me. Maybe good enough for your "mend the fences" idea?

Elphaba

Jorgelito, I will vote for McCain, but if he attaches himself with a neo-con I will vote for whoever the Dems put up. Like I did last time. I lean Republican on fiscal issues, but the neo-cons are anything but true Republicans.

Nice "make-believe hypothetical" though.

How about Jessie Jackson and Orin Hatch? There's a winning combo.

analog

Having lived in Florida for a while, where Jeb is honcho, I can say that he really doesn't do much at all to impress me as a politician. I've never really found anything he's said or done to be all that important, let alone presidential.

When all the hurricanes came through here, he was barely seen or heard on the TV or radio saying much of anything about it other than supporting the words of the electric companies promising speedy power restoration. I would think that even a halfway decent politician in charge of a state that has just been ravaged by not one, but then two, three, and four hurricanes would be on some form of media telling the people it'll be ok, that things will be taken care of. It's not like it was a few tornados ripping through a mobile home park- it was a state-wide emergency which literally impacted almost all of the state. He should have been more vocal, more attentive. It seemed like he didn't care whatsoever.

Also, he panders to the elderly way too much. I understand there are a lot of them here, but there are also a lot of people who aren't elderly living here. Additionally, there is a horribly corrupt sheriff's office running one of the state's largest counties, which has spent millions upon millions of dollars on untraceable stuff, and keeps asking for more. Jeb has never once been seen to concern himself in any way with such things. I don't care if he is the brother of George W, of whom i'm not a fan- i'm not a fan of Jeb because of Jeb himself.

EDIT: And i'd vote Condileeza over Hillary, except that I know Condileeza would be little more than a puppet.

Ustwo

Just out of curiosity, why do you think that?

Personally I think shes got more pure brains than 99% of the politicians.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Mephisto2

As an ex-Professor from Stanford, she's bound to.

No doubt an intelligent woman, but she scares the bejaysus out of me. If I had a vote, I'd vote for Hillary over her.

Horses for courses I guess.


Mr Mephisto

analog

Oh I do as well. I think she's very intelligent and has a good grip on things. I also, however, think she's derived a lot of her power and position from the types of people who would use her in office for their own agendas, and she'd owe them- or they'd convince her she owes them.

I really don't know, now that i'm thinking about it, I think I'd have to have some more information to be able to really pick one over the other. I'm just afraid of her ties to the current administration, of which I do not want another incarnation under a different face and name.

pan6467

I think it is necessary to have a more centrist non partisan president that can have his own agenda and therefore either both sides will hate him and by virtue bring them closer..... or hopefully be so loved by the people that both sides will fall into place and become fiscally conservative while being socially liberal.

I envision a president that by his nonpartisanship can show how juvenile parties have become and the PEOPLE will wake up and vote the idiots that are so far on one side and unwilling to compromise (Right and Left) out.

I think Trump has the arrogance and yet is charismatic enough to get both sides to deal with each other and end the petty bickering. Plus, I don't think Trump is one to worry about any "dirt" that would come out about him and is strong enough to turn the dirt around and show what it really is..... trying to win without having to expose your true platform.

I think a strong Trump/McCain or Trump/Edwards ticket would crush any GOP ticket out there.

Trump is the master of the deal, he knows how to get things done, how to work with unions and win respect (trust me NOTHING in NYC gets built without someone getting union respect).

Trump knows how weak we are in the world economy and I believe would surround himself with the best people possible to develop ways to get the US back to #1 and keep it there.

I really see no downside to Trump except whether or not he could be convinced the US needs him as president.

Laugh, if you will, but Trump is powerful enough, charismatic enough and strong enough in who he is to become president. He is also smart enough to know people work harder, put more dignity and feel better about themselves when companies treat their workers with respect.

(Argue if you will but the president does set the tone for the nation ..... good and bad......)

I am now declaring myself a man on a mission to get people to DRAFT TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT...... perhaps if enough people show him that WE WANT TRUMP he'll run........

Hey if 1992 Perot could garner what 19% .... surely Trump who is more charismatic, more of a deal maker and more respected can come close to getting triple that and that would be a winner.

Otherwise the options are too bleak........

Hilary??????? too much of a witch, cold distant wants it too badly..... which forces me too ask why does she want it so badly? She lacks the charisma Bill had and while strong she seems to be more into herself than what is best for the country.

Libertarian?????? Still too right.... they truly have no compromise in them.

I don't know hopefully a strong DEM can come from somewhere.... but until that happens my mantra shall be........

DRAFT TRUMP IN '08............DRAFT TRUMP IN '08............DRAFT TRUMP IN '08

FACT I'M GOING TO PRINT BUMPERSTICKERS AND T-SHIRTS THAT ON THE FRONT HAVE A PICTURE OF HIM AND ON THE BACK SAY.........

DRAFT TRUMP IN '08............DRAFT TRUMP IN '08............DRAFT TRUMP IN '08

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Mephisto2

When has it ever been different?

Indeed, the current Administration is often cited as the quintessential example of this kind of vested interest.


Mr Mephisto

alansmithee

I agree that Dean would have been a better candidate, and also think he would have one. Really the only reasons I can see why Kerry got the nomination was due to the fact that he looked more "presidential". Kerry seemed to have far more negatives than Dean, didn't have the personality of Dean, and had a campaign team seemingly worse then Dean's.

And as for the launching attacks with no rebuttal, move on (.org).



Kettle: Hello Pot!

Pot: You're Black!

Suffice to say, I think your blindness to liberal attacks and use of the same tactics is suprising.

-----

I don't think Trump nor McCain could make a viable candidate. For every Dem vote McCain would gain, he would lose two Rep votes. Since his run in 2000, he's really disappointed me. I fully supported him then, I thought Bush was a horrible candidate in comparison. But it seems to me that McCain has become a much more polished politician, and spends too much time grabbing headlines. In 2000, he seemed outside of the system, now he's been assimilated. As for Trump, he has too much baggage. Also, he seems to have no qualifications for being president. He's great in real estate and self-promotion, but not else. If a businessman is what you want, I think Steve Forbes is a better choice personally.

Honestly, I think the republican nomination is going to be someone not on the radar just yet. And as for the Dems, everything now is pointing at hillary which makes me think its going to be someone else entirely, probably a southerner. Hillary has no chance in any of the "red" states, and would probably lose a couple of the blues as well.

Mephisto2

As an outside observer, I tend to agree with Shakran. If you think there is a liberal bias in the media, or if you think "liberalism" is in the ascendent in America today, then you must be living in a different world than I.

Of course the "left' attacks the "right", but today's political landscape, today's social milieu, is such that being liberal, or anti-war, or pro-worker etc is almost a mark of Cain (and I don't mean that in the Old Testament, literal sense, but in the popular sense).

Mr Mephisto

alansmithee

There is a slight socially liberal, pro-business bias in the majority of mainstream media. Looking simply at which stories recieve the most press reveals that. Or look at examinations of the previous presidential election, where Bush got almost double the negative press that Kerry did.

And where are you living where being anti-war or liberal or pro-worker is frowned upon? I see much the opposite, where not blindly throwing accusations at the administration, or even questioning the liberal adenda in any way gets you attacked by lefties as a hatemongering, intolerant, ignorant part of the vast right-wing conspiracy. You can look at this board for proof of this.

Apparently you're not living in the same part of America that I am.

pan6467

The right attacks the left far far more vehemnetly and even in cases where the left isn't necessarily attacking the right but simply asking the right to explain their stance .... the right considers it an attack and avoids the explanations but worsens the attacks and any dialogue that could exist crumbles. But that's just my viewpoint.

As for McCain, I think as a Dem and with the right running mate (Edwards) he could very easily win... problem is he won't run as a Dem or even an Ind.

Trump is an oddity. He has failed but he has comeback every time stronger and looking better than ever. I really don't think he has baggage that would hurt.... what he's a player..... lol big freakin deal he likes gorgeous ladies and can get them so what? Other than that Trump is about as dirt free as they come. He's very intelligent, knows how to get the most from the people around him and you NEVER hear anyone truly bad mouth the guy. Perhaps he's too good a man for president... but I doubt it.... I truly think he's the perfect man for the job. He isn't isolationist but he knows we need more fair trade. The only people that won't back him are big business because they know he is fair with employees and would probably raise the minimum wage in a hurry but offer tax breaks for those smaller companies it would hurt.

Trump is too perfect that's why the GOP will hate him.

Forbes ran I believe in '96 and had some good points but even Alan Keyes beat him. I will say the Class of '96 was just that in the GOP primaries.... all were moderates and had class and decent ideas.... how I miss them.... the GOP is far to right now... when Reagan, Nixon and even BushI court judges (some of whom at the time were considered borderline too conservative) and policies are called too liberal.... something is very, very, very wrong.

That maybe the first thing we have ever agreed upon. That the GOP nomination may go to someone not on the radar screen.... and Hilary losing even some of the blue states.

I see Edwards making a strong run and maybe getting the nomination (I would vote for Edwards IF Trump doesn't run).

DRAFT TRUMP IN '08............DRAFT TRUMP IN '08............DRAFT TRUMP IN '08

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Ustwo

Or perhaps that is just your bias showing

Liberalism is a policy for the lazy in my world view. People are lazy. Give it time.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Ustwo

If I recall he is in Canada.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

pan6467

Mr. Mephisto is from Australia.....

hence: Location: Where beer does flow and men chunder

A line from that great group Men At Work..... Can't you hear can't you hear the thunder..... you better run you better take cover

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Mephisto2

Or perhaps it's your bias showing.

And so it goes.



I'm far from lazy. I guarantee that I do more for social or liberal causes than the majority of people on this board, and I don't mean that in a boasting manner. I also work hard, pay LOTS of taxes and don't lament the fact. I simply get on with it, whilst retaining my sense of right and wrong.

Raised, as I was, by hard-working parents who gave much more (and continue to give much more) to society than they took, I absorbed their humanist, liberal, socially responsible outlook on life. I don't particularly see that as lazy, or appreciate it being called as much.


Mr Mephisto

Mephisto2

Mr Mephisto is from Ireland. But he lives in Australia. :-)

Hence my use of the phrase "as an outside observer" alansmithee.

But no matter. I simply see things differently than you. I honestly, and with no malice, see the right in the ascendent in the US. If you don't, then so be it.


Mr Mephisto

shakran

You just proved my point for me. Moveon.org had to respond to Bush's attacks because Kerry would not. That made things even worse for Kerry - not only will he not fight to defend himself, but it got so bad that someone ELSE had to step in and fight back for him. As soon as I saw that Kerry wasn't gonna fight for the office, and instead was gonna let other groups try to do it for him, I immediately predicted a Bush victory.





What tactics? The tactics the conservatives used were to call anyone who disagreed with them unpatriotic, morally bankrupt, and godless. I've certainly never used those phrases in my arguments against the conservatives.

Your statement again proves my point. The conservative side is having a grand old time launching attacks against the liberal side claiming the liberals are attacking them.

They're glossing over the fact that one can disagree with a position without attacking the position holder. The fact that I disagree with the war does not mean I consider every republican to be morally bankrupt or unpatriotic.

But the conservatives want to paint things as though I do, because then that makes me look petty, and reinforces the liberal whacko stereotype that the republicans invented.

roachboy

once you see conservatives throwing hillary clinton about as a marker of left politics you know that they have been backed into seeing politics from a position that would square with that of any number of militia groups---the function of the empty signifer "the left" in conservativeland is to obscure just how far to the right the apparatus has moved---hillary clinton's actual political position are both wholly mysterious and totally irrelevant for the right--what matters is the 8 years of sustained bile directed at her from the planet limbaugh and other parallel outlets for audio autolobotomy. the reponses above to/about clinton are little more than nostalgic residuum of those years of sustained group hate orchestrated by the right--the pleasures of group hate, the sense of direction it gives, etc.

on the other hand, given that the politics of george w. bush roughly square with those of jean-marie le pen, it makes some sense that, for them, obvious centrists like clinton appear to be left ideologues of some mysterious type. but like many of the rhetorical moves you see recurring from the loyal footsoldiers of the neo-mcarthyite set do not refer to anything in the world other people know about, but instead refer to the right itself, to the authorized perception of the political landscape of conservative corporation. so it makes some sense to find a movement that is in fact located around the space of militia groups and snake-handling churches pretending that it represents the "mainstream" and that any and all opposition is a type of fifth column.

but again, this is not about the world. it is about conservatives themselves---nothing and no-one else.

as for the question of jeb bush running for president: i think you'll find that it never happens. even the right knows that, as of now, bush is among the least popular presidents ever, that his policies are not widely supported by the public, and can derive the obvious consequence--that another bush would be understood as more of the same. jeb would be among the finer gifts the right will give the rest of us. and i doubt very much that even the right's arrogance goes so far as to authorize a second bushrun for president any time soon.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Ustwo

All rules have exceptions. I myself know some hard working liberals, I know some with genius IQs, I know some who give back a ton to the community. It is not for these people that we have self defeating programs like social security, welfare, food stamps, Medicare, racial quotas etc. Liberalism as practiced appeals to the lazy. Let some other hardworking slob pick up the slack (again much like communism). To succeed it needs people to be like you, but there isnt enough self-motivated people. They are lazy and will take the easy road most of the time. As such motivation fails when the motivation is working for a better society (what’s in it for me eh?!) and you get the reality. Welfare doesn't get people out of poverty, it creates a permanent underclass, but if your intentions were good who cares right? Hell I'd be happy to live in the socalist Utopia, provided it would work, but as long as people are people, alturism will always fail long term.

I just love tangents

Rice '08

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

shakran

I agreed with everything you said until this paragraph. I think he will eventually run, and it wouldnt' at all surprise me if he won. The public has an amazing ability to come down with political amnesia. Remember, Bush Jr's dad was president, and was so horridly unpopular that he didn't even get two terms, even though he was the Reagan administration's golden boy. Yet the public elected bush in '04 - an amazing feat considering that even though they didn't elect him in '00, they still got a 4 year preview of what a legitimate Bush administration would do.

So unless Bush were to turn into Hitler version 2.0 tomorrow, I don't think his incompetence would significantly hurt his brother's chances.

And Ustwo, republicans have no business whining about a permanent underclass when it's the republican-backed wealthy tax breaks that sustain the underclass today.

Mephisto2

I understand your position. I just disagree with it.

If you don't help people when they're down, you end up with an obscene "capitalist, free market" aberration like Brazil, post Communist Russia or Columbia.

There, the rich are free to avoid fulfilling their obligations to society and the poor are free to starve or die, due to lack of access to medical care.

Me too.

Mr Mephisto