Why Hillary v. Jeb Would Be Great for America

[DonViejo]

Mark McKinnon

They’re both qualified, respectful of each other (shocker!), and represent the vast majority of middle America. So what’s not to like about another Clinton/Bush race for 2016?

When you mention the prospect of Clinton vs. Bush 2016 a funny thing happens.

First, there is the reflexive response: "Oh no, not again. We don't need more dynastic politics in this country."

But upon further reflection, you realize Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton would be a great race and actually good for the country.

Let's review.

QUALIFICATIONS—THEY’VE BOTH GOT THEM.

Barack Obama won the presidency because in an election where the premium was on change, it mattered little that he was inexperienced. In fact, it was an asset.

more
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/13/why-hillary-v-jeb-would-be-great-for-america.html

[tridim]

1. Chelsea v. Jenna will be so much better for the country!!!11

I'm already feeling sick about 2016, mainly because it's 2014.

[BeyondGeography]

2. Or Mark McKinnon, Conversations With Myself

How did your last stunning insight work out, Mr. No Labels?:

In the mid-90s, Republicans had gone from brief ascendancy under Newt Gingrich's Contract With America to a government shutdown in 1996, which turned off a whole lot of Americans and helped to re-elect a Democrat like Bill Clinton. But then some Republicans like George W. Bush emerged on the stage with a different approach, a message about compassionate conservatism; about a limited, but proactive role of the federal government on issues like education and immigration reform.

And it was those issues and that message almost 20 years ago that attracted a then-conservative Democrat to cross the bridge and become a progressive Republican willing to support and then work for George W. Bush.

[davidpdx]

9. He's an asswipe

along with whathisface who was Clinton's poller in 2008.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

13. "a progressive republican" ??? Is that even a thing?

[BeyondGeography]

15. The late Jack Kemp was the last guy I know of who could begin to fit that description

Whatever McKinnon is at the core, you had to be either cynical or a very poor judge of character to ever associate "progressive" with W. The guy was so obviously emotionally stunted that any benevolent impulses were bound to be overwhelmed by his base score-settling desires. The targets could be anyone who looked at him the wrong way or failed to interpret his mood at any given moment, let alone those who dared oppose him or even encouraged him to think again.

[Whisp]

3. I stopped at: ''and represent the vast majority of middle America...''

really? The both of them have money and power oozing out of their pores and both want to accumulate more - and they are representative of middle America?? What kind of silliness is that?

Off to read the rest.

[sofa king]

4. I'm glad someone thinks so.

I personally think that another Bush-Clinton election is the only way that interest in the next general election can be depressed enough for Bush to get close enough to steal it.

It's not because Mrs. Clinton can't win--she can and should. It is because the Bush people can rely upon the myth that there are millions of Clinton-haters who will climb forth from the early graves dug for them by W to vote for Jeb.

Jeb Bush is certainly smart enough to hide behind the veneer of cordiality while his half-billion dollar army of flying monkeys smears Mrs. Clinton 24 hours a day for a year.

I think Mrs. Clinton wins against any opponent. But it's no longer about winning. As President Obama has shown, the only true way to victory (edit: for a Democratic candidate) is through overwhelming support that cannot be statistically flipped or suppressed.

So for Mrs. Clinton, it is all about winning by so long that it can't be stolen from her. Jeb, I think, is the only guy who can narrow the odds to within criminal reach.

There is literally no lower limit to which Jeb can stoop--the bottomless pit of evil that is the Bush legacy has already gone there, from smear to mass murder and everywhere in between.

One big reason why Jeb has to win is to protect the extent to which the crimes of his stupider brother can be disclosed. He's gonna run, or the Bushes will move to Dubai, like Dick Cheney did.

[libodem]

12. I think this what bothers me

The idea that she will be smeared with monkey shit 24/7 for half a year. She seems game. I hope our side has a few buckets to smear back. Gack.

When I think about this horrible taste in my mouth that I have for politics, I think it might be monkey shit.

Mrs. Clinton I wish you a leak proof rubber suit.

[sofa king]

16. Might as well plan for it.

The nice part of it is that it's an obvious play for the Republicans, despite the fact that it's an old, worn out play that won't work as expected because, as I said elsewhere, the army of drooling Hillary-haters from the 1990s are, by and large, already and unexpectedly dead as a result of Bush policies.

Even if a particular Republican candidate decides to avoid the smear, the GOP is too screwed up to control itself as a whole from engaging in the smear.

So the very first, totally unfair thing to do RIGHT NOW is to play a little bit of "Saddam/Osama" with ol' Jeb. Whenever some asshole smears Hillary and we have to acknowledge it, I think we need to mention Jeb Bush in the same paragraph.

That turnabout is both necessary and fair play.

[libodem]

17. Yes

Man the buckets and don the rubbersuit. They have no shame. So expect the shitshow to be ruthless.and unfair.

[winter is coming]

5. Looks like tossing darts isn't such a good way to pick column topics after all. n/t

[Agschmid]

8. Right?

Haha, but it's still worth a read.

[blkmusclmachine]

6. NO NO NO

And NO

[daybranch]

7. LOL

This is the first time I have ever used that Acronym to my knowledge. It seems that most if not all readers and contributors to Democratic Underground would see the hypocrisy in supporting such a match up. Both candidates presumably or maybe actually are owned by the Corporations and Wall Street. Yes, I know they would battle over social issues to bring out their perceived voters and the discussion would be a good watch, but when all was said and done, would either really battle for economic justice? I watch everyday as we argue over rights that any sensible adult in the 21st Century should not be questioning and every day I marvel at how main stream media and our National politicians wish to steer us away from the issue that matters most to the rich- i.e. how to hold onto and plunder more wealth from the people of the US and the world? Yes I know voting rights, marriage equality and climate change are extremely important but we need to understand our enemy, their goals, and their weapons first. Their goal as best I can express it is to have more and they are willing to destroy what we perceive as liberty, goodwill, or common wellbeing to do it. Bribing of politicians and dumbing down the populace, coupled with creating voter restrictions and Gerrymandering are huge weapons for them. We must work to stop them and stop our parties from supporting them. Of course fighting big money in political campaigns is valuable, of course fighting voter restriction is valuable, of course electing populists (when you can find therm) is valuable, but it seems to me that only structural changes such as ending Gerrymandering are really long lasting. Here in Ohio we suffer from Gerrymandering and we also know that the country as a whole suffers from Gerrymandering in Ohio. We ask you to pledge to fight Gerrymandering in Ohio and help the country. We urgently need you to do this on our MoveOn petition. The link is http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/gerrymandering-in-ohio/ Thank you.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. I'm sure that lots of people will be excited about Hillary and the possibility of a female POTUS

particularly since she came so close back in 2008. While I suppose that I would prefer a younger and slightly more progressive candidate, I would trust Hillary with the job for the next 8 years. Not sure how many people are going to be particularly enthused by another "Bush" in the WH after GWB, however- and that's assuming that the Tea Party will allow him to win the nomination (though at this point, who else credible have they really got?)

[bemildred]

11. Piss up a rope. nt

[Gidney N Cloyd]

14. And if you don't have a rope, use one of those idiotic scarves.

[Hutzpa]

18. Hilarious

thanks for the laugh.

[Hippo_Tron]

19. I defer to Jeb's mother on this one