February 10, 2016--Jeb!
During a long interview on Monday on Morning Joe, don't quote me, but I came to conclude that Jeb Bush was very impressive.
He was personable, relaxed, almost likable; but more important revealed genuine knowledge of the issues, domestic and international. And his ideas about what to do about them seemed well thought out and less radical or pandering than his GOP opponents'.
I found myself not ready to vote for him but thinking about him differently.
Yes, big-winner TRUMP is right--he has an energy, fire-in-the-belly problem. It feels as if family forces and the resulting competitive, almost Oedipal inner demons are propelling him forward as opposed to his motivation coming from a more authentic interest in running for president.
I recognize that the electorate thus far has not been that interested in "experience." With the exception of how Marco Rubio is more and more being viewed as having no experiences whatsoever to prepare him for the presidency other than a lifetime of running for office and a series of predigested sound bites that, we now know, he repeats robotically over and over again as if he has neurological issues.
But, if we are beginning to gets serious about selecting candidates, thinking who might actually make decent presidents, the two "best-prepared" candidates are Bush and Hillary Clinton.
No matter what else we think about them, no matter what we conclude about the quality of their actual accomplishments--pretty thin--they are the only two (maybe the surging John Kasich also qualifies) who have a grasp of issues, a modicum of relevant experiences, and plans to solve or deal with actual problems.
One more thought--
If we care about the country, in addition to struggling to figure out who to vote for, we should resist the temptation to root for a weak candidate from the other party.
Thus, if we support Bernie or Hillary, we shouldn't hope that Ted or Marco is nominated because we assume either one would be the weakest opponent. Since one never knows what happens on Election Day, we should hope that the best of the lot is nominated in case he somehow manages to be elected in November.
The same should thought should be posed to TRUMP or Jeb! supporters. If your candidate loses to the Democratic nominee, who among them is best suited to be your president because the political cliché is true--whoever wins is president for all of us.
That is with the exception of all the folks who tell me they're moving to Canada if The Donald is elected. These, by the way, are the same people, still residing here, who planned to move there if Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush was elected.
He was personable, relaxed, almost likable; but more important revealed genuine knowledge of the issues, domestic and international. And his ideas about what to do about them seemed well thought out and less radical or pandering than his GOP opponents'.
I found myself not ready to vote for him but thinking about him differently.
Yes, big-winner TRUMP is right--he has an energy, fire-in-the-belly problem. It feels as if family forces and the resulting competitive, almost Oedipal inner demons are propelling him forward as opposed to his motivation coming from a more authentic interest in running for president.
I recognize that the electorate thus far has not been that interested in "experience." With the exception of how Marco Rubio is more and more being viewed as having no experiences whatsoever to prepare him for the presidency other than a lifetime of running for office and a series of predigested sound bites that, we now know, he repeats robotically over and over again as if he has neurological issues.
But, if we are beginning to gets serious about selecting candidates, thinking who might actually make decent presidents, the two "best-prepared" candidates are Bush and Hillary Clinton.
No matter what else we think about them, no matter what we conclude about the quality of their actual accomplishments--pretty thin--they are the only two (maybe the surging John Kasich also qualifies) who have a grasp of issues, a modicum of relevant experiences, and plans to solve or deal with actual problems.
One more thought--
If we care about the country, in addition to struggling to figure out who to vote for, we should resist the temptation to root for a weak candidate from the other party.
Thus, if we support Bernie or Hillary, we shouldn't hope that Ted or Marco is nominated because we assume either one would be the weakest opponent. Since one never knows what happens on Election Day, we should hope that the best of the lot is nominated in case he somehow manages to be elected in November.
The same should thought should be posed to TRUMP or Jeb! supporters. If your candidate loses to the Democratic nominee, who among them is best suited to be your president because the political cliché is true--whoever wins is president for all of us.
That is with the exception of all the folks who tell me they're moving to Canada if The Donald is elected. These, by the way, are the same people, still residing here, who planned to move there if Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush was elected.
Labels: 2016 Election, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, John Kasich, Presidential Election, Primaries
posted by Steven Zwerling at
5:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home