Jeb Bush Ends Longest Pre-Campaign In American History, Announces Presidential Candidacy For 2016

Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush finally ended the longest pre-campaign for President in American history, announcing his candidacy today at Miami Dade College, the largest community college in the nation, and the largest Hispanic student population of any college in America.

Having indicated his intended plans unofficially in December, starting the 2016 campaign, Jeb Bush decided to hold off for the overlong period of six months, so he could raise tons of money, without any campaign spending limits.

Bush made it clear that he was out to gain the Hispanic vote by pushing for immigration reform, something not popular in the Republican Party, and the fact that he speaks fluent Spanish and that his wife is a Mexican American born in Mexico, gives Bush an opportunity to push for a higher percentage of that vote.

The question arises though whether Jeb Bush can overcome the stain of his brother George W. Bush’s reputation, although the popularity of his dad, George W. Bush, is at an all time high, since he left the Presidency 22 years ago, and just as the elder Bush has turned 91 and his mother has turned 90.

Bush has many faults, but he is a serious, mainstream conservative, not a loony like many of the others in the race, so the odds of his winning the nomination at this point seem greater than 50-50.

The next nine months will show what the truth of the Bush name is in American politics in 2016!

10 comments on “Jeb Bush Ends Longest Pre-Campaign In American History, Announces Presidential Candidacy For 2016

  1. Max June 16, 2015 9:42 am

    I think Jeb Bush argued persuasively why he shouldn’t be nominated.
    He made a strong, passionate argument explaining why he should not be the nominee of the Republican Party, and I for one was totally convinced. He’s quite a persuasive speaker! He says that the government borrows too much money, but didn’t speak out against the enormous TARP programs of his brother. He’s never spoken out against repeatedly expanding the debt limit, or the thousand page Cromnibus budget bills, or any other big government programs. Bush is a clear role model for a candidate you should be voting for if no other candidate is running.
    He criticized Obama for talking about the Crusades, in reference to the Middle East, when he said Obama should have been talking about “fantatics.” Bush won’t use the “I” word either, as in “Radical Islam.” You really should have heard his speech–Bush is so tremendously charismatic, he said all the right things in all the right places to 100% convince me that he’s not my guy!
    In short, I think Bush is the man we need to convince people that he is not the man that we need. I would urge people to volunteer with his campaign to help convince Republicans that he is not the right man to be nominated, and I wish him the best of success in his endeavors.

  2. Rustbelt Democrat June 16, 2015 12:20 pm

    I agree with the Professor. Jeb Bush is a more legitimate candidate for the Repugs than the others that have announced so far.

    And now hopping on the clown bus is Donald Trump. LOL!

  3. Southern Liberal June 16, 2015 12:54 pm

    Totally agree with the Professor. We are NOT going to have a smaller federal government. That will NOT work in this modern era! Max/Juan might as well FORGET IT!

  4. Max June 16, 2015 5:29 pm

    Boy some people really I mean really love government. It’s almost like a fetish. They really believe government can do no wrong. Amazing considering that government is run by fallible human beings. Yet some honestly never see that government could in any way shape or form be limited. Some honestly believe it must be unlimited in its power as long as the declared intent is to do good and thus make everyone “feel” good. And on the other hand those of us who sustain that experience has proven over and over again that government can do good as well as bad and that most of the bad is done by unintended consequences, are looked upon as extremist and radicals. Stunning.

  5. Princess Leia June 16, 2015 7:00 pm

    From Daily Kos:

    Talk to any true believer on the right for five minutes, and you’re likely going to hear about the virtues of limited government.

    Well, not really. You’re likely to hear about high taxes and regulations being bad for the economy, and you’re going to hear that low taxes and limited government are good, but you’re probably not going to hear why. After all, they’ve already accepted limited government as the solution.

    So just who is limited government good for?

    The poor? Well, that one’s obvious. Poor people would be in terrible shape. Under the idea of limited government, they wouldn’t have any sort of safety net. If they lost their job, they would probably starve to death since they wouldn’t have food. And even if they did have a job, they might not be able to survive anyway. Without a minimum wage, their employers could pay them basically whatever they felt like. And also, they’d be subjected to whatever working conditions their employer deemed acceptable without an OSHA around to enforce safety regulations. Of course, safety regulations would be nonexistent anyway. Their kids would be poorly educated without public schools. And their neighborhoods would be utterly unlivable with no police protection.

    But all of those things I just listed? Yeah, they affect the middle class as well. Sure, the middle class would pay lower taxes. That seems to be all they care about; remember, since Reagan came along, Republicans have convinced them they can pay lower taxes and still keep the same level of service. Thanks, deficits!

    But those lower taxes would be offset in a lot of ways. With public schools defunded, they’d probably have to send their kids to private school. Have you looked up private school tuition lately? Either that or they’d have to home school their children. That would require one of them to drop out of the workforce in all likelihood, thus reducing their standard of living. With Social Security gone, they’d have to take care of their elderly parents. And again, with no safety net, like the poor they’re screwed if they lose their job.

    What about the wealthy? Oh, they love limited government and hate taxes. Of course, with limited government taking food stamps away from the poor and making them starving and desperate, they’ll probably try to rob the rich. The rich can always call the police… Oh, wait, there are no police? No firefighters for when the poor burn down their houses, either.

    And bug business? Most of them need to transport products from time to time, and without government around to pave roads and maintain railroad tracks, you can expect that proposition to become a whole lot more dicey.

    So just who is limited government good for?

    Conservative politicians.

    And… That’s about it.

    Yet conservatives, especially the Tea Party, continue to push limited government as the answer to all of our problems. Perhaps they don’t realize that limited government is good for exactly nobody. They don’t really want to live in a country with limited government. They just think they do.

    And they must be stopped before they get their way and turn the United States into a third world country.

  6. Southern Liberal June 16, 2015 7:01 pm

    Exactly as that article says. Limited government is good for nobody.

  7. Ronald June 16, 2015 8:12 pm

    Brilliant article, Princess Leia!

  8. Max June 17, 2015 10:37 am

    The article talks about the poor and how big government helps the poor. But does it help the poor get out of poverty or does it help the poor maintain the status of poor? I don’t know about you, but I want there to be less poor. And how is that achieved? With economic growth.Using data from 118 countries over four decades, research published by the World Bank has found that the primary driver of poverty reduction is economic growth. According to the authors, “This evidence confirms the central importance of economic growth for poverty reduction… institutions and policies that promote economic growth in general will on average raise incomes of the poor equiproportionally, thereby promoting “shared prosperity”.there are almost no cases in which growth is significantly pro-poor or pro-rich.” This means that policies that enhance economic growth, such as limiting the size of government and lowering barriers to international trade, are key to alleviating poverty. Indeed, research finds this is the case.

  9. Ronald June 17, 2015 5:14 pm

    Wonderful article, Pragmatic Progressive! Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.