The Way Forward for Republicans

Jeb Bush is not it. Sorry.

I'm not saying Jeb Bush isn't someone Republicans might choose as a presidential nominee. I could see that happening. And that's part of the problem Republicans have. They need a sharper break with their recent past and they seem unwilling to make that break.

As for Jeb himself, some Republicans think he's the way forward because he is well-regarded for his job as Governor and because he is more "Latino-friendly" (not a hard-liner on immigration and his wife is Mexican).

Here's why that's wrong:

1) "Bush" - You can pretty much count the number of times Romney said the name in 2012 on one hand. And this was not a mistake by Romney. The name remains toxic among too many independents and even among some Republicans. Jeb gave a full-throated defense of his brother's presidency at the Republican Convention this year. It didn't rehabilitate GW's image any.

2) Between 1952 and 2004 (52 years and 14 presidential elections), Republicans put together a ticket that didn't have a Nixon, a Dole, or a Bush on it just 1 time (1964). That's kind of creepy. These days, there's a fine line between partisanship and tribalism. Turning back to another Bush gets way too close to the tribalism side of things. The turn to McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012 was not quite the "fresh" makeover the Republicans needed. They desperately need that now.

3) Republicans don't so much need new ideas as they need a return to reason and "reasonableness." Mitt Romney actually pledged during the Republican primaries that he would not support $10 in spending cuts in return for $1 in tax increases because this would be $1 in tax increases too much. Voters sense this lack of reasonableness on various issues. A CNN poll out today indicates that 70% of Americans believe the Republican Party does not do enough to compromise with the President while just under half say the same about the President. Jeb Bush cannot be the new face of Republican reasonableness. And that brings us back to the root of the problem ...

The Republican Party has a problem with their base. Both political parties are prone to extremism in their primary processes. But it is worse in the Republican Party. How do we know? Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich (not to mention Michelle Bachmann and Herman Cain and Rick Perry and Donald Trump) were serious alternatives to Mitt Romney in the primaries. They won serious primaries and got lots of votes. Dennis Kucinich ran for president but he never got a significant number of votes anywhere. The radical left does not hold the same sway in Democratic primaries as the radical right does in Republican primaries. It is not enough for Chris Christie or Mitch Daniels or Jon Huntsman to run. They need to have the space for these candidates to say reasonable things and still win the nomination. That space didn't exist in 2012.

It is a long way to 2016 and Republicans have time. But I'm not hopeful that Republicans have learned the key lessons yet. Nominating Jeb Bush would be a sure sign they haven't learned these lessons at all.

Obama Leads in Florida

Maybe. PPP says he's got a small lead at least. One poll that is this close and is within the margin of error doesn't frankly tell us too much. But it is enough to generate a few thoughts on the subject of Florida ...

1) I'm going to say something sort of provocative and tell you that Florida sort of doesn't matter. Of course, if Obama wins Florida, Romney can't win. That's true. But it is also true that if Obama wins Florida, he's probably already won Ohio. And if Obama wins Ohio ... Romney can't win. So, while a win in Florida would guarantee an Obama victory, it would sort of be like hitting a grand slam in the top of the 9th when you're already ahead by 5. It's nice but you were very likely to win already anyway.

2) PPP also asked respondents how they would vote if either of Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio was added to the Romney ticket. Obama's lead was still 3 with Rubio on the ticket and it was 5 with Bush on the ticket. Now, I'm skeptical that a question like this really does a good job of simulating the impact of adding Bush or Rubio to the ticket. That said, I do think adding Bush would be utterly insane. That name is radioactive and Romney just couldn't do more to make Obama's case that electing Romney is like going back to the Bush policies that produced the current mess. Has anyone noticed the Obama campaign has changed their one-word slogan from "Change" in 2008 to "Forward" in 2012? If Obama's watchword is Forward and you add Bush to the Republican ticket, I think the Obama campaign would just gleefully issue a press release saying, "We have nothing to add your honor. The prosecution rests." As for Rubio, I do not think he would change the dynamic of the race much at all. I don't say that because of anything about him. I just don't think any running mate helps dramatically. They can only hurt (see Palin, Sarah and the preceding discussion of Bush, Jeb).

3) I tend to think quite highly of PPP as a polling organization. They rated quite well in Nate Silver's pollster ratings for one. We'll get an interesting test this evening. PPP had a poll out yesterday showing Walker up 50-47 in Wisconsin's recall. We Ask America had a poll out yesterday as well that had Walker up 52-44. Let's see what happens.

"Enormous" Shot of Momentum

Jeb Bush is endorsing Mitt Romney providing what Thomas Roberts in MSNBC calls an "enormous" shot of momentum ... a few days before Romney loses Louisiana. Not to be outdone, Mark Halperin (who I continue to believe is the least insightful media personality out there) declared:

Mitt Romney’s Illinois win could be the beginning of the end of the Republican nomination fight.

That's right. It "could be" the "beginning" of the end ... of this one phase of the process. Or it "could not" be. Who knows? Thanks for the insight Halperin.