Jeb

[Bilge_Rat]

interesting profile on Jeb written by a reporter (S.V.Date) who covered him for 8 years in Florida. The reporter does not agree with his politics, but clearly respects him:


The word “relentless” doesn’t begin to explain this Bush. I’ve yet to encounter any other politician as smart, as driven, as self-disciplined, as organized, as single-minded about his goals—or as certain about his views.

And when it came to dealing with the press corps, Bush wasn’t afraid to let that certainty shine through. He’s almost always the smartest guy in the room—and he made sure to remind us of that in news conference after news conference, eviscerating reporters who came unprepared or with wishy-washy questions. In politics, Bush has always seen the world starkly—you’re either with him or you’re against him. And the press, he was convinced, was usually against him.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/04/jeb-bush-reporters-florida-schooled-the-press-117004.html#ixzz3YX3BntOI

personally, if it comes down to a choice between Jeb and Hilary in the White House, I would rather see Jeb get in.

[Mr Quatro]

Yeah boy Jeb Bush is my main man to beat the lady queen of spades.

I started to like Rubio too with his quick wit of talking about Hillary's camp talking about raising 2 billion dollars for her campaign in the next 15 months. He said, "That's a lot of Chipotle"

Sunday news show on ABC with George Stanalapolous had a guest that wrote the book "Clinton Cash" and he said that he had something on Jeb Bush too with shady stock dealings overseas.

The mud is coming fast ... I wish my TV had a truth meter. Didn't George Orwell say these days would come?

Apple should go to work on an app that can discern the truth. That would be a watch worth buying.

[Catfish]

I wonder, how it could be possible in a "democracy", that whole families apply for and become "president", one after another.

Surely there can be no better man or woman around, in the whole United States of America :dead:

[Oberon]

Jeb for President, I mean, what could go wrong?

http://i.imgur.com/5pYVIMP.gif

[August]

I wonder, how it could be possible in a "democracy", that whole families apply for and become "president", one after another.

Surely there can be no better man or woman around, in the whole United States of America :dead:

Maybe there is and maybe there isn't but either way I submit that such things are the essence of democracy. No citizen of a free country should be prevented from running for pubic office because of their last name.

[em2nought]

Jeb for President, I mean, what could go wrong?

http://i.imgur.com/5pYVIMP.gif
Jeb, being the equivalent of the Duke of Strelsau, probably wishes ol' Dubya had been sent down Jacobs ladder. :D

[Platapus]

I dunno. The idea of both houses and the executive being of the same party (any party) does not bode well for the country. :nope:

[Catfish]

Maybe there is and maybe there isn't but either way I submit that such things are the *essence of democracy. No citizen of a free country should be prevented from running for pubic office because of their last name.

:o :hmm2:

So you say members of the same family can become the leading persons or president again and again, over 30 years, and more.

For me it looks as if other probably more competent persons are effectively hindered to get a chance to become president, by an election system very much alike the "Kurfuersten" in Germany some hundred years ago. Where certain aristocratic and rich influential people were allowed to choose ..

*essence of democracy
For me this looks like "family throne succession" :03:

[Oberon]

North America is best America.

https://twistedsifter.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/barack-obama-and-kim-jong-un-impersonators-meet-in-la-4.jpg

[Bilge_Rat]

The big problem with the U.S. electoral system is that you need enormous amounts of money to run for President. Obama and Romney each raised over $1 billion for the 2012 election. That severely limits the field, even before the race starts, you need someone with national name recognition.

[August]

:o :hmm2:

So you say members of the same family can become the leading persons or president again and again, over 30 years, and more.

For me it looks as if other probably more competent persons are effectively hindered to get a chance to become president, by an election system very much alike the "Kurfuersten" in Germany some hundred years ago. Where certain aristocratic and rich influential people were allowed to choose ..


For me this looks like "family throne succession" :03:

I imagine a lot of what we do here in the Land of the Free sounds strange to you foreigners. :03:

What laws in Germany prevent say relatives of Merkel or Kohl etc from seeking their predecessors office?

[Betonov]

I imagine a lot of what we do here in the Land of the Free sounds strange to you foreigners. :03:



You know, from where I'm sitting I often wonder the same thing about the US.
Especially after having a long talk with my in-law from Montana.

Shame, I came here to agree with you on how I don't care what's the last name the next president has, even if it's Bush, which makes me an endangered specie in Europe, only to see your blinkered horse rhetoric about the lack of liberty in Europe from a man that lives in a country with the biggest rate of incarcerated people per capita in the world.

[Oberon]

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/46/46e5b5919bf4609e77d001dca2f58079fcea0c868b923558cc f8f31cc097a0e7.jpg

[Rockstar]

You know, from where I'm sitting I often wonder the same thing about the US.
Especially after having a long talk with my in-law from Montana.

... in a country with the biggest rate of incarcerated people per capita in the world.

I think it has more to do how things are added up. If you compare incarciration rates of all 50 independant states to say one independant state like Slovenia. Ya the incarciration rates will seem pretty lopsided.

But before royalty begins to pat themselves on the back. They might want to compare Union to Union such as United States to the United Kingdom EXCLUDING the E.U. They'll soon see incarciration rates are quite comparable. Using my poor math skills and wikipedia http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate as my source I find the there are 2348 persons in jail per 100,000 in the United States and 2353 persons per 100,000 in the United Kingdom.

So bite me. :arrgh!:

[Betonov]

So bite me. :arrgh!:

I can't. My dentures are still in-grown.

The point I was trying to make that Slovenia is also land of the free.
We have a parliament. And a constituition. And a president.
And people that toppled a government because speed traps were considered to opressive.
And I don't like un-educated guesses about my country since I'm allowed to counter these un-educated guesses. Because I'm a citizen of a free nation :yeah:

[Wolferz]

We need another Bush in the White House about as much as we need another hole in our heads.:-?

[Oberon]

I think it has more to do how things are added up. If you compare incarciration rates of all 50 independant states to say one independant state like Slovenia. Ya the incarciration rates will seem pretty lopsided.

But before royalty begins to pat themselves on the back. You might want to compare Union to Union such as United States to the United Kingdom EXCLUDING the E.U. You will see incarciration rates are quite comparable. Using my poor math skills and wikipedia http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate as my source I find the there are 2348 persons in jail per 100,000 in the United States and 2353 persons per 100,000 in the United Kingdom.

So bite me. :arrgh!:

:hmmm: Errrr

http://i.imgur.com/A4svV9o.jpg

[Catfish]

^Virgin islands?

[Oberon]

^Virgin islands?

I dunno if I'd count that as being a part of the UK, but rather administered by it, it's a bit like the Falkland Islands, they don't have a Member of Parliament that reports to the House of Commons in the UK, unlike Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England...although technically, the Isle of Man doesn't have an MP either, so I'll take that back off the list.

See, you should be thankful you lost World War One, otherwise you'd have all this confusing situation with colonies too... :O: :nope:

[Schroeder]

:hmmm: Errrr

http://i.imgur.com/A4svV9o.jpg
They probably still counted every Australian as an incarcerated Brit.:O:

[Oberon]

They probably still counted every Australian as an incarcerated Brit.:O:

:haha: That could explain it. :yep:

[Platapus]

So you say members of the same family can become the leading persons or president again and again, over 30 years, and more.



1. If the members of the same family are eligible to hold the office and
2. If one of the political parties nominates the family members and
3. If each of the family members garners enough electoral votes

Then, yes, we could have the same family as president for 30 years... 32 years actually :)

There is nothing in our Constitution that prevents successive members of the same family from being duly elected to the office of President.

[Mr Quatro]

Rednecks for Jeb don't understand this conversation ... we may hold our own convention in 2016 if Hillary continues to sweep the nation with her amazing popularity voters.

This isn't about a Bush/Clinton run for the POTUS, this is simply conservatives against the liberal policies of the democratic party.

How many of your figures for incarcerations include political foes?

This is a free nation ... the sad history of America and how it got to be free is available for all to read.

[Buddahaid]

^Virgin islands?

The British Virgin Islands are so much nicer than the US Virgin Islands there is no comparison. In the BVI if you're not a citizen, or an employer, you can't work so the jobs stay local. Plus they are not developed to death and as such are a nice place to visit. I doubt there is all that much serious crime to count for this purpose.

[AndyJWest]

:hmmm: Errrr

http://i.imgur.com/A4svV9o.jpg

What is the 395 figure supposed to indicate? The incarceration rates are per 100,000 population, and adding them together gives a meaningless number. If you want to know the figure for the UK as a whole, you need the relative population sizes - but the actual figure must by simple logic be less than 148 and greater than 101 per 100,000.

[Oberon]

What is the 395 figure supposed to indicate? The incarceration rates are per 100,000 population, and adding them together gives a meaningless number. If you want to know the figure for the UK as a whole, you need the relative population sizes - but the actual figure must by simple logic be less than 148 and greater than 101 per 100,000.

....

Well, I never claimed to be good at math. Either which way though it's a fair bit lower than the US incarceration rate per 100k, which is the opposite of what Rockstar was indicating.

[August]

Shame, I came here to agree with you on how I don't care what's the last name the next president has, even if it's Bush, which makes me an endangered specie in Europe, only to see your blinkered horse rhetoric about the lack of liberty in Europe from a man that lives in a country with the biggest rate of incarcerated people per capita in the world.

Well I think it's a shame that you foreigners can't take a joke because I used a smiley and everything.

As for why you came here you should note that I do deeply care what the last name of the next president may be. I'm not at all eager to see a Clinton or a Bush run and hope to God that won't be my choices in November 2016.

On the other hand I firmly reject the insinuation that the Presidency is limited to some mythical American nobility. Our incarceration rate whatever it may be has nothing to do with it.

[AngusJS]

Well I think it's a shame that you foreigners can't take a joke because I used a smiley and everything.

As for why you came here you should note that I do deeply care what the last name of the next president may be. I'm not at all eager to see a Clinton or a Bush run and hope to God that won't be my choices in November 2016.

On the other hand I firmly reject the insinuation that the Presidency is limited to some mythical American nobility. Our incarceration rate whatever it may be has nothing to do with it.Out of 43 presidents, only 9 had a net worth of less than 1 million in 2010 dollars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidents_by_net_worth

And that's not even counting the billions that will be raised and spent between the candidates during our stupidly long campaigns.

We don't have a nobility, but the political class doesn't need titles when it's this wealthy. And because "money is speech", the super wealthy just happen to also be the most eloquent and persuasive too, funnily enough.

We're screwed.

[August]

Out of 43 presidents, only 9 had a net worth of less than 1 million in 2010 dollars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidents_by_net_worth

And that's not even counting the billions that will be raised and spent between the candidates during our stupidly long campaigns.

We don't have a nobility, but the political class doesn't need titles when it's this wealthy. And because "money is speech", the super wealthy just happen to also be the most eloquent and persuasive too, funnily enough.

We're screwed.

I don't see that as very surprising. Successful people tend to have lots of money. They tend to have lots of smarts and drive which helps them earn lots of money. Do you really want someone running the country that isn't successful? Personally I don't want someone who can't balance his checkbook sitting in the oval office but maybe that's just me.