Friday, June 28, 2013

Updated With Port Authority Chief's Christie Testimony:"Bush-Palin 2016; Historic Compromise"

Update: That should just about end it for former GOP establishment media darling; "Christie Knew About Lane Closings Ex-Port Authority Official Says"

If this does mark the end of Governor Christie as a possible 2016 contender (or even as Governor) then the article I wrote for American Thinker, reproduced below, is even more to the 2016 point. If Christie done then Jeb Bush is the natural Establishment choice. The only thing that could stop him getting the nomination woudl be a Palin run. If she ran, and the grass-roots gave her the nomination then the Palin/Bush combination has a cear imperative for a united party especially against Clinton for all the reasons set out in the article.

UPDATE: Sean Trende at Real Clear Politics shows exactly why the Bush/Palin formula, under the right circumstances, is possibly the only winning one for the GOP:

"I suspect that to get in the neighborhood of 40 percent with Hispanics, Republicans would need a near-perfect candidate for Hispanic outreach, maybe Jeb Bush"



As also presented at: "The American Thinker" (LINK) under
Michael Sheppard

Bush-Palin 2016;Historic Compromise And The GOP's Only  Answer To Hillary?

Let's talk political reality-Realpolitik-first. To the question "can
the GOP win in 2016?" The answer is "yes, but only if they win
Florida." If by 9 pm on election night 2016 the early results indicate
Florida has gone to the Democrat, then Republicans of all stripes
could simply turn off their televisions as there would be no path to
victory in the Electoral College.

Would Jeb Bush have as good a chance, or better, than any other
prospective GOP candidate? Most certainly he might. As a popular
Governor of Florida, married to an Hispanic, and who garnered a good
proportion of the Hispanic vote, Bush would be in a strong position to
carry the state.

Electoral College reality shows that Florida is an essential
beginning, withNorth Carolina/Virginia also having to be in the GOP's
column as the evening wore on. Bush, as a former Governor of a
Southern state would not, at least, be at a disadvantage to any other
prospective Republican candidates chances in those two states.

Even with those three states in the bag, the GOP would still not be in
a winning position without Ohio and
one from New Hampshire/Iowa/Colorado/Nevada, at which point they
would squeak through by only two electoral votes. It is possible to
win without Virginia, but extremely challenging. Again, on the face of
it, Jeb Bush would not be at a disadvantage to any other prospective
Republican candidate in these states, and might have an advantage over
some in Iowa appealing to Evangelicals, and in New Hampshire appealing
to centrists.

Thus, looking at the 2016 election purely in Electoral College terms,
Jeb Bush would appear to be in a position to do no worse than any
other prospective candidate and, in crucial states, he might do

The Electoral College would be of a secondary consideration should
President Obama be as unpopular as G.W. Bush was in 2008, and the
economy was still in a sub-optimal situation, as regards the
unemployment figures after eight years of a Democrat president. Under
those circumstances it would not necessarily matter who the GOP
candidate was, as electoral victory would be more or less a given. At
that point the GOP establishments call for an "electable" candidate
would have no resonance and a genuine conservative, a Palin for
example, would have every chance for the nomination and subsequent
election as president.

If however the economy has improved, or is seen to be improving, and
especially if Hillary Clinton is the Democrat's candidate, then the
"electability" and Electoral College arguments would have some
substantial force and credibility. But it would be of no avail to have
an "electable" centrist if the Palin-ite, conservative forces didn't
vote. Although Evangelicals turned out for Romney in 2012, two million
Pero-ite White voters stayed home. Running another centrist in the
Dole/McCain/Romney line is no formula for ensuring a maximized
conservative turnout. Neither is running a perceived conservative like
Paul Ryan for VP a guarantee as the Romney/Ryan ticket proved.

In the scenario outlined above, i.e. a Clinton candidacy during a
relatively non-negative economic and political environment, a centrist
presidential candidate with a charismatic conservative VP running mate
may be the GOP's only best hope. A Jeb Bush for president Sarah Palin
for vice-president ticket covers all the Electoral College,
Evangelical, pro-life, centrist-conservative, experienced
governorships, male/female bases.

Both are strongly vetted and most certainly there is nothing in
Palin's life that has not be diced and sliced, disproved and shown to
be a product of leftist hate. Even in liberal circles there has been
grudging acceptance that Jeb Bush ran a successful administration in
Florida and that he is "Not George W."

Palin is not the media inexperienced person she was in 2008, and never
again would be the subject of the astonishing MSM/Blogosphere hate and
ambush that she was then. In effect a Bush/Palin team would be a
candidacy of ideas, from experienced campaigners, which would have to
be addressed by the opposition media and Dem's without the distraction
of lurid media "scandals".

An Hillary Clinton candidacy would make having a woman on the GOP's
ticket essential as "it's time for a woman in the White House" meme
could be negated to a degree by a female VP candidate. With the
balanced ticket, Bush's appeal to Hispanics and, according to Real
Clear Politics, the even more important possibility of a drop off in
Black turnout allied to an increase in White voters to the polls, even
a Clinton candidacy can be overcome.

The GOP establishment shunning Palin to the point of, once again, not
even inviting her to speak to the nominating convention would be the
height of stupidity and a guarantee of a sub-optimal conservative
turnout. Having Palin on the ticket would, as she did for McCain in
the most hopeless of circumstances, bring in a massive energy,
enthusiasm and commitment from her great mass of supporters.

Objections to the Bush/Palin team concept would include "the country
wouldn't want another Bush." That argument had force up until this
year, but as the Obama administration sinks in popularity and
credibility, G.W. Bush rises in both, and by 2016 his administration
would be a memory which might even be seen through rose colored
glasses. Certainly "it's all Bush's fault" would be a ludicrous battle
cry after eight years of Obama.

As for Palin, again, everything possible has been thrown at her and
the "she's dumb and thinks Africa is a country" nonsense is tired and
silly, and would be lampooned if trotted out again. The "heartbeat
away from the presidency" loses its force with Bush being much younger
than McCain, and Palin having been a commentator with authority on all
and sundry during her Fox consultancy years. She would of course be
more than a capable debater as she proved with Biden in 2008.

Would Palin accept the VP slot again? Only she could answer that, but
given her dedication to America, and if she was given the freedom to

campaign as was denied to her by the McCain team, it is of course a
possibility. It would hold out to her the chance of a run of her own
after eight years, when she would still be relativity young, and would
of course be vastly experienced. Running with a pro-life Catholic
would not be a barrier to Palin's views it could fairly be stated.

Would Palin's supporters accept her being VP? Speaking for myself if
Palin accepted the role then I would, as an uncompromising Palin
supporter, support the ticket wholeheartedly (after a wistful
consideration of the ticket being the other way around). Some Palin
supporters might state now that "Palin would never accept being the VP
candidate again" and raise many valid objections. But none of them can
speak for Palin herself, and time and place, Realpolitik and realistic
assessments can make seemingly impossible pairings e.g. Reagan/Bush

Immigration and establishment ties would appear to be the main divide
for conservatives. The seemingly impossible Bush/Palin pairing would not, however, be affected by the current immigration controversy which saw Bush plead for more immigrants at the Faith and Freedom Conference. That Palin made a seeming dig at Bush for his "fertile" comment is nothing compared to G.W.H's "voodoo economics" attack on Reagan. Bush self-described himself to Christian Broadcasting News CBN as pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, and pro-tax cuts.
By 2016 the immigration issue will have been addressed, and legislation will have passed, despite conservative objections and be under implementation, or it will have failed to pass. If the former, then the internal GOP divide on the issue could only be patched over with a Bush/Palin pairing (or Cruz if she does not wish to run). If the proposed "gang of eight" legislation fails then the pairing might be the only hope of keeping the GOP establishment on board for the election.
A sure sign that the establishment sees Jeb Bush as a possible candidate is Time Magazine running a major feature: "Has Jeb's time come." What the article doesn't address is how to effect "Jeb's time" without the support of the Palinite rank and file.
Would Bush accept the VP slot? There would be every reason for him to do so. If the ticket won he would be the heir apparent without question. If the ticket lost he would have proven his loyalty to the conservative wing and would be the absolute front runner for 2020.
The Palin/Bush pairing (which works either way) would see the rifts in the GOP healed over, a united team with massive resources in finance, manpower and credibility, and a very real path to Electoral College victory -- an historic compromise for the restoration of a conservative America. All this is moot of course if the immigration crisis splits the GOP asunder -- which might well lead be a Bush versus Palin primary campaign.

Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

No comments: