THE EASIEST WAY TO FILL A JEB-SHAPED HOLE:

Jeb Bush: The Future of the Republican Party: With no obvious candidate to lead the Republican party (and one having just stepped down), some are looking to Jeb Bush. Which is news to him. (Tucker Carlson, 7/08/09, Esquire)

How have Republicans alienated Hispanics?

The people that are on television are the loudest on the immigration issue. The emotion, the anger, is a signal. Put aside the substance, but just in terms of the language. It makes it sound like them and us. And the evidence is that after [the GOP] making major inroads, Hispanics have turned toward the Democratic party in the last two election cycles. Big time. Compare that to how my brother did and how I did and how other Republican candidates have done in the past and you can see a trend line that's quite disturbing. [...]

Why has the party gotten so unpopular?

I don't think there's any seismic shift. The Democrats have won on tactics. Barack Obama would not have gotten elected if he'd let us in on his secret plan prior to the election. He would not have gotten elected if he'd said, "My idea is to create a $1.8 trillion deficit for the next fiscal year. My idea is to spend $750 billion [the president's budget estimate puts this figure at $630 billion] over the next ten years on a government-sponsored, government-subsidized health-care policy. My idea is to create a massive cap-and-trade system [based on the idea] that CO2 is [a] pollutant and we need to tax it in a massive way to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions." Those ideas, which are now embedded in his budget, and the ideas in the stimulus package, weren't central in his campaign. In fact, he basically won the tax debate, which is breathtaking if you think about it. Cutting taxes is generally considered a center-right idea, not a center-left or left idea. He made it appear like McCain was going to raise taxes, which was unfair, but there was no response back. When there was an ideological component, it was generally centrist or even center-right. Had he said what he was going to do as a candidate, [Obama] would have lost. [...]

Does the party need to change or de-emphasize its positions on abortion or gay marriage?

No. No, I think those are important issues to not shy away from. And I don't think that's the reason why suburban voters have migrated to the Democrats. I think it's the economic issues. We have not been able to explain why these timeless conservative principles matter in 2009.

I think the economic issues drove the 2008 elections, and to a certain extent the 2006 election. The last big election was the presidential race in 2008. Senator McCain, in spite of his life experiences, his worldview, the kind of man he is — I think he was far more qualified to be president than President Obama — he could not connect to people's anxieties and fears about the economy. He could not take our timeless principles, he could not take conservative values and express them in a way that drew people toward the belief that while we're living in these tumultuous times, the solution is not bigger and stronger government, that we shouldn't migrate toward the collectivist response and feel comforted on one level because government is there to take care of us, that there are dangers to that, number one, and, number two, the alternative is to use these basic institutions that are the hallmark of our philosophy we need to strengthen. We need to strengthen the family, we need to empower people, give them the tools to be successful. We need to reform the things that right now make it harder for families to be successful.

If his last name was Smith he'd be president today.

Posted by Orrin Judd at July 8, 2009 12:33 PM