ShareThis Page
The view from ‘JebWorld’ |
Featured Commentary

The view from ‘JebWorld’

Byron York
| Friday, November 20, 2015 8:57 p.m

The conventional wisdom that Jeb Bush is dead has become so unanimous it’s only natural to suspect it’s wrong.

Yes, the poll numbers are atrocious. Bush, now seeking traction with a New Hampshire tour, is at 4 percent in a recent Fox News national survey and a weak fifth in the RealClearPolitics average of polls.

Yet there is a not-crazy scenario in which Bush could rise again, not to dominate the race but to be in the running when the four candidates ahead of him self-destruct, kill each other or run out of gas.

JebWorld held a focus group in New Hampshire the day after Bush’s disastrous performance at the Republican debate in Boulder on Oct. 28. According to a source deep inside JebWorld, the result pointed to five areas of promise for Bush:

1) A large majority of group members were undecided and felt no rush to decide anything. It’s not even time to narrow their list of favorite candidates.

2) After all that has happened, New Hampshire voters still had a positive, or mostly positive, impression of Bush. They see him as smart, mature and dull.

3) They like Donald Trump, think he’s fun, but are concerned about giving Trump the vast powers of the presidency.

4) They love Ben Carson as a non-politician with a gentle bedside manner but are a little discomfited by his offbeat views on a number of topics.

5) They see Marco Rubio as a perfect vice president and wonder if he is too young, and has too few accomplishments, for the top job.

There’s no avoiding the fact that at this point in the game, the Jeb success scenario depends on other candidates falling.

Four of them, specifically. First, Trump. JebWorld continues to believe the New York billionaire doesn’t have what it takes for a long, grueling campaign. But if Trump does last, the still-rich Bush super PAC Right to Rise will have the ability to unleash millions of dollars worth of negative ads to exploit the doubts voters already have about him.

Next Carson. JebWorld believes Republicans are drawn to him because of his natural likeability and because he stands so far outside the political system. But they believe Carson’s support is particularly soft, with 80-plus percent of Carson supporters saying they might eventually vote for someone else.

That leaves Rubio and Ted Cruz, who could emerge as the two leaders after a Trump-Carson fade-out. One good-for-Jeb scenario would be that Rubio and Cruz then engage in an internecine battle so vicious, bitter and bloody that Republican voters come to believe neither is suited for the presidency.

In that case, Republicans look around and see Carly Fiorina, Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, John Kasich, Rand Paul, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal and Lindsey Graham, and ask: Now why was it we didn’t like Jeb?

The other good-for-Jeb scenario, JebWorld believes, is that Cruz slays Rubio. Despite Rubio’s solid progress in recent weeks, JebWorld believes he is all talk and is just beginning to face media scrutiny.

It’s been said over and over, but Bush really believes longevity will be the key to victory.

The bottom line: Conventional wisdom says it’s already over — just Google “Jeb Bush” and “death watch” — but conventional wisdom can always change.

Byron York is chief political correspondent for the Washington Examiner.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.