Jeb Bush for Veep?

Speculation among Republican strategists is that Bush won’t run for president in 2016, but might be willing to be a strong conservative’s running mate.

National Journal
Tom DeFrank
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Tom DeFrank
June 16, 2014, 5:34 p.m.

Even be­fore Eric Can­tor’s seis­mic loss to a polit­ic­al novice backed by the tea party last week, many Re­pub­lic­an eld­ers had con­cluded that Jeb Bush, who really wants to be­come the third Pres­id­ent Bush, won’t run in 2016.

The emer­ging con­sensus ex­plains why some of these party man­dar­ins have launched a new polit­ic­al boom­let tout­ing the ex-Flor­ida gov­ernor: Jeb for Veep.

At first the no­tion seems a little weird. While a re­li­able ideo­lo­gic­al con­ser­vat­ive, Bush is a dreaded main­stream Re­pub­lic­an. Worse yet for many on the Right, he’s a fer­vent boost­er of com­pre­hens­ive im­mig­ra­tion re­form. That pro­vokes apo­plexy among many tea-party faith­ful and oth­er GOP con­ser­vat­ives.

With Can­tor’s de­feat blamed in part on his ap­par­ent will­ing­ness to en­ter­tain a middle ground on im­mig­ra­tion, Bush as second ba­nana on a tick­et headed by a more con­ser­vat­ive Re­pub­lic­an would seem to be a non­starter.

Not so fast, some GOP heavy-hit­ters main­tain.

“Jeb would be per­fectly ac­cept­able to the base if the nom­in­ee is a proven con­ser­vat­ive,” said a prom­in­ent Re­pub­lic­an con­sult­ant. “If it’s [New Jer­sey Gov. Chris] Christie or some mod­er­ate, Jeb would be a no go. On the oth­er hand, if a right-wing nom­in­ee wanted to make a bow to­wards the middle and add some His­pan­ic vote ap­peal, Jeb would be a good choice.”

“He has name ID, a Span­ish back­ground, [is] a former gov­ernor, and he’s con­ser­vat­ive.”

Le­gendary polit­ic­al op­er­at­ive Stu Spen­cer was even more em­phat­ic about Jeb’s value to a party anxious to at­tract in­de­pend­ents and swing Demo­crats in 2016.

“Jeb could be a safe choice for any­body,” said Spen­cer, who worked for three Re­pub­lic­an pres­id­ents. “He has name ID, a Span­ish back­ground, [is] a former gov­ernor, and he’s con­ser­vat­ive.”

Iron­ic­ally, it was Spen­cer who pushed Ron­ald Re­agan to pick Jeb’s fath­er, George H.W. Bush, as his run­ning mate in 1980. En route to the De­troit con­ven­tion, Spen­cer told Re­agan he needed a No. 2 more mod­er­ate than him­self to beat Pres­id­ent Carter. At first Re­agan balked, be­liev­ing Bush a little too squishy. But even­tu­ally he sided with Spen­cer, Bush cam­paign man­ager James Baker, and oth­er mod­er­ates, and tapped Bush for the tick­et.

Like Re­agan, a con­ser­vat­ive 2016 nom­in­ee would be­ne­fit from the per­cep­tion of pick­ing a more mod­er­ate run­ning mate, Spen­cer ar­gued.

“He’s the per­fect No. 2 for any Re­pub­lic­an tick­et,” said a top GOP fun­draiser who echoed Spen­cer in pro­mot­ing Bush. “It makes a world of sense.”

A spokes­man for Bush called such spec­u­la­tion “very pre­ma­ture.”

Bush has re­mained rig­or­ously quiet about his op­tions — even broth­er George W. Bush re­mains in the dark about his young­er sib­ling’s lean­ings. He’s told in­siders what he says pub­licly: He’ll talk with his fam­ily after the Novem­ber midterm elec­tions and de­cide soon there­after.

But his wife Columba’s big-time op­pos­i­tion to a pres­id­en­tial run leads many Re­pub­lic­an lead­ers to as­sume Jeb Bush won’t be a can­did­ate. That doesn’t ne­ces­sar­ily rule out a spot on the tick­et; giv­en the Bush fam­ily’s sense of pub­lic ser­vice, it might be hard for Bush to re­ject an ap­peal from the GOP nom­in­ee to help out.

Bush is an un­abashed con­ser­vat­ive, the the­ory goes, but a kinder, gentler ver­sion who can ap­peal to main­stream Re­pub­lic­ans, con­ser­vat­ive Demo­crats, and in­de­pend­ents. He would even the­or­et­ic­ally pass muster with con­ser­vat­ive red-hots who think he’s too es­tab­lish­ment — es­pe­cially since he speaks Span­ish like a nat­ive and is pop­u­lar with His­pan­ic voters turned off by the GOP’s hard line on im­mig­ra­tion re­form.

“A straight-up tea-party tick­et can­not win,” adds one of the GOP’s most prom­in­ent fun­draisers. “Too many Re­pub­lic­ans and in­de­pend­ents will just flat-out not vote for a tick­et with two tea-party guys. It will not hap­pen.”

And if he has to cam­paign for only three months as a veep nom­in­ee in­stead of more than two years swim­ming up­stream to be pres­id­ent, a seni­or Bush fam­ily source pre­dicts his wife would sign off. “Be­ing picked for pres­id­ent-in-wait­ing would be ideal for him and his fam­ily,” the con­sult­ant said.

Bush’s pro­spects for the second spot would test wheth­er the no-pris­on­ers Right look­ing to purge the party of main­stream Re­pub­lic­ans could abide an­oth­er Bush — or if, like the prag­mat­ic con­ser­vat­ive Re­agan, they’re will­ing to throw a bone to the middle to boost their chances of cap­tur­ing the White House.

At least for the mo­ment, that’s not a pop­u­lar no­tion in some con­ser­vat­ive quar­ters.

“If you put someone on the tick­et who sup­ports Com­mon Core [edu­ca­tion stand­ards] and bank bail­outs and the list goes on, you are tak­ing grass­roots en­ergy away from your can­did­acy,” said Freedom­Works com­mu­nic­a­tions dir­ect­or Jack­ie Bod­nar. “Pick­ing a Jeb Bush would really demon­strate how out of touch the tra­di­tion­al, old-guard Re­pub­lic­ans are with their con­stitu­ents back home.”

But Alf­onso Aguilar of the Latino Part­ner­ship for Con­ser­vat­ive Prin­ciples calls Bush “a smart and in­tel­li­gent choice” for po­ten­tial pres­id­en­tial nom­in­ees like Sens. Rand Paul and Ted Cruz or Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

“Jeb Bush would de­liv­er Flor­ida for Re­pub­lic­ans, in­crease our abil­ity to raise money, and is prac­tic­ally His­pan­ic,” Aguilar said. “If the choice is made by the top of the tick­et and he is a con­ser­vat­ive can­did­ate, I think the con­ser­vat­ive base would go along with it.”

What We're Following See More »
A CANDIDATE TO BE ‘PROUD’ OF
Chicago Tribune Endorses Gary Johnson
2 hours ago
THE LATEST

No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."

FUNERAL FOR ISRAELI LEADER
Obama Compares Peres to ‘Giants of the 20th Century’
2 hours ago
THE DETAILS

Speaking at the funeral of former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, President Obama "compared Peres to 'other giants of the 20th century' such as Nelson Mandela and Queen Elizabeth who 'find no need to posture or traffic in what's popular in the moment.'" Among the 6,000 mourners at the service was Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Obama called Abbas's presence a sign of the "unfinished business of peace" in the region.

Source:
THE QUESTION
How Many New Voters Does the Clinton Campaign Aim to Register?
2 hours ago
THE ANSWER

Three million—a number that lays "bare the significant gap between Donald Trump’s bare-bones operation and the field program that Clinton and her hundreds of aides have been building for some 17 months."

Source:
“STANDING FOR PRINCIPLES”
Chicago Tribune Endorses Johnson
3 hours ago
THE LATEST

In a somewhat shocking move, the Chicago Tribune has endorsed Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson for president, saying a vote for him is one that voters "can be proud of." The editorial barely touches on Donald Trump, who the paper has time and again called "unfit to be president," before offering a variety of reasons for why it can't endorse Hillary Clinton. Johnson has been in the news this week for being unable to name a single world leader who he admires, after earlier this month being unable to identify "Aleppo," a major Syrian city in the middle of the country's ongoing war.

Source:
NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
16 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
×