In (tepid) defense of a Jeb Bush candidacy

It’s certainly not an ideal situation for the candidate to be named Bush, but the drag is probably exaggerated. How many Republicans would withhold their support for the nominee solely because of dynastic implications? In a race against Hillary, the RCP average find Bush on equal footing with other potential GOP nominees. And, really, what is Hillary’s argument going to be on this? Never, ever vote for the same family the third time around? And would the Bush name be any more of a hindrance than running on the legacy of an unpopular Democratic administration? Put it this way, Republican senatorial candidates around the country seem far more interested in having Jeb Bush show up in their state than Democrats are in having Barack Obama visit.

On nearly every other issue, Jeb is your basic traditional conservative candidate. Pro-life. Hawkish. He like, all other candidates, opposes drug legalization—though Bush has supported repealing mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes. Bush has also actually reduced the size of government and cut taxes, which is more than you can say for most prospective GOP presidential candidates. I don’t think he’s much better than most of the governors eyeing a run, but he’s probably not any worse. (I told you, tepid.)