"Back to my dad's time and Ronald Reagan's time -- they got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan support," Bush said, adding that Reagan "would be criticized for doing the things that he did."
...", would have "a hard time" navigating a GOP terrain "that doesn't allow for disagreement, doesn't allow for finding some common ground."
What do GOP hubbers think? is he correct?
Well as usual when it comes to MSNBC/MSN, they don't give the entire story. Here is the actual story and you'll see how the statements were taken out of context:
By Morgan Little
June 11, 2012, 8:52 a.m.
The venerated Ronald Reagan may not have been able to reach the presidency in today’s Republican party, Jeb Bush said during a meeting with Bloomberg reporters in New York City on Monday morning.
Bush labeled the nation’s partisan bickering “disturbing,” placing much of the blame on the way President Obama conducted his first term.
“His first year could have been a year of enormous accomplishment had he focused on things where there was more common ground,” Bush said, according to Buzzfeed’s Ben Smith.
"Back to my dad’s time and Ronald Reagan’s time – they got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan support," Bush said, adding that Reagan "would be criticized for doing the things that he did."
Bush portrayed his father and Reagan’s penchant for reaching across the aisle to achieve their political goals as out of style compared with Washington’s “temporary” partisan fervor, and said such tendencies would have lead to a difficult path toward the presidential nomination.
“Ronald Reagan would have, based on his record of finding accommodation, finding some degree of common ground, as would my dad, they would have a hard time if you define the Republican Party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement, doesn’t allow for finding some common ground,” he said."
Notice how the article from MSN conveniently leaves out " if you define the Republican Party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy" and inserts "navigating a GOP terrain" which of course is not in the article. Not to mention Bush clearly says he doesn't agree.
I've been saying the same thing about Ronnie. I think the same way about JFK and most modern Dems, too.
Yes, he is completely correct! The GOP (well, neither party, but especially the GOP) no longer values bipartisanship, or even thinking! Today, I'm still absolutely conservative, but I no longer consider myself Republican.
Ronnie would be considered slightly left of Barack by today's measures.
I disagree, Obama is very far left, Reagan was probably more middle right with some far right views mixed in. What Reagan and other presidents in the past did was get people to work together. You have to know before you become President, or even if you want to be a Congressman, you have to know that there is a group is going to disagree with your point of view. It would take civil discussions and compromising to cure the issues our country faces today, much like was done years ago
That is the reason reason it would be harder for Reagan today is because both sides no longer respect the other sides views, they refuse to sit and have rational discussions. Until that changes, our country continue down the same road until we get to the end and go right off that cliff
I agree that how politics has worked in the past --and this includes "old school" senators of today like John McCain -- is working across the aisle.
Obama is finding that "One term president" bloc is immovable but he spent 2 years desperately trying to keep reaching and keep conversing.
And moving further away from his own hard left bloc.
But as he found, you can't legislate by negotiation if the other side refuses to budge.
Same with unions negotiating with management.
What will happen when the Tea Party fills the entire Congress, I wonder?
They'll dump the whole the in the harbor and call it a day.
Well the tea party could never fill Congress in its entirety, notice how they fell apart after the election in 2010. They can try and revive themselves, but their glory days are behind them
.I disagree with what you believe Obama and the one term president block. The Democrats said the same thing about George Bush after the 2000 election. But because of 9/11 they backed off. After Bush defeated Kerry, the Democrats rallied again and that was how they took back control of the House and Senate.
Do the Republicans make Obama's job easy, no and they shouldn't, just like the Democrats did not make George Bush's job easy, and they shouldn't have made it easy. I believe we can say the same thing about every president in the past. No matter who the president was, the other side did not make the job easy. The difference of the past is at least they could come to a compromise. Today it is totally impossible. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are dug into their bunkers and neither will move. What this country needs is a leader that will, from one bunker to the other and do a Gibb's and smacked them both in the back of the head and make them work together.
Truth is neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have the answers, both their platforms are incomplete. However, if you pull some from one side and pull some from the other side and put it together, a solution can be found. But how can you do that when neither side listens.
I do think Ronald Reagen would not be elected today considering the political climate and the changes the GOP have undergone. The Democrats have also changed and perhaps JFK wouldn't be elected either.
Both major parties need to go back to their original principles and stop being lead by big business.
I agree Stacie, the polarization began with Newt Gingrich & Dick Armey becoming the surrogates of conservative think-tanks funded by fat-cats.
And then there's the religious zealots who have also commandeered the GOP and also refuse to compromise . . .
by Grace Marguerite Williams4 years ago
in light of the current sociopolitical and socioeconomic situation regarding the United States of America? Do you believe that President Obama is doing the best job he can under the circumstances? Do you maintain that...
by Susan Reid5 years ago
During the 2010 mid-terms the GOP campaigned fiercely on the platform of job creation and, as a result of such promises, the GOP gained the majority in the House of Representatives. As the new Speaker of the House, John...
by cprice755 years ago
Could Ronald Reagan get the Republican nomination today?I am not talking about the idealized Ronald Reagan that we often hear about today, but the real Ronald Reagan--the one who was a union president, who raised...
by Credence24 years ago
See video linkhttp://www.nbcnews.com/id/3036697/ns/ms … 5#52776545Otherwise to recap-After watching Chris Matthews :Steve Lonegan is supposed the be the GOP standard bearer against Democrat Cory Booker for the...
by Cassie Smith4 years ago
Shouldn't the Republicans be congratulating themselves?And laughing at the dummycrats and Obama for the turd legislation that Obamcare is revealed to be? Really, the Republicans have a golden moment right now and...
by Grace Marguerite Williams4 years ago
presidency thus far? Do you believe that President Obama is doing a good job as president? If not, who do YOU wished you have voted for instead of President Obama? Why?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.