I am opposed to dynastic families, but there is little serious question (or perhaps to rephrase: little question among serious people) that Jeb Bush has been America’s most effective governor for the last several years. He leaves office with an approval rating of well over 60% in a state where the majority of voters are not from his party, and if he wasn’t constitutionally limited he’d be Florida governor for as long as he wanted the job.

It is in fact too bad that his last name is Bush. He has more aptitude for the job than anyone else currently on offer. But the reflexive attitudes expressed above will make it certain that the best guy won’t be at the party. (Though I don’t believe he wants the job anyway.)

I love the phrase: “ruthless, highly effective inauthenticity,” too. Perfectly sums Hillary up in only four words, not bad at all.

I am always amused that in a world of genuine female achievers, Hillary Clinton was ever picked up on and pedestalized by the feminists: she is the antithesis of what they claim to believe. And she has used her time in the senate to accomplish….? Well, about as much as Obama has. (This would be, to me, a somewhat more critical criteria to keep an eye on vis-a-vis Jeb Bush than their last names.)

Mitt Romney is going to have to decide what he actually believes, and stay there. This changing the message from audience to audience stuff isn’t going to work out for him in the national spotlight. Everyone tailors the message to an extent, but he’s been for abortion, then opposed to it; for gay marriage, then opposed to – very much depending on who it was he was addressing at the time. I’m a little curious about what he actually believes, if it’s something other than that he should be President.

I’m sorry for overlooking Bill Richardson. Of the group you listed, I actually like his resume the most since he’s definitely got the experience. I’ll be interested to see how he fares and (currently anyway), I could support him.

Bookworm,

On the LDS thing, I would actually welcome Romney since all of the Mormons I know are incredibly hard-working, helpful, and conservative individuals (what happened to Reid, I don’t know.) I agree with you on Kennedy–I remember the concern everyone had until he confronted the issue directly, pledging to be an American president and his election did much to lessen anti-Catholic prejudice in the United States. The problem with the LDS, however, is that many people view it as a cult and I think that won’t play well with many of the voters.

It would really be nice to actually vote for the person I want instead of the lesser of two evils for a change (the last time was Regan.)

I’m not John F. Kennedy fan, but it does seem to me that the one thing he DID NOT do was what everyone feared most — bring the Pope into the White House. People can let their religious morality inform their decisions without imposing their religion itself on others, and I think Romney has shown that his religious morality squares well with conservative thinking.

Guliani–I really liked the way he cleaned up Times Square but since I’m a social conservative, I don’t trust him to appoint Supreme Court Justices that I want. I would have more respect for someone who can actually make a marriage commitment and keep it. If he’ll betray vows to someone as close as his wife, why should I think he wouldn’t sell me out in a heartbeat (this, incidently is why I found Clinton to be so repugnant.) As for his handling 9/11, he just happened to be Mayor at the time (albeit, he did handle it better than Nagin would have.)

McCain–I actually voted for him over Bush but as Bookworm has said of Carter, I’m glad my vote was for naught. Originally, I questioned his judgment due to his being one of the Keating Five but was prepared to give him a one-time pass because of the character he showed during his time as a P.O.W. That has now passed since I think he once again exhibited a lack of good judgemnt by being duped into co-sponsoring the (disasterous) campaign finance reform legislation. To paraphrase Thomas Sowell, we have to judge policies by the incentives they create and not the good will that inspired them. When it comes to big issues, McCain appears to exhibit poor judgment.

Any other possible choises out there?

Is it just me or is anyone REALLY excited about any of the above? And if so, which one(s) and why?