The Russians have a saying.
"Scazat ee daylat nee pohozhnee. Ahnee rozhnee."
Translated it amounts to, "words and deeds are not the same. They are different."
In American slang it goes something like, "the proof's in the pudding!"
2015 will be a pivotal year in America. Republicans will attempt to find the best possible alternative to likely Democrat nominee, Hillary Clinton. At stake is throwing a roadblock in Democrat's final push toward Communism in America.
It won't be easy. The Democrats have their true believers. The have embraced the term "social justice" and are now applying it to Cuba and the "Fidelistos."
Many in the Republican leadership are already evauluating the wisdom of a concession of sorts. In other words, concentrating on the "low hanging fruit," as GOP strategist, Dick Morris explains. This translates to tweaking the existing system. "Fundalmental change," in the minds of Morris, Karl Rove and the senior leadership is beyond realistic expectation.
Jeb Bush is considered their "safe savior." Hillary herself has quietly admitted that "beating Bush in his home state will be a challenge." Top minds in the Bush camp are already whispering the name "John Kasich" as Bush's running mate. These people are nobody's fools. They know that to lose Florida and Ohio would create electoral problems for Clinton.
What about the Tea Party Republicans who arguably pulled the party from the gutter in 2010? It's fairly obvious that Jeb Bush is not their man! In the minds of the leadership, it doesn't matter! Given the choice of Hillary or Bush, these troubled voters will "hold their noses and pull the level for Jeb." After all, anything would be better than Hillary! Besides, these same people voted for his brother! In most cases, TWICE! Rumor has it that Jeb might actually be a wee bit to the right of "Dubya!" So, get over it!
Could things be more clear?
True, much of the party base is proclaiming that they will not vote for Jeb under any circumstance. The GOP Establishment is banking on their change of heart when November 2016 rolls around. Meanwhile, conservatives can splinter as they did in 2012. True, there will be more to choose from. But, Jeb will be a stronger candidate than Mitt Romney. That's why Romney opted out of the race. Look for Romney to endorse Bush sometime in 2016.
Conservative Republicans' biggest problem is based on "purity." Only those with minimal experience are exempted from ultra zealous scrutiny that generally accompanies years in office. It is much easier to trust someone with no resume and reassuring words. Deeds draw attention and usually criticism. But character comes from them. And with it a right to say, "give me your blessing; not because I deserve it, but because I have earned it!"
Deeds come in the form of positive change. And, the only place that you can assess them is when a candidate's record comes under the microscope. Anything less is only talk.
Tea Party Republicans can choose the 2016 nominee. But they must grow up to do it. It begins with evaluating a candidate's accomplishments in a previous office. We must also look at issues that will ultimately make the difference with that 10% that will remain undecided, up until the last moment.
Two issues considered Democrat strengths by their partisan media cohorts are "education and the environment." As the Republican leadership concludes, Jeb Bush had a respectable record with the environment. Plus, he promoted Charter Schools, which proved to be a huge success in Florida. On both counts he trumps Hillary Clinton decisively!
Hillary had little to say about preserving Florida's wetlands. Her opposition to Charter schools left the impression that she was in bed with the teachers union.
While Bush may edge Clinton on Environmental issues, he places a distant second to Texas Governor, Rick Perry in this arena. Under Perry's watch, CO2 emissions have been cut in half. The ozone levels are down 24%! Texas is the nation's leading producer of wind.
Credit Maine with recording the highest rate of Hispanic high school graduation rates(86%) in America. Texas finished second with 82%, according to an ABC poll. Yet, while Maine is less than two percent Hispanic, Texas is 42%.
Equally notable is the increase in Hispanics in higher education. According to Politifacts, by the end of 2012, Hispanics in higher education had increased 118% since 2001. Hispanic college graduation rates were up 228% during that same time!
Texas students overall had climbed from 33rd to 4th nationally in math and reading scores.
It gets even better!
One of Rick Perry's signature initiatives has been "lowering the cost" of a college education. As of May, 2013, there were 13 Texas College institutions that offered a four-year degree(eight full time semesters) for $10,000. A large number of those taking advantage of the tuition reduction are minority students.
For liberals who talk about Texas' "sub-par" health care system, think again! The costs have come down because the "loser pays tort reform" has lowered physicians E & O expense! For those not convinced, ask the 34,000 new doctors who have recently relocated to Texas!
Obviously no candidate in either party can trump these accomplishments while in elected office. Yet, many stalwart Tea Party advocates would rather talk about an HPV vaccine that was never implemented or a tuition waiver that was favored by 177 of 181 Texas legislatures. You hear accusations such as Perry's alleged closeness with Mississippi's Barbour clan. Or, the fact that he supported David Dewhurst's failed Senate effort against Ted Cruz in 2012. But are these deal breakers?
Scott Walker is the recent poster boy for Republicans not wanting Bush. The question emerging is "can he win thye necessary 40% of Latino vctes?" Anything less will likely yield a "Mitt Romney type" verdict...
Ted Cruz talks beautifully. Without question, he is a brilliant man. Yet what has he actually accomplished while in office, outside of shutting the government down? Besides, wouldn't he be more valuable to the conservative cause as a Supreme Court Justice?
We know that Rand Paul has his base and we should listen to them. Perry's orientation is more closely in tune with Paul's than any other candidate. Case in point: Both Perry and Paul have acknowledged that social issues such as "Gay Marriage, Abortion and Marijuana legalization" should be left up to the state's exclusive judgment, in accordance to the 10th amendment. This could be huge in states such as Colorado and Oregon.
As logical as it may sound. As impressive as the record reflects, there remains this idea that "only a moderate" can win in key GOP circles. But are not the accomplishments recorded under Perry's watch important for all Americans?
It will still come down to finding 270 electoral college votes. Bush braintrusts believe that they have found a way. Do any of the other candidates have a similar path?
Perry would need to win Florida. While he might do better than Mitt Romney did, there are still concerns. My conclusion is that if he were to tap Marco Rubio for his running mate, he would accomplish two objectives.
(1) He would win Miami-Dade County. Democrats path to victory in Florida runs through Dade County. Rubio is like a "rock star" to this county of 2.6 million where 70% of the residents speak Spanish as their first language.
(2) Rubio could effectively canvas New Mexico and Nevada and with the help of their Latino Republican Governors could lure Hispanic voters to the Republicans. New Mexico is 47% Hispanic, Nevada 25%. Rubio actually live in the latter six years.
This would probably be enough. Perry's appeal to "blue collar" Democrats and Independents is especially strong. In the end, it's possible that he would secure more Buckeye votes than Bush. Even, if Bush had the Governor of Ohio as his running mate!
Iowa and Virginia finals can be determined by Evangelical turnout. It's a mathematical certainty that a Perry-Rubio ticket would motivate more to the voting booths than Romney's 33.7%. There are 89 million Evangelicals in America. Only 30 million voted in 2012. Shockingly 22% of them broke for Barack Obama.
In short, Perry can win the White House. While he might not be "Mr. Perfect" in the eyes of Tea Party purists, most all will admit that he would be better than Bush. Odds are he is the only Republican who can both topple Bush and later defeat Hillary Clinton.
Never forget than "money" will play a key role in this election. Can anyone besides Bush and Perry come up with enough to challenge Clinton? This consideration more than most, must be considered going forward...
So, we come to the question of "who has accomplished the most in a similiar, albeit smaller position?" From the economy, to education, to the environment to healthcare, it is decisively Rick Perry. True, he scares the "willies" out of the Democrats. And, to an extent, much of the Republican Establishment. His speaks of a "downsize" of the federal government.
It amounts to a total outsider, who comes off as a gun slinger. Such individuals are threatening to those entrenched in old ways.
However, most conclude that this is what is truly needed in today's Washington.