Sunday Open Thread [3.29.15]

Jeb Bush “is expected to be a formidable contender for the GOP nomination. But there are signs that his biography will lead to struggles in the primary’s early stages. There are signs that a worst-case, crash-and-burn scenario for Bush is more realistic than even his skeptics recognize,” National Journal reports.

Jonathan Bernstein: “If party actors remain split or uncommitted and prefer to wait for tests of electoral strength, it’s easy to imagine Bush finishing fifth or lower in Iowa, failing to rally in New Hampshire, and then finding himself almost a non-factor in South Carolina. One thing’s for sure: Waiting for the Florida primary to come around isn’t going to be a successful nomination strategy.”

NBC News: “With the Obama administration announcing this month that some 16 million people have obtained health insurance since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the Republicans’ intense focus on completely repealing the law is increasingly looking unrealistic.”

“Republicans blasted Obama for disrupting the health insurance of Americans to enact his policy vision, as the early days after the law’s enactment including thousands of Americans having their existing insurance plans canceled. Now, with Obamacare more entrenched, Republicans would face the political backlash from a huge overhaul if they went through with their plans to repeal and replace the ACA.”

Scott Walker is the best candidate to bridge both the Establishment and the Tea Party. But he just did something that will give a huge opening to Ted Cruz.

“Likely GOP presidential candidate Scott Walker told a private gathering of New Hampshire business leaders earlier this month that he supports providing some illegal immigrants with a pathway to citizenship,” the Washington Post reports.

“The position would mark a significant shift from away from the hardline ‘no amnesty’ stance Walker has taken in public in recent weeks. The Wisconsin governor also told the small group that illegal immigrants seeking citizenship should not receive preferential treatment over applicants who are already in line, according to the person, who was not authorized to speak about it publicly.”

Remember, allowing any illegal to stay here is amnesty and unacceptable. The Tea Party cannot have that.

Michael Tomasky:

More serious debates will sometimes compare the positions and platforms of the Democrat and the left alternative. But in my experience, these debates also tend to get personal pretty quickly: “I just can’t stand Al Gore,” and so on. We’re human beings, after all, and it’s understandable to feel that you have to be able to at least tolerate the sight of this person you’re going to be exposed to on a daily basis for the next four to eight years.

But it’s not a good way to think about lesser-evilism. Yes, the candidates’ platform positions tell us certain things about their political imagination, their vision of a just society and, more prosaically, which wealthy interests they’re unwilling to risk offending. So they do count for something.

But the right way to think about one’s vote for president is to think about the presidency not as a person, but as a thing—a huge, sprawling, complex, cumbrous, many-tentacled thing. The executive branch is a corporation. Or, if it makes you feel better, a huge nonprofit. It’s thousands of people doing thousands of things: big things, like setting Middle East policy, and small things, like making sure a few painters in central West Virginia are getting a fair wage for federal contract work.

And on this score, the differences between the two major parties are vaster than vast. This maybe didn’t used to be so, back when there were actual moderate Republicans. But now? With the Republican Party controlled by the radical right, a Republican presidency doesn’t mean merely that you’re going to have to see that distasteful reactionary with the cracker-ish accent on your TV screen for the next few years. It means that thousands of people are going to be making many thousands of deeply reactionary decisions, across all federal agencies and departments. This stuff doesn’t make the front pages. It rarely makes the news at all. But it goes on, and it affects all of us every day: decisions about civil-rights and environmental enforcement, about the protection of public lands, about the ethical questions raised in scientific research, about the safety of consumer products (and now financial instruments, thanks to Elizabeth Warren), about which polluting or swindling corporations to investigate and with how much zeal… You get the picture.

Sheldon Adelson “is said to be incensed” over former Secretary of State James Baker’s comments about Israel “and the lack of pressure put on him by the Jeb Bush team before his address — a significant concern, given that Mr. Adelson has the resources to pour tens of millions of dollars into the Republican presidential primary,” the New York Times reports.

“But the flare-up could thrust Mr. Bush into conflict with some of the most hawkish voices in his party, including some leading Republican donors, and a constituency determined to demonstrate its strength in the primary.”

Can’t offend the billionaire.

Politico: “Tens of millions of listeners — and potential GOP primary voters — tune in each week to the biggest right-wing radio hosts, who hold forth on the merits and demerits of the various 2016 Republican hopefuls as keenly as they spit invective about Barack Obama and the Democrats. Many of them are big fans of the Texas senator, if not outright supporters. Most are holding their cards close, refusing to hug any candidate too tightly, be it in the spirit of equanimity or out of fear of alienating some listeners.”

“But nearly all the kings and queens of the conservative airwaves express admiration for a man almost universally despised by his Senate colleagues and dismissed by the mainstream media: Cruz. And they are equally clear about who they do not like: Mushy ‘progressives’ like Jeb Bush and Chris Christie.”