While I understand why Bush sounds unclear on his position on refugees, I think he's really more of a moderate candidate compared to other Republican candidates and while his opinion may be an outlier, it would be important as the more moderate Republicans would be swayed to him. In my opinion, in an election, you need to stick out from the group with your own policies and ideas. If everyone has the same policies and the same positions and the same everything, then... who should you vote for? Plus, it's impossible for everyone to have the same opinion, so you know that some candidates are lying. I think that if Bush is really more moderate on this issue, then he should come out and say so.
It doesn't seem to me that his two comments are mutually exclusive. It is a tough issue to settle and so people are likely to have varying responses. I think that the federal government should be a little more open about the screening process because some people might be more open to the refugees if they knew that there was a relatively strict but not unreasonable screening process. However, I do not think that splitting up families or dividing people based on religion is the answer. We need to have more information before we make a decision, but that needs to happen soon.
Jeb Bush seems like he is stuck in indecision between the two extreme choices of whether we should accept Syrian refugees into our country or not. When pressured into giving an immediate response, he kind of just picks one side of the issue and goes with it. I do agree with him when he says he'd like to see more information on the screening process for refugees. The government keeps mentioning this "screening process" but they don't say how strict or lenient it will be, who it applies to in terms of gender and age, etc. If we had this information, we would be able to better decide on our stances on this issue.
I think the most interesting predicament the article brings up is the shaky legal ground that the governors who are trying to bar immigrants from entering this country are standing on. Clearly, this conflict between the federal government and the state governments is problematic and, if it progresses, could be reminiscent of the Nullification Crisis (in that states are disobeying national law). I hope that it doesn't come to that and that we allow refugees to enter this country while screening them to ensure our country's safety.
Jeb Bush seems to have contradicting opinions of the refugees being allowed into the U.S. It's a bit confusing to see where he stands, but his proposal on getting more information on the screenings for incoming refugees. This is essentially a conflict between the federal and state governments. I hope we get through this because I believe refugees should be allowed into this country when they are in need. The governemnt keeps saying there will be a screening process but doesn't give much detail on who specifically it applies to or how it will be done. If we had these answers, I could see the stances on this being better distinguished if it were better explained.
The refugee issue is very complicated, there seems to be no clear fix that a majority of people would agree with, for this reason I understand Bush’s hesitance coming to picking and sticking to a side and idea. I myself am very conflicted with the issue, I believe in the freedom of Americans and all others, but in the sense of national security and other concerns with the issue it is hard to overlook them.
I'm not surprised by his conflicting conflicting views seeing this is a really complex issue and it is hard to take a firm decision on it. It sounds like he wants to let refugees in but he wants to be more selective and more selective with who should be screened for protection. I don't know if I agree totally with what he wants but it's better than what some people think like not letting any refugees in.
Personally, I felt that Bush's statements were not entirely contradictory, and certainly not enough to warrant large amounts of whiplash and media coverage. As I read it at least, Bush said that people had legitimate concerns over the efficiency of the current procedures for screening incoming refugees, however that it wasn't right to fully stop those refugees from entering the US. He then later said that the governors were correct in stopping without those stricter methods of regulation, and even advocating a temporary pause. Personally, I could see those statements being made together so long as Bush clarifies that the pause is only temporary, and also that the governors are only right in advocating a stop until the regulating process is bettered. However, I also see how the statements are viewed as completely contradictory, as those clarifications were not made. Overall, I think that the slip was not major, and it is being exacerbated by his current struggles in the polls. However, it is understandable that Bush would struggle to find his stand on such opinions, due to those same struggles. The voter base as it stands now is shifting away from his more moderate/center stance on many issues and is becoming generally based further to the right, and as he struggles to slide just a little bit closer to that right without giving up his own political identity, he is going to naturally have to back track and make blunders. As I view this, those blunders will cost him more votes than the shifting to the right will gain him, and it is probably better for him to stick to who he is. For one thing, he won't be continually ambushed by the media, and for another I think that the race will shift back in his direction as more candidates fall out and we get closer to the actual election, more of the general (moderate) population starts to become invested in the election, and Bush will begin to have more success again. I think that he is losing all hope too soon and it is going to end up hurting him if he strays from what he actually believes politically.
Bush, like many of his Republican constituents, is to some extent going against his own opinions in order to conform to the mainstream GOP set of beliefs. He does this so that he can gather more support from republican voters when his campaign is in turmoil. This highlights one of Bush's major problems: he will do seemingly anything to win. If voters see this, they will be less likely to trust his credibility and will ultimately question many of the statements he makes. In order to mount a successful campaign now, Bush needs to become his own person and not try to become whatever he thinks others want him to be.
I think the reason why Bush, and other candidates, often contradict themselves is because sometimes they voice what they believe, and other times they have to make statements that they don’t necessarily believe, but will please a majority of the voters. Many candidates change their views so they fit in with their party. The conflict with the Syrian refugees is complex, and I don’t think there’s one solution that’s going to please everyone. Right now, the best thing the government can do is enforce their screening process, because it would still allow refugees to enter the country, but America citizens would feel safer. I think many candidates contradict themselves on major issues because their goal is to please as many people as possible.
Although it seems like Bush is completely contradictory and unclear, I do not think his statements are clearly opposites of each other. First, Bush said that it is a tradition in the US to accept refugees and that the solution is not to ban them from coming here. Next, Bush said that not allowing refugees is acceptable if they cannot properly be screened, and that he respects the decision made not to allow refugees. The first half of Bush’s second statement appears as though he is saying that he wants to still allow refugees in, but only if he knows they will do no harm. For the second part, he could have respect for something and not agree with it necessarily, or maybe he did fumble on what he was saying. Maybe Bush did change his viewpoints, or maybe he had the same viewpoint both times but said things that appear contradictory--I’m not really sure. However, Bush seems has a more moderate view on refugees than other Republican candidates.
This is one more example of a politician trying to appease his constituents. He says one thing, it doesn't get the reaction he was quite hoping for, so he backtracks in an effort to save any chance of saving the votes he lost in the first place. Ironically, this makes him seem even weaker than it would have if he had just stuck to a position. Trump says whatever he wants and doesn't apologize to anyone, which is what people are responding to. Jeb, on the other hand, is trying to please everyone - pleasing almost no one in the process. He's painting himself as a weak leader, which is not what Republican voters want. It's unfortunate that Jeb is trying so hard to appeal to far right voters that come out in the primaries, shedding his true moderate opinions in the blink of an eye.
Cut the guy a break. He has to put up with the nonsense currently taking place in the GOP while still trying to maintain a solid public figure. The comments aren't even super contradictory. I honestly feel bad for Jeb. He's probably gotten the most flak from Trump this election. He's desperately trying to appease the populous and has probably taken the most risks in trying to do so, but to no avail. He quite frankly has no idea how to deal with Trump. That will probably cost him in the long run. If this election was Trump-less he might have had a chance.
While I understand why Bush sounds unclear on his position on refugees, I think he's really more of a moderate candidate compared to other Republican candidates and while his opinion may be an outlier, it would be important as the more moderate Republicans would be swayed to him. In my opinion, in an election, you need to stick out from the group with your own policies and ideas. If everyone has the same policies and the same positions and the same everything, then... who should you vote for? Plus, it's impossible for everyone to have the same opinion, so you know that some candidates are lying. I think that if Bush is really more moderate on this issue, then he should come out and say so.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't seem to me that his two comments are mutually exclusive. It is a tough issue to settle and so people are likely to have varying responses. I think that the federal government should be a little more open about the screening process because some people might be more open to the refugees if they knew that there was a relatively strict but not unreasonable screening process. However, I do not think that splitting up families or dividing people based on religion is the answer. We need to have more information before we make a decision, but that needs to happen soon.
ReplyDeleteJeb Bush seems like he is stuck in indecision between the two extreme choices of whether we should accept Syrian refugees into our country or not. When pressured into giving an immediate response, he kind of just picks one side of the issue and goes with it. I do agree with him when he says he'd like to see more information on the screening process for refugees. The government keeps mentioning this "screening process" but they don't say how strict or lenient it will be, who it applies to in terms of gender and age, etc. If we had this information, we would be able to better decide on our stances on this issue.
ReplyDeleteI think the most interesting predicament the article brings up is the shaky legal ground that the governors who are trying to bar immigrants from entering this country are standing on. Clearly, this conflict between the federal government and the state governments is problematic and, if it progresses, could be reminiscent of the Nullification Crisis (in that states are disobeying national law). I hope that it doesn't come to that and that we allow refugees to enter this country while screening them to ensure our country's safety.
ReplyDeleteJeb Bush seems to have contradicting opinions of the refugees being allowed into the U.S. It's a bit confusing to see where he stands, but his proposal on getting more information on the screenings for incoming refugees. This is essentially a conflict between the federal and state governments. I hope we get through this because I believe refugees should be allowed into this country when they are in need. The governemnt keeps saying there will be a screening process but doesn't give much detail on who specifically it applies to or how it will be done. If we had these answers, I could see the stances on this being better distinguished if it were better explained.
ReplyDeleteThe refugee issue is very complicated, there seems to be no clear fix that a majority of people would agree with, for this reason I understand Bush’s hesitance coming to picking and sticking to a side and idea. I myself am very conflicted with the issue, I believe in the freedom of Americans and all others, but in the sense of national security and other concerns with the issue it is hard to overlook them.
ReplyDeleteI'm not surprised by his conflicting conflicting views seeing this is a really complex issue and it is hard to take a firm decision on it. It sounds like he wants to let refugees in but he wants to be more selective and more selective with who should be screened for protection. I don't know if I agree totally with what he wants but it's better than what some people think like not letting any refugees in.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I felt that Bush's statements were not entirely contradictory, and certainly not enough to warrant large amounts of whiplash and media coverage. As I read it at least, Bush said that people had legitimate concerns over the efficiency of the current procedures for screening incoming refugees, however that it wasn't right to fully stop those refugees from entering the US. He then later said that the governors were correct in stopping without those stricter methods of regulation, and even advocating a temporary pause. Personally, I could see those statements being made together so long as Bush clarifies that the pause is only temporary, and also that the governors are only right in advocating a stop until the regulating process is bettered. However, I also see how the statements are viewed as completely contradictory, as those clarifications were not made. Overall, I think that the slip was not major, and it is being exacerbated by his current struggles in the polls. However, it is understandable that Bush would struggle to find his stand on such opinions, due to those same struggles. The voter base as it stands now is shifting away from his more moderate/center stance on many issues and is becoming generally based further to the right, and as he struggles to slide just a little bit closer to that right without giving up his own political identity, he is going to naturally have to back track and make blunders. As I view this, those blunders will cost him more votes than the shifting to the right will gain him, and it is probably better for him to stick to who he is. For one thing, he won't be continually ambushed by the media, and for another I think that the race will shift back in his direction as more candidates fall out and we get closer to the actual election, more of the general (moderate) population starts to become invested in the election, and Bush will begin to have more success again. I think that he is losing all hope too soon and it is going to end up hurting him if he strays from what he actually believes politically.
ReplyDeleteBush, like many of his Republican constituents, is to some extent going against his own opinions in order to conform to the mainstream GOP set of beliefs. He does this so that he can gather more support from republican voters when his campaign is in turmoil. This highlights one of Bush's major problems: he will do seemingly anything to win. If voters see this, they will be less likely to trust his credibility and will ultimately question many of the statements he makes. In order to mount a successful campaign now, Bush needs to become his own person and not try to become whatever he thinks others want him to be.
ReplyDeleteI think the reason why Bush, and other candidates, often contradict themselves is because sometimes they voice what they believe, and other times they have to make statements that they don’t necessarily believe, but will please a majority of the voters. Many candidates change their views so they fit in with their party. The conflict with the Syrian refugees is complex, and I don’t think there’s one solution that’s going to please everyone. Right now, the best thing the government can do is enforce their screening process, because it would still allow refugees to enter the country, but America citizens would feel safer. I think many candidates contradict themselves on major issues because their goal is to please as many people as possible.
ReplyDeleteAlthough it seems like Bush is completely contradictory and unclear, I do not think his statements are clearly opposites of each other. First, Bush said that it is a tradition in the US to accept refugees and that the solution is not to ban them from coming here. Next, Bush said that not allowing refugees is acceptable if they cannot properly be screened, and that he respects the decision made not to allow refugees. The first half of Bush’s second statement appears as though he is saying that he wants to still allow refugees in, but only if he knows they will do no harm. For the second part, he could have respect for something and not agree with it necessarily, or maybe he did fumble on what he was saying. Maybe Bush did change his viewpoints, or maybe he had the same viewpoint both times but said things that appear contradictory--I’m not really sure. However, Bush seems has a more moderate view on refugees than other Republican candidates.
ReplyDeleteThis is one more example of a politician trying to appease his constituents. He says one thing, it doesn't get the reaction he was quite hoping for, so he backtracks in an effort to save any chance of saving the votes he lost in the first place. Ironically, this makes him seem even weaker than it would have if he had just stuck to a position. Trump says whatever he wants and doesn't apologize to anyone, which is what people are responding to. Jeb, on the other hand, is trying to please everyone - pleasing almost no one in the process. He's painting himself as a weak leader, which is not what Republican voters want. It's unfortunate that Jeb is trying so hard to appeal to far right voters that come out in the primaries, shedding his true moderate opinions in the blink of an eye.
ReplyDeleteCut the guy a break. He has to put up with the nonsense currently taking place in the GOP while still trying to maintain a solid public figure. The comments aren't even super contradictory. I honestly feel bad for Jeb. He's probably gotten the most flak from Trump this election. He's desperately trying to appease the populous and has probably taken the most risks in trying to do so, but to no avail. He quite frankly has no idea how to deal with Trump. That will probably cost him in the long run. If this election was Trump-less he might have had a chance.
ReplyDelete