Jeb Bush Screws Up Iraq War Question

The past two days have been tumultuous for Jeb Bush, specifically concerning his comments in an interview with Megyn Kelly.

When asked, “On the subject of Iraq…Knowing what we know now, would you have authorized the invasion?”

Bush responded by saying, “I would have, and so would have Hillary Clinton…”

Kelly immediately followed up asking, “You don’t think it was a mistake?” To which Bush gave a long, convoluted response blaming the Iraq invasion on faulty intelligence and poor military strategy.

In 2015, saying that with all our current knowledge you would still invade Iraq is like saying that Neville Chamberlain was on to something when appeasing Hitler prior to World War 2. It is a statement founded on fundamentally faulty logic and tragic misinterpretations of history.

Republican pundits and talking heads jumped all over Bush after this interview. Many questioned his sanity and political acumen. Politico’s Roger Simon questioning not if, but how many times Jeb was dropped on his head. Bush endured a bashing for a news cycle, but defenders soon came to his side.

Ann Navarro, a weathered GOP strategist, followed up with Bush after the interview, asking him to clarify his comments. After consideration and distance from the interview, most likely realizing the widespread implications of supporting such an absurd position, Bush said that he misheard the question, and answered the question without considering its retrospective nature.

While such a deep misunderstanding seems suspect, let us assume for a minute that this was in fact a mammoth misunderstanding. That does not account for a few troubling parts of Bush’s response.

First, misunderstanding or mishearing such a direct, softball question then continuing to defend such a preposterous position after a skeptical follow up is cause for concern. If Jeb Bush is to stumble on this question so early in the race, additional gaffes are certain to come in the future.

Bush claimed that faulty intelligence was the primary cause of the alleged mistake to invade, however, this is factually inaccurate. The Senate Intelligence committee found that the Bush Administration, “repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent.”

This interview also brought to light a nagging question for the Bush campaign: how much should Jeb accept the family name? While the defense of family policy is admirable, it could also be politically toxic, highlighting an issue that will certainly be contentious along the campaign trail.

Regardless of the true intentionality behind Jeb Bush’s response, neither he nor the GOP needed this blunder.

This interview was bad for Jeb Bush not only due to the negative attention, but also because he’s been hailed as the moderate of the Republican field. Consider this: a main worry concerning the viability of Bush’s candidacy is his ability to make it through the Republican primary while holding moderate viewpoints. He will inevitably be forced to shift to the right to gain the nomination, and much like Romney, would be forced to flip-flop on some issues to win the general election. On the other hand, if Bush refuses to move right, he will be at risk of losing the nomination.

The process of balancing a more conservative base in the primary while looking forward to a more moderate general electorate will prove to be a struggle for Bush. Unnecessary blunders cannot be made while attempting to toe the proper line of conservatism.

The GOP is also in trouble. Jeb Bush was, and still may be, the front-runner to win the nomination. Every mistake he makes decreases the odds of a moderate opponent for Hillary in the general election, in turn hurting the the odds of a Republican winning back the White House in 2016.

Without a token military hawk in the running thus far, Republican candidates will have to prove their legitimacy in the realm of international relations. Strong nationalist rhetoric will most likely guide the party’s policies, but for individual candidates, foreign policy credentials will be at a premium. In tripping up on this question, Bush has decreased his legitimacy, opening the door for criticism from his rivals.

When Megyn Kelly asked, “Knowing what we know now, would you have authorized the invasion?” The answer should have been one word: no. In trying to defend his brother’s decision to invade Iraq, not only did Jeb further associate himself with the toxic Bush name, he made life unnecessarily difficult not only for himself, but for the party as a whole.