Among the myriad questions concerning which candidate from whom the Republican Party might draw greater benefit in the 2016 general election is who might stand as a better contrast against the presumed Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton.
Hillary advisers may have already answered that question. One unnamed Clinton insider detailed:
“We’d be much more concerned about Bush. When you have Romney against Clinton, [he] can’t really make the argument that it’s time to move on. You’ve got two people who have run before.”
It’s an analysis, however, that draws contempt from Republicans that argue Mitt Romney would be a stronger candidate against Hillary than Jeb Bush. Romney defenders point out that the possibility of painting Hillary as a retread of old political dynasties would be useless for Bush since those same arguments would apply to his candidacy.
What’s more, in the most recent Quinnipiac national poll from November – when few thought Romney might run – Mitt edges Hillary 45-44 while Jeb Bush is trounced by her 46-41. Though it’s still very early in the cycle, snapshot polls like these give some indication of how marginal votes from voters who pay little attention to debates and issues might swing, especially in a high-turnout election.
