Iowa Poll: Nearly Two-Thirds Can't Stand Biden

Makes sense.

He's an absolute disaster.

At the Des Moines Register, "Iowa Poll: 62% of Iowans disapprove of the job Joe Biden is doing as president":

Fewer than one third of Iowans approve of the job Joe Biden is doing as president, a steep drop from earlier this year.

Thirty-one percent of Iowans approve of how Biden is handling his job, while 62% disapprove and 7% are not sure, according to the latest Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll.

That’s a 12 percentage point drop in approval from June, the last time the question was asked. Biden's disapproval numbers jumped by 10 points during the same period. In June, 43% approved and 52% disapproved.

Biden’s job approval has not been in net positive territory in Iowa since March, when 47% of Iowans approved of his performance and 44% disapproved.

"This is a bad poll for Joe Biden, and it's playing out in everything that he touches right now,” said pollster J. Ann Selzer. The partisan breakdown of the poll shows Biden has nearly no support from Republicans. Just 4% of Republicans say they approve of his job performance as president, while 95% disapprove. Among Democrats, that number is largely reversed, with 86% approving and 7% disapproving. A majority of political independents disapprove, at 62%, while 29% approve.

Biden's job approval rating is lower than former President Donald Trump's worst showing in the Iowa Poll. The former Republican president's worst job approval was 35% in December 2017. Other recent presidents' worst Iowa Poll results: Barack Obama, 36%, in February 2014, and George W. Bush, 25%, in September 2008.

The poll of 805 Iowa adults was conducted Sept. 12-15 by Selzer & Co. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points...

Still more.

 

Bernie Sanders Internal Numbers

CNN's reporting the Iowa results right now, as are the other networks, no doubt.

Bernie's leading the popular vote totals, but Buttigieg has won more voters around the state, and hence took a larger share of the delegates.

Joe Biden absolutely crashed last night, and I expect he'll bomb in New Hampshire as well. (And Nia-Malika Henderson, on CNN earlier, questioned the strength of Biden's "wall" in the South Carolina primary coming later this month.

I love it.

In any case, at the Intercept, "SANDERS CAMPAIGN’S INTERNAL CAUCUS NUMBERS SHOW THEM LEADING IOWA, WITH BIDEN A DISTANT FOURTH."

BREAKING: The Iowa Democratic Party has released 62% of its caucus results.

Pete Buttigieg leads with about 27% in the State Delegate Equivalent count.

Bernie Sanders follows with about 25%.

More here:

BREAKING: The Iowa Democratic Party has released 62% of its caucus results.

Pete Buttigieg leads with about 27% in the State Delegate Equivalent count.

Bernie Sanders follows with about 25%.

More here: https://t.co/glyEmOk8dS pic.twitter.com/Kjej9p4q5y

— NPR (@NPR) February 4, 2020

Democrats Are Decadent and Depraved

It's true.

At the Other McCain, "Disaster in Iowa: The Democratic Party Is Decadent and Depraved":

The way Democrats run their Iowa caucuses is difficult to explain briefly, but the result Monday was clear. Within an hour of the beginning of the complicated process, the totals of the first-round voting began to be reported via social media, and from precinct after precinct came the same phrase: “Biden — not viable.”

Former Vice President Joe Biden has based his campaign on the argument that he’s the most “electable” Democratic candidate, but the voters of Iowa shot a torpedo through the hull of that argument. Due to a technical glitch that delayed the state Democratic Party’s counting process, we still don’t have official results. But by 10:30 p.m. Eastern time Monday, it became apparent to caucus-watchers that Biden was headed for a fourth-place finish in the Hawkeye State, behind Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders; South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg; and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Buttigieg’s strong second-place showing is a big story — the young mayor out-performed expectations — but Biden’s humiliating defeat is much bigger. . .

Media Roundup Slams Democrats for Iowa Disarray (VIDEO)

Via Free Beacon:

Impact of the Iowa Chaos

From Jonathan Last, at the Bulwark, an excellent analysis.

It's been a perfect storm burying Iowa in negative coverage, and even the experts are saying the Hawkeye State's special role as "first in the nation" is at risk.

Iowa: Ded https://t.co/MTydnoHpQd

— Jonathan V. Last (@JVLast) February 4, 2020

Added: See also AoSHQ, "The Soyciety Pages: Bill Kristol Declares, 'We Are All Democrats Now'."

Democrats Are Facing Disaster

There's too much to report on the Iowa chaos (check Memeorandum).

But one thing's for sure, things are going terribly for the Democrats.

For example, Gallup is out this morning with the best presidential approval number for President Trump --- he's at 49 percent approval, and more than 6 in 10 approve of his handling of the economy, a death knell for Democrat prospects this fall, especially if those number hold up.

More at AoSHQ, "GALLUP: TRUMP JOB APPROVAL RISES TO HIGHEST LEVEL EVER, AT 49%."

Donald Trump’s job approval rating has risen to 49% in a new Gallup poll. https://t.co/aspVxbbTaS

— GallupNews (@GallupNews) February 4, 2020

Identity Politics Remains a Political Loser

It's Kim Strassel.

I love this lady!

At WSJ, "Stay Woke, Drop Out: In its wake, identity politics leaves a trail of failed Democratic candidates":

In its wake, identity politics leaves a trail of failed Democratic candidates, writes @KimStrassel https://t.co/auu0EMfEGU via @WSJ

— Kimberley Strassel (@KimStrassel) January 17, 2020

To paraphrase Santayana, Democrats who refuse to acknowledge Hillary Clinton’s failures in the 2016 election were always doomed to repeat them. Why is their primary field littered with the failed bids of woke candidates? Why is #WarrenIsASnake trending on Twitter? Because identity politics remains a political loser.

That’s the takeaway from the rapidly narrowing Democratic field, and smart liberals warned of it after 2016. Mark Lilla, writing in the New York Times, faulted Mrs. Clinton for molding her campaign around “the rhetoric of diversity, calling out explicitly to African-American, Latino, LGBT and women voters at every stop.” Successful politics, he noted, is always rooted in visions of “shared destiny.”

Progressives heaped scorn on Mr. Lilla—one compared him to David Duke—and doubled down on identity politics. Nearly every flashpoint in this Democratic race has centered on racism, sexism or classism. Nearly every practitioner of that factionalist strategy has exited the race. Mr. Lilla is surely open to apologies.

Kamala Harris created the first big viral moment when she tore into Joe Biden, absolving him of being a “racist” even as she accused him of working with segregationists to oppose school busing. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand didn’t hold the race card but ran a campaign about “women’s equality,” attacking any Democrat who didn’t measure to her standards on abortion, child care and violence against women.

Sen. Cory Booker campaigned relentlessly on “systemic racism” and “social justice,” blasting Mr. Biden for his work on the 1994 crime bill and warning the nation of an “all-out assault” on black voting rights in 2020. Beto O’Rourke felt the need to make up for his own whiteness by going all in on reparations for slavery. Julián Castro built his run on complaints about “discriminatory housing policy,” injustices to transgender and indigenous women, and threats to marginalized communities.

Which bring us to Elizabeth Warren’s attempt to rescue her campaign with a Hail Mary appeal to “sexism.” Her campaign leaked in the run-up to Tuesday’s debate the claim that Mr. Sanders, in a private 2018 meeting, told her he didn’t believe a woman could win the presidency. Mr. Sanders denied it. When the inevitable CNN question came Tuesday night, Ms. Warren played the victim and rolled out a rehearsed statistic about the election failure rate of the men on stage. She praised the Democratic Party for having “stepped up” to elect a Catholic president in 1960 and a black one in 2008 and suggested it should do the same for a female candidate today. Sen. Amy Klobuchar cheered her on.

This is the politics of exclusion—and it explains why a field that began as the most diverse in Democratic history is now coming down to a competition between two old white men. Candidates who speak primarily to subsections of the country are by necessity excluding everybody else. All voters want to know what a candidate is going to do specifically for them, and for the country as a whole. And while many voters view issues in a moral context, few voters feel a moral imperative to vote for candidates solely because they are black, or female, or gay. It’s an unpersuasive argument.

Identity politics is also by necessity vote-losing, because it requires accusations. Ms. Warren is getting blowback now after implying that Mr. Sanders is a misogynist, and calling him a liar. Sanders supporters are lacing Ms. Warren on social media with snake emojis and declaring a #NeverWarren campaign. Even if she stages a comeback, she’s alienated a key base of support.

Precisely because Mr. Biden and Mr. Sanders don’t have easy identity-politics cards to play, they’ve focused on broader themes. Yes, they give shout-outs to core liberal constituencies, but Mr. Biden’s consistent argument is that he is the only one qualified to beat Mr. Trump, while Mr. Sanders’s is that America needs to overhaul its economic system. Those are positions around which greater numbers of Democrats can unify...

More.

Bernie Sanders Is a Hardline Communist

[Re-upping this piece from almost exactly four years ago, so hilarious.]

From Paul Sperry, at the New York Post, "Don’t be fooled by Bernie Sanders — he’s a diehard communist":

As polls tighten and self-described socialist Bernie Sanders looks more like a serious contender than a novelty candidate for president, the liberal media elite have suddenly stopped calling him socialist. He’s now cleaned-up as a “progressive” or “pragmatist.”

But he’s not even a socialist. He’s a communist.

Mainstreaming Sanders requires whitewashing his radical pro-Communist past. It won’t be easy to do.

If Sanders were vying for a Cabinet post, he’d never pass an FBI background check. There’d be too many subversive red flags popping up in his file. He was a Communist collaborator during the height of the Cold War.

Rewind to 1964.

While attending the University of Chicago, Sanders joined the Young People’s Socialist League, the youth wing of the Socialist Party USA. He also organized for a communist front, the United Packinghouse Workers Union, which at the time was under investigation by the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

After graduating with a political-science degree, Sanders moved to Vermont, where he headed the American People’s History Society, an organ for Marxist propaganda. There, he produced a glowing documentary on the life of socialist revolutionary Eugene Debs, who was jailed for espionage during the Red Scare and hailed by the Bolsheviks as “America’s greatest Marxist.”

****

Sanders still hangs a portrait of Debs on the wall in his Senate office.

In the early ’70s, Sanders helped found the Liberty Union Party, which called for the nationalization of all US banks and the public takeover of all private utility companies.

After failed runs for Congress, Sanders in 1981 managed to get elected mayor of Burlington, Vt., where he restricted property rights for landlords, set price controls and raised property taxes to pay for communal land trusts. Local small businesses distributed fliers complaining their new mayor “does not believe in free enterprise.”

His radical activities didn’t stop at the ­water’s edge.

Sanders took several “goodwill” trips not only to the USSR, but also to Cuba and Nicaragua, where the Soviets were trying to expand their influence in our hemisphere.

In 1985, he traveled to Managua to celebrate the rise to power of the Marxist-Leninist Sandinista government. He called it a “heroic revolution.” Undermining anti-communist US policy, Sanders denounced the Reagan administration’s backing of the Contra rebels in a letter to the Sandinistas.

His betrayal did not end there. Sanders lobbied the White House to stop the proxy war and even tried to broker a peace deal. He adopted Managua as a sister city and invited Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega to visit the US. He exalted Ortega as “an impressive guy,” while attacking President Reagan.

“The Sandinista government has more support among the Nicaraguan people — substantially more support — than Ronald Reagan has among the American people,” Sanders told Vermont government-access TV in 1985.

Sanders also adopted a Soviet sister city outside Moscow and honeymooned with his second wife in the USSR. He put up a Soviet flag in his office, shocking even the Birkenstock-wearing local liberals. At the time, the Evil Empire was on the march around the world, and threatening the US with nuclear annihilation.

Then, in 1989, as the West was on the verge of winning the Cold War, Sanders addressed the national conference of the US Peace Council — a known front for the Communist Party USA, whose members swore an oath not only to the Soviet Union but to “the triumph of Soviet power in the US.”

Today, Sanders wants to bring what he admired in the USSR, Cuba, Nicaragua and other communist states to America.

For starters, he proposes completely nationalizing our health-care system and putting private health insurance and drug companies “out of business.” He also wants to break up “big banks” and control the energy industry, while providing “free” college tuition, a “living wage” and guaranteed homeownership and jobs through massive public works projects. Price tag: $18 trillion.

Who will pay for it all? You will. Sanders plans to not only soak the rich with a 90%-plus tax rate, while charging Wall Street a “speculation tax,” but hit every American with a “global-warming tax.”

Of course, even that wouldn’t cover the cost of his communist schemes; a President Sanders would eventually soak the middle class he claims to champion. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need, right?

Still more.

Frankly, all of this is public information.

Folks should read the Bernie Sanders entry at Discover the Networks. Diehard Communist is right.

Trump Blasts Biden in Iowa (VIDEO)

OMG this is funny.

From Vodka Pundit Instapundit, "HE FIGHTS: Trump Blasts Biden in Iowa, Says Obama ‘Took Him Off the Trash Heap’ in 2008."

And at LAT, "Trump and Biden trade barbs as they cross paths and split screens in Iowa."

Polls Show Donald Trump Holding Double-Digit Lead in New Hampshire (VIDEO)

Following-up from yesterday, "Donald Trump Moves to 22-Point Lead Over Marco Rubio in New Hampshire Tracking Poll."

Here's the last entry in the UMass Lowell New Hampshire tracking poll, "Trump-34 Rubio-13 Cruz-13 Kasich-10 Bush-10... #NHPrimary LVs..."

And watch, at CBS News This Morning:



I'm making no predictions. Too many voters are undecided up there, and I thought enthusiasm would push Trump over the line in the Hawkeye State. No can do, it turns out.

So, we'll see about New Hampshire tomorrow. We'll see.

Donald Trump Moves to 22-Point Lead Over Marco Rubio in New Hampshire Tracking Poll

Following-up from yesterday, "Donald Trump Stays Steady at 21-Points Ahead of Marco Rubio in New Hampshire Tracking Poll."

It wouldn't have caught any shifts from last night's debate, although I don't think Trump hurt himself. If anything, Rubio's numbers should tank a bit before Tuesday, and maybe some of the governors will move up.

Via UMass Lowell:

.@UMassLowell @UML_CPO @7News tracking poll update for Republican #NHPrimary https://t.co/8rcR1o7YS8 pic.twitter.com/XLSOcoSDwU

— UML Public Opinion (@UML_CPO) February 7, 2016

Tracking poll 2/7 #NHPrimary Reps
Trump 36
Rubio 14
Cruz 13
Bush 10
Kasich 9
Christie 4
Fiorina 4
Carson 3
DK 7https://t.co/8rcR1o7YS8

— UML Public Opinion (@UML_CPO) February 7, 2016

For GOP, could change mind...
Trump 26
Cruz 47
Rubio 54
Kasich 44
Bush 39
Rubio has most to lose of top 5 Reps in NH https://t.co/e5t2jRzzAL

— UML Public Opinion (@UML_CPO) February 7, 2016

Marco Rubio Responds to Debate Debacle on 'This Week' (VIDEO)

Following-up from last night, "Marco Rubio Was Flummoxed, Speechless After New Hampshire's #GOPDebate," and "WATCH: Chris Christie Pummels Marco Rubio During New Hampshire's Crucial #GOPDebate (VIDEO)."

At ABC News:

Marco Rubio Was Flummoxed, Speechless After New Hampshire's #GOPDebate

Heh, I can't stop laughing!

From Hunter Walker, at Yahoo Politics, "Marco Rubio and his team assess the damage from his duel with Chris Christie":

Rubio was speechless moments after the debate, Christie told his advisers https://t.co/8CninXdcqk pic.twitter.com/fEFmvEkrqT

— Jon Ward (@jonward11) February 7, 2016

Who benefits from Christie beating up on Rubio?
JEB BUSH.
Beware the SHADOW MENACE!https://t.co/Q5pOLKDgi4

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) February 7, 2016

Rubio blew it tonight https://t.co/CFuKVttwnw

— ColorMeRed (@ColorMeRed) February 7, 2016

MANCHESTER, N.H. — Moments after the Republican debate ended Saturday, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie walked over to Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, shook his hand, and offered some customary words of encouragement.

Rubio stared mutely back, looking flummoxed, Christie told close aides moments later, according to one Christie adviser who was in the room.

Christie and his team were buoyant after the New Jersey governor mauled Rubio in a one-on-one face-off in the first half-hour of the debate, repeatedly mocking Rubio for what he called his lack of experience and accomplishments. It was, clearly, a bad night for Rubio. The question now is: Who benefits from the fallout?

Rubio came into the debate with momentum, following a surprisingly strong third-place finish at the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 1. But he got in trouble Saturday starting with the very first question that came his way, which was about “readiness to be president.” The senator, who said he was “proud” of his record, then attempted to shift the discussion to President Barack Obama...

Keep reading.

CNN Rips Ted Cruz for 'Flat-Out Lie' Blaming Network for Iowa Caucus Dirty Tricks — #GOPDebate (VIDEO)

This is harsh — for the Cruz campaign!

Tom Foreman excoriates Cruz for his "flat-out lie" about the network's Iowa caucus coverage, at the clip below.

At Politico, "CNN rips Cruz as feud escalates":

CNN came out swinging against Ted Cruz Saturday night after the Texas senator once again tried to blame the network for his campaign's use of its report to tell Ben Carson's Iowa Caucus supporters that their candidate was dropping out of the race.

"What Senator Cruz said tonight in the debate is categorically false," a network spokesperson said in a statement. "CNN never corrected its reporting because CNN never had anything to correct. The Cruz campaign's actions the night of the Iowa caucuses had nothing to do with CNN's reporting. The fact that Senator Cruz continues to knowingly mislead the voters about this is astonishing."

Right as the Iowa caucus was beginning, CNN reported that Carson was not flying directly to New Hampshire and would instead fly to Florida for some days off and to get a fresh set of clothes.

Messages sent out to Cruz supporters at the caucuses made it seem as though Carson was suspending his campaign, and urged them to convince Carson supporters to jump to Cruz, who ended up winning the Caucus...

More.

And at CNN, "Ted Cruz is wrong about CNN's reporting." (Via Memeorandum.)

WATCH: Chris Christie Pummels Marco Rubio During New Hampshire's Crucial #GOPDebate (VIDEO)

They traded blows, for sure, but Marco Rubio ended up worse for the wear.

Seems to be the consensus, even though Rubio otherwise had a good night.

And I love the headline at Politico, "GOP HUNGER GAMES: Marco Rubio takes the brunt of the blows, as the candidates desperately try to score points ahead of Tuesday’s primary":

MANCHESTER, N.H. — With time running out before the New Hampshire primary, the top Republican rivals desperately tried to land knock-out punches at Saturday night’s debate — and most of them were aiming at Marco Rubio.

Rubio’s adversaries went after the Florida senator from all angles, eager to slow his momentum by portraying him as a lightweight leader whose campaign has been lifted by little more than lofty rhetoric.

Chris Christie led the charge, slamming Rubio for memorizing talking points and for his thin record in the Senate, as he declared that Rubio “simply does not have the experience to be president of the United States.”

Christie urged Republicans not to make the “same mistake we made eight years ago” in electing a first-term senator, Barack Obama. Jeb Bush eagerly joined the Rubio pile-on. “We’ve tried it the old way,” Bush said, echoing Christie’s warning of an Obama repeat act.

When Rubio repeated himself by pivoting three times to the fact that Obama is carrying out his flawed plan for the White House — saying he “knows exactly what he's doing" — Christie pounced. “There it is, the memorized 25-second speech,” Christie declared. “There it is, everybody.”

When Rubio listed some of his Senate accomplishments, Christie hammered him on that, too, in particular Rubio’s backing of a bill cracking down on Hezbollah, and his spotty attendance record for Senate votes. “That’s not leadership,” Christie said. “That’s truancy.”

Rubio tried to hit back at Christie over attendance, only to have it boomerang. The Florida senator pointed that Christie only reluctantly went back to New Jersey for 36 hours during a big snow storm. "That had to shame you into going back,” Rubio said.

Christie shot back — “The shame is, Marco, you would actually criticizes someone for showing up to work."

Keep reading.

PREVIOUSLY: "Explosive Jeb Bush/Donald Trump Exchange on Eminent Domain Sparks Boos at #GOPDebate (VIDEO)."

UPDATE: Linked at iOTW Report. Thanks!

Plus, at the Los Angeles Times, "Fierce exchanges mark Republican debate, as Marco Rubio is hit hard."

Still more, at BuzzFeed, "Under Attack, Marco Rubio Malfunctions — And Repeats the Same Line Four Times."

Explosive Jeb Bush/Donald Trump Exchange on Eminent Domain Sparks Boos at #GOPDebate (VIDEO)

That was something else, no doubt.

At ABC News, "Donald Trump Sparks Boos at GOP Debate."

And at Politico, "Trump shushes Bush, and the crowd boos":

Donald Trump shushed Jeb Bush during a feisty exchange between the two Republican candidates on eminent domain.

Trump was asked a question about eminent domain and he defended it, provoking Bush to interject that Trump used it to build a "limousine parking lot for his casino in Atlantic City."

When Bush moved to interrupt the real estate mogul, Trump raised one finger to his lips.

"Quiet," Trump said to Bush. The audience booed, and Trump said the booing was because of all the wealthy donors in the audience.

"The RNC told us we have all donors in the audience. And the reason they're not loving me is I don't want their money," Trump said, as the crowd continued to boo.

During the exchange he also said eminent domain was important because without it there wouldn't be roads or other essential public works.

"Without eminent domain, you don't have roads, highways, schools or anything. eminent domain is an absolutely necessity for a country," Trump said.

Trump also accused Bush of "trying to be a tough guy," to which Bush responded by asking Trump how "tough" he had to be when, per Bush's accusation, Trump attempted to use eminent domain to seize property from an elderly woman.

Awkward! Candidates Take the Stage at New Hampshire GOP Debate (VIDEO)

Via WMUR News 9 Manchester, "There was some confusion as the Republican presidential candidates took the stage Saturday at the final GOP debate before the New Hampshire primary."

I'll say.

Jeb Bush 'Is Not Far from Third Place' (VIDEO)

Call me skeptical.

If Jeb Bush comes in third on Tuesday I'll take the hot ghost pepper challenge, lol. (I'm not sure if I know where to buy the hot ghost pepper, but I'll worry about it Jebbie comes in third, heh).

At WMUR News 9 Manchester, "Andy Smith of the UNH Survey Center dissects recent poll numbers ahead of the GOP debate."

Smith claims Jeb's got a shot. Well, I did blog Jeb this morning, "Jeb Bush Was Supposed to Be New Face of Conservatism, But GOP Rivals Outpaced Him (VIDEO)."

Maybe Barbara Bush's stump speech will win over a few voters. I'll bet she'll siphon some of John Kasich's supporters, ha!

Donald Trump Stays Steady at 21-Points Ahead of Marco Rubio in New Hampshire Tracking Poll

The latest numbers from the UMass Lowell poll out of New Hampshire.

He's back up a little from yesterday, "Donald Trump Holds 19-Points Lead in UMass Lowell Tracking Poll with 3 Days of Post-Iowa Caucus Data."

The 6th release of the @UML_CPO @UMassLowell @7News #NHPrimary tracking poll is here; Sanders +14, Trump +21 https://t.co/8rcR1nQnty

— UML Public Opinion (@UML_CPO) February 6, 2016

Trump 35 Rubio 14 Cruz 13 Kasich 10 Bush 10 Christie 4 Carson 3 Fiorina 3 - @UML_CPO @7News #NHPrimary tracking poll https://t.co/8rcR1nQnty

— UML Public Opinion (@UML_CPO) February 6, 2016

41% of Republican #NHPrimary LVs could still change their mind; 11% of registered Republicans undecided https://t.co/8rcR1nQnty

— UML Public Opinion (@UML_CPO) February 6, 2016

Jeb Bush Was Supposed to Be New Face of Conservatism, But GOP Rivals Outpaced Him (VIDEO)

His campaign's just sad.

It's always been sad. He's been hated from the get-go. Nobody's wanted him. Nobody's wanted a third Bush term. Now the question is how he can bow out without disgracing his family even further?

At the Los Angeles Times, "Fight or flight? In New Hampshire, Jeb Bush's sagging campaign faces reckoning":

When Jeb Bush entered the presidential race, he had a vision of a transformative candidacy that would remake the Republican Party, attracting young people and minorities — especially Latinos — with a vibrant new image based on solid conservative principles.

Now it has come to this: A dismal finish in the Iowa caucuses, a slog through New Hampshire and a growing wish in the party that Bush would step aside or, at least, tone down his campaign so he doesn't hurt someone more likely to win — such as Marco Rubio, who reflects much of what Bush hoped to accomplish when he ran.

It is, he tells audiences, an exciting and joyful experience.

But for others watching, who know Bush and his family personally, or who witnessed his firm command as Florida's two-term governor, the spectacle is sad and disheartening to see. “It bothers people because they believe he deserves better,” said Susan MacManus, who teaches political science at the University of South Florida and has closely followed Bush and his career for decades.

Stepping into a Bush campaign event can seem like a voyage to the past.

The family lineage is evident even without the ritual invocation of his mother — who campaigned alongside Bush in New Hampshire on Thursday night — his father and, sometimes, his oldest brother, both former president. There is the awkward syntax, the preppy manner and, above all, the unfashionable reverence for elected office and the sanctity of the political process.

Noting that businessman Donald Trump has used profanity three times in a recent speech — Bush had obviously counted — he insisted, “Look, I'm no fuddy-duddy. But this should be at least [PG]-rated. I mean, we're running for president of the United States. There are children listening to this stuff!”

The issues he talks about — term limits, a balanced-budget amendment — were moldy when his brother sought the White House 16 years ago and some of his language can sound oddly old-fashioned as he warns against abusing a president's executive powers, “Oh, my goodness gracious!” or throws a session open to questions with an exuberant, “Give me some doozies!”

There is a hopeful Bush scenario in New Hampshire: a strong finish in Tuesday's primary, which sends him roaring into the next contest in South Carolina, where he emerges as the favorite of those in the Republican Party desperate to stop the insurgencies of Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.It seems improbable, however.

New Hampshire rescued Bush's father, then-Vice President George H.W. Bush, after he stumbled in Iowa in 1988. The state tripped up his older brother, the front-running George W. Bush, and almost cost him the GOP nomination to a surging John McCain in 2000.

This time, though, Jeb Bush rests far back among the also-rans, easily overlooked but for the bombardment of TV and radio advertisements savaging Trump and, especially, Florida Sen. Rubio, a former protégé-turned-campaign-nemesis.

The onslaught has angered many Republicans, including lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who see it as gratuitous, hopeless and, worse, potentially damaging to a candidate some have started to see as their best general election candidate after Rubio's strong third-place finish Monday night in Iowa. Bush appears unmoved.

“Guess what? This is not beanbag,” he said when a woman at a Laconia Town Hall meeting complained about the pile of attack mailers she has received from a pro-Bush political action committee, which has spent tens of millions of dollars attacking Rubio. “If you think it's ugly right now, wait till you get to the general election.”

With an edge to his voice, Bush offered this unsolicited advice to Rubio, who has complained about the barrage of negativity: “Get over it, man. This is politics.”

The former governor is 62, older than the 44-year-old Rubio but younger than Trump and both of the two Democrats running for president...

He might have to drop out after Monday night, but perhaps he's a glutton for punishment, or doesn't want to embarrass his family? I don't know. But the sooner he drops out the better --- it's been merciless on those who've had to watch.

PREVIOUSLY: "Stakes Are High in Tonight's GOP Debate."