Will Bush’s big money tactic scare off presidential rivals?

Jeb Bush thinks money in politics is scary. And he likes it that way.

A June 10 story in the Washington Post by Ed O’Keefe and Robert Costa detailed how Bush and his advisers intended to snag the 2016 GOP presidential nomination by amassing so much early cash that potential rivals would stay out of the race.

This “shock and awe” tactic, they wrote, was “designed to send an unambiguous cue to fundraisers and party activists and to reinforce a natural advantage Bush had with establishment donors.”

The reporting duo said, “Bush’s ability to command huge amounts of cash … was emerging as the dominant characteristic of his potential candidacy.”

They quoted “one Republican close to the Bush operation” as saying that Bush “was more of a super-PAC candidate than a retail candidate.”

It is slightly encouraging that the article was explaining — supposedly — how this strategy did not work. The article was headlined: “How Jeb Bush’s campaign ran off the tracks before it even began.”

Leave aside, for the moment, the question of whether Bush’s financial advantage still will prove insurmountable. Consider instead just how loathsome the “shock and awe” fundraising tactic is.

The tactic says that votes don’t count. Issues don’t count. Character doesn’t count. Money counts. More than that, the money that counts comes, by necessity, from big, big donors.

Bush’s tactic and his history in politics provide an interesting intersection. In 1994 he ran against Lawton Chiles, whose campaign tactics were the opposite of those Bush follows now.

When Chiles won a surprise victory in the 1970 U.S. Senate race and later when he ran for governor, Chiles famously limited campaign donations, at first to no more than $10 and later to no more than $100. Chiles, who beat Bush in 1994, never lost an election.

Bush won the 1998 election, though, and served two terms as Florida’s governor. In his current presidential bid, Bush was so confident of being able to crush his opponents financially that he once limited donations to no more than $1 million.

Lawton Chiles $10; Jeb Bush $1 million.

Bush at times campaigns so badly that his campaign war chest might not be enough. His specific problem is that he freezes at crucial times and cannot think on his feet.

In 1994, Bush — then leading in the polls — famously choked during a debate when Chiles intoned that “The old He-Coon walks just before the light of day.” In the current race, Bush choked when he was asked about his brother’s policies in Iraq.

Despite Bush’s stumble, it is too early to declare that his financial advantage will not win him the nomination and the 2016 presidential election.

Even if money doesn’t do the trick for Bush, it is nearly certain that money will do the trick for somebody. It’s not like Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina or any of the others is planning to win on $10, $100 or $1,000 donations. Any GOP candidate will be counting on big money from big donors.

The voters — those who bother to show up at the polls after that big money pays for negative ads designed to stifle turnout — are an afterthought.

Now, there are those who will ask: “If Jeb Bush’s tactic of using his war chest to scare away rivals is loathsome, why isn’t Hillary Clinton’s tactic just as loathsome?”

To such critics I would say: It is just as loathsome. And worse, while the tactic might not be working for Bush, so far it clearly is working for Clinton.

Clinton hasn’t scared away all potential rivals. But Bernie Sanders and Lincoln Chafee don’t exactly have her shaking in her shoes.

Democrats looking for a meaningful contest and choice aren’t likely to find them. This is unusual and unfortunate in a race that does not include an incumbent.

And it could mean real trouble for Democrats in the general election if Republicans put forward a fresh face — like Rubio, for instance — while Democrats are pushing a candidate who famous name is just as much a liability as Bush’s is, and whose money entanglements are a bigger liability than any known financial questions Rubio faces.

Not that Rubio would win by his fresh face alone. Behind that fresh face would be the same old rotten money.

Jac Wilder VerSteeg has covered regional, state and national issues for three decades. Contact him at jwvcolumn@gmail.com.