That is the premise of an op-ed in the Washington Post. While the editorial is interesting primarily as an exercise in looking at how the last 6 years would have played out had Jeb Bush become president instead of his brother. The main conclusion of the column is that things would have probably been better, but not because Jeb is some sort of uber-leader. The column focuses on Jeb's knack for paying attention to the details of law making and his more internationally minded/Powell-like approach to foreign policy. But, are either of those two traits all that unique. To put it differently, Jeb, like most every politician who wants a prayer of becoming President pays attention to the bills he signs into law and isn't insane when it comes to crafting foreign policy. More than anything, the column turns into an exposition on the utter failures of the Bush presidency with Jeb representing the sort choices that anyone would have taken had they been in Dubya's shoes: the obvious ones.