As the Republican primary field for next year’s presidential election begins to take shape, it would be prudent to attempt to differentiate the top candidates in the running from those in the lower tiers. By the top candidates, I do not refer to those who are most likely to be nominated. The fact that a candidate is polling well among primary voters does not mean that he or she is fit to president (see Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann, circa 2012). In reality, the definition of a top-tier candidate is someone who is truly fit to fill the most important office in the world.

To be a top-tier candidate in my book, several criteria must be met. For one thing, the candidate must be a solid conservative- with a significant record to prove it. He or she must be unflinchingly pro-Israel and relatively hawkish when it comes to foreign policy. The candidate of choice has to be ready to exercise pragmatism when necessary to advance conservative goals and needs to have a positive, optimistic vision for our country’s future. Ideally, the Republican nominee should be someone who can broaden the GOP base (especially through the courting of Hispanic voters) and someone who is an effective, disarming messenger of conservative values. Above all, electability is a must. In order to take back the White House next year, the GOP needs to choose a standard-bearer who can win over independents without losing much conservative support. There are four potential candidates who sufficiently fulfill these criteria, and any one of them would be no less than ideal as the Republican presidential nominee this cycle.

First up is Marco Rubio, Florida’s junior senator. Rubio has a record of unwavering conservatism, from his consistent support of smaller government to his social conservative bona fides. Rubio’s political experience- while quite limited at the national level- goes back to his time in the Florida House of Representatives, where he rose to the powerful position of Speaker at a very young age. Rubio is among the Senate’s loudest foreign policy hawks, ardently battling the Obama administration’s policy of making nice to foreign dictators like Ayatollah Ali Khameini in Iran and Raul Castro of Cuba. He has called out the president for standing by more or less idly while Russia annexes parts of Ukraine, and for being too timid in the face of the quick rise of Islamic state in Iraq and Syria. Senator Rubio is also among Israel’s staunchest and most vocal allies in Congress.

Rubio has also on several occasions shown a pragmatic side. In 2013 he co-sponsored a bipartisan immigration reform bill which easily passed the Senate before stalling in the House of Representatives. The senator has also expressed his desire to pass a bipartisan tax reform bill, a badly-needed fix to our broken tax code. In February, Senator Rubio was among those who responsibly promised not to allow a lapse of funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Time and again, Marco Rubio has demonstrated his understanding of the fact that government cannot function if both sides always demand 100% of what they want.

Another thing going for Rubio is his electability. Simply put, Marco Rubio is the most electable candidate on the Republican side of the aisle. The 43-year-old Cuban’s youth and colorful background would contrast starkly with presumed Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s advanced age and lack of a compelling life story. Rubio will appeal to younger voters and, more importantly, Hispanics, broadening the traditional GOP base of support. He is one member of a small group of candidates who can appeal to the political center without losing turnout on the far right of the party, which for the most part adores him. The senator’s writings and speeches reflect the youthful optimism of the son of immigrants who recognizes how fortunate he is to be an American. Rubio possesses virtually unparalleled speaking and debate skills and comes off as a nice, sincere guy. At a recent focus group meeting in New Hampshire, participants were asked which 2016 contender they would most want to be stuck in an elevator with for six hours. Unsurprisingly, the answer was overwhelmingly Marco Rubio. A cunning, brilliant and charming politician, Rubio will manage to be relatively gaffe-free on the stump without seeming robotic and un-human.

Rubio’s fellow Floridian, the as-of-now unannounced contender Jeb Bush, is another candidate worth giving a second glance. His 1999-2007 tenure as Florida’s chief executive was one of conservative achievement and a time of booming economic growth in the Sunshine State. Many question Bush’s conservative credentials, but such people are ignoring his actual, substantive record as the most right-wing governor Florida has ever seen.

Governor Bush rolled back taxes time after time, including an across-the-board property tax cut, an additional property tax cut for veterans, and numerous reductions of the state income tax. He also instituted several sales tax holidays. Overall, as governor Jeb presided over $19 billion in tax relief and still managed to grow Florida’s surplus by about 880% over his time in office. He drastically reduced the size of the state government, laying off thirteen thousand public sector employees whom he deemed unnecessary. Governor Bush also showcased his social conservatism when in 2004 he did everything in his power (and according to some experts, even went beyond his legal authority) to save the life of Terry Schiavo, a brain-dead young woman whose husband had her feeding tube removed. Bush went so far as to jam a bill through the state legislature authorizing the governor to reinstate the feeding tube, which he immediately did. Bush took his fight all the way to the Supreme Court, where Mrs. Schiavo’s husband prevailed. A convert to Catholicism, the former governor is a strident opponent of practices contrary to traditional Judeo-Christian values. Pretty radical record for a “moderate.”

So where did the Bush-is-a-moderate myth come from? Amazingly enough, it is borne from the ex-governor’s stances on a grand total of two issues: immigration reform and Common Core. The Common Core issue revolves mostly around a popular misconception regarding Bush’s position on the education standards. Jeb’s support of the Common Core standards amounts to no more than his belief that better education is a good thing and that Common Core is a helpful tactic from an educational standpoint. There is nothing inherently anti-conservative about higher standards for math and English. Forty-five governors, including many of the most conservative state executives in the country, enacted the Common Core education standards in their states, because virtually everyone agrees that it’s a good idea to hold teachers and students to higher standards. The standards only became anathema to conservatives once the federal government inserted itself into the process, tying the implementation of Common Core to waivers from the No Child Left Behind Act. To quote an email written by Jeb, “That was wrong. I opposed that action.” Bush also wrote, “If Common Core standards were imposed by the federal government, I would oppose them.” But they aren’t. All Bush likes about Common Core is that in his words, “[the standards] are higher than most states’ standards.” That’s it. So while conservative darlings like Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker were busy flip-flopping from being Common Core implementers to Common Core haters, Jeb Bush has remained one of the lone sane Republican voices on the topic, persisting in his steady support for the standards while strongly criticizing the Obama administration’s federalization of Common Core. There can certainly be valid debate about the wisdom and effectiveness of Common Core from an educator’s standpoint. But how does Jeb’s opinion that higher standards help kids learn make him any less of a conservative? Would Scott Walker be a better option simply because he flip-flopped as soon as Common Core became unpopular?

Similarly, with regard to immigration reform, Governor Bush’s position has been taken hopelessly out of context. While Jeb is pro-“amnesty,” as many of his conservatives rivals are thrilled to point out, the truth is that Bush- like Marco Rubio and numerous other conservative Republicans- intelligently argues that immigration reform which secures the border for once and for all and makes it possible to track illegal immigrants within our borders- who are already here in a state of de facto amnesty- is worth allowing them an eventual pathway to legal status. Although there can be differing views among conservatives about whether stopping the flow of illegal immigration is worth granting official amnesty to those already here, Bush’s endorsement of such an approach does not detract one iota from his rock-solid conservatism. And for the record, conservative frontrunner Scott Walker changed his position on immigration to pander to conservative diehards, just like he flipped on Common Core. Governor Walker was for amnesty before he conveniently decided to side against it. So maybe Jeb Bush isn’t so moderate after all.

Jeb’s foreign policy positions are still somewhat unclear at this point. Based on his taste in foreign policy advisers and the little he’s said on the subject so far, it seems like he aims to follow the Reagan foreign affairs approach of peace through strength, somewhere between his dovish father and hawkish brother. This could be the right balance of passivity and aggression, if he does indeed choose to chart this course. It is too early to tell exactly what Bush’s intentions are pertaining to goings-on outside of our borders, but we can perhaps glean a bit of insight from his hawkish condemnation of the president’s recent moves to improve relations with Cuba. One thing that is abundantly clear is that Jeb is a passionate supporter of Israel and its right to self-defense. In late March he wrote a sharply worded op-ed blasting the pending “risky deal” with Iran and strongly criticizing President Obama’s treatment of the Jewish State.

Bush has also displayed a level-headedness and responsibility the likes of which are rarely found in politics. This has led him to stake out positions and stick to them even in the event that they lose popularity. He is not only among the staunchest conservatives in the presidential field, but he is also without question the most principled contender who registers in early polling.

Despite his principled nature, the former Florida governor has shown flashes of pragmatism, endorsing compromise with Democrats in order to advance the conservative agenda. For instance, the former governor is a vocal backer of bipartisan tax reform, especially with regard to eliminating corporate tax loopholes. At a June 2012 House Budget Committee hearing, Jeb Bush- an avowed tax cutter with a concrete record to prove it- testified that if “we’re going to have $10 of spending cuts for $1 of revenue enhancement, put me in, Coach!” In other words, while other conservatives like anti-tax activist Grover Norquist (who said at the time that “Jeb stabbed Republicans in the back” with his comments) insist on unilateral spending cuts which of course the Democrats will never give them, Bush is actually prepared to compromise with the other side on a plan to reduce our grotesquely massive pile of national debt. If you ask me, $10 of spending cuts for $1 of increased tax revenue doesn’t sound like such a terrible deal. For the record, Ronald Reagan raised taxes in exchange for a significantly smaller proportion of cuts to welfare programs. Maybe that’s what Jeb had in mind when he commented in 2012 that President Reagan would “have a hard time” finding support in today’s GOP. In the words of his spokeswoman Kristy Campbell, “Gov. Bush does not support tax increases.” Jeb does recognize, however, that in politics you have to be willing to give a little in order to get what you want.

Jeb Bush is the rare candidate who is an effective conservative messenger purely by virtue of his message. Governor Bush is not a gifted orator; it has in fact been oft-noted in the media that he finds it more enjoyable to debate the complexities of government laws and policies than to engage in rabble-rousing rhetoric. However, Bush’s message, a recycled version of the “compassionate conservative” theme which catapulted his brother to power a decade and a half ago, is likely compelling enough to overcome Bush’s introverted personality and the difficulty he has connecting with the voting public. His blend of sympathy with toughness may be the perfect storm to win over swing voters. He has a positive, powerful message reflected by the name of his super-PAC, Right to Rise. Of course, his age and family name are liabilities, but they probably will matter little to voters by the time the general election rolls around. In fact, the Bush name will help him raise enough money to play to win in November. It may also help him overcome one of the biggest complaints voters had about Mitt Romney leading up to the 2012 election: that he came off as unpresidential.

While perhaps not as electable as his state’s junior senator, Jeb is still easily among the most electable candidates on the GOP side of the race for president. By virtue of his pragmatism, his vast network of deep-pocketed donors, his competence, experience, and solid grasp of the issues, Bush would be as strong a nominee as anyone we’ve seen in decades. He can also garner a significantly larger share of the Hispanic vote than most other Republicans could ever dream of, because he is one of the few GOP politicians who has consistently refused to back down in the face of anti-immigration reform activism. A fluent Spanish speaker, Bush’s Mexican wife and multiethnic kids and grandchildren will also serve to boost the ex-governor’s favorability among the millions of Hispanics who vote on November 8, 2016.

To be continued…