Any Republican hoping to become the first Republican president since George W. Bush should have a well-rehearsed opinion about the wisdom of the Iraq war, and should be able to deliver it in response to an unambiguous question like, “Knowing what we know now, would you have authorized the invasion?"

This is especially the case if you’re hoping to become the first Republican president since George W. Bush and you also happen to be George W. Bush’s brother.

Instead, after facing the most predictable question of the election cycle, Jeb Bush spent two days stepping on rakes before before finally landing on an answer that probably made George W. himself proud.

“If we’re going to get into hypotheticals I think it does a disservice for a lot of people that sacrificed a lot,” Jeb said at a town hall meeting in Nevada on Wednesday. “Going back in time and talking about hypotheticals—what would have happened, what could have happened—I think, does a disservice for them. What we ought to be focusing on is what are the lessons learned.”

This premise—that to even engage an awkward subject would in itself dishonor the troops—is vintage George W. Bush, and would be clever enough to help Jeb evade further inquiries about the war if Jeb were already the president. Instead, he’s one lonely candidate in a field of Republicans who have already grappled with the question more forthrightly, and won’t let him get away with being mealymouthed. Last year, in a live Facebook chat at the Aspen Ideas Festival, Hillary Clinton explained that while she knew the Iraq war was a mistake back in 2008, a reflexive support-the-troops mantra reinforced her caginess about it, and helped drag down her unsuccessful campaign. I expect a similar dynamic applies today.