That would be the American voter who is pathetic that they would vote 48% for "extremely liberal northeast senator".
And we wonder why Bush isn't conservative enough.
Only 20% of the people identify themselves as liberal. And I forgot to mention the liberal GWB barely beat was in a ridiculous bunny suit. There are lots of reasons to be disappointed with GWB. If it weren't for security issues he never would have been re-elected.
You think that rhetorical question implies either a plausible position, or a sound political posture? Ronald Reagan was significantly further to the right than GWB, in all particulars...including defense spending...and yet he won going away in both elections. Not even close. He stomped. The reason the liberals did so well, is because the GOP abdicated the high ground of explaining to the middle-electorate just how insane and counterproductive liberalism is. Liberalism became a dirty word thanks to Reagan. We had them on the mat. But GWB let them get up again.
GWB's policy and speeches allowed liberalism to be rehabilitated...and his puny "anti-liberal" attacks at the tail end of the campaign had virtually no traction. He had undermined his own credibility as an "anti-liberal". GWB had openly equated conservatives as bigots, or uncompassionate. He was a big-spender. Big Government. KennedyDasche-BiPartisan toady. We had a battle for the lesser liberal. And the more communist lost. Just barely.