I think you are missing a key point here.
Bush was re-elected in 2004.
McCain never won. More conservative candidates failed to beat McCain.
Bush must have been conservative enough— he won in 2004.
Bush did not hand off in 2008 because he did not have a VP willing to continue. He gave Republicans a free agency option.
Unsaddled by our allegations, the Republicans were free to pick anybody.
I’m not sure but I think the Republicans lost in 2008— yeah I’m pretty sure that is right. You should have won your argument in 2008.
Its interesting that your about page emphasizes global warming. Bush derailed Global Warming for 8 years, but you could not care less.
There is a need to rebuild conservatives because moderates and faux conservatives have destroyed conservatism. Immigration has been given a false prominence. Bush bashing has become normative among conservatives— even though Bush has been extraordinarily successful as a President. If Bush is not a success, then no one can fill the ideals of being a conservative.
We are being reduced to unicorns and leprechauns because we keep having to imagine a Conservative who does not exist.
Bush increased Republican majorities in 2002— which was unprecedented. New Presidents almost always suffer losses in Congress.
The Bush not conservative enough argument has been made in 2006 and 2008. That argument failed.
Moreover, the effort to deny that he did any substantively conservative is hyperbolic falsehood. I am not going to repeat my 38 point list but Bush has massive conservative credentials whether you care to admit it or not. Moreover, we have to argue with anonymous internet posters who for all we know have done less than nothing beyond tapping on their keyboards.
In my very first post on this thread I said Bush is a good man and wartime leader but that he wasn’t a conservative. I should have said that he was awful at helping the conservative movement. I read your homepage also and I agree that many of the items you posted were conservative successes. Hey he is a republican with majority control in both houses of congress for most of his 8 years, go figure. There are crudely 4 kinds of cons. Social cons, traditional cons, fiscal cons and small government cons. He satisfied the social cons to some degree but failed to articulate a cogent policy on gay marriage and abortion. He failed the other 3 groups. As for the WOT, his one shining legacy, well nation building and pre-emptive war aren’t exactly what you call conservative goals, in fact historically they’ve been liberal positions. He convinced me on that front and I mark it as his one success as a leader to change the minds of conservatives. He failed us in not privatizing social security. He failed us on McCain Fiengold. He failed us on the prescription drug benefit. He failed us on NCLB(hell Ted Kennedy helped him on that one). He failed us on immigration and he failed us on GLOBAL WARMING(the single biggest avenue for socialists to get us to sign on to one world government) by folding on this issue last year. This ain’t nitpicking. These issues are massive, broad, and lasting in scope. He failed by turns because he either didn’t, wouldn’t fight, or thought he shouldn’t fight. He often failed because he couldn’t articulate, wouldn’t articulate, or thought he shouldn’t articulate conservative issues. He didn’t get a lot of things done and many of the things he did get done were down right liberal. He was a bad leader.