he was quite conservative on some things, but not on all things. It would be hard to find examples on the social issues where he was anything but strongly conservative. Economics was was mixed bag. He believed in lower taxes and defended the free market, but did not do well on monetary issues, and certainly not spending. He had conservative principles on foreign policy and military, but there were exceptions.
He was not a small government conservative, that can be said for certain.
I would agree he was a good man and a social conservative in his personal and family life, and that's a big plus.
My complaint is that he did not promote conservative policy much outside of example.
For example:
Amendment I - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
This means, according to Rats, that career criminal anarchists, AKA disadvantaged people, can shut down cities, loot and vandalize businesses, and assault taxpayers because they don't like the G7, 8 or 20 or whatever with impunity, but it is a major felony for a pro life minister of an established religion, to be present on the public sidewalk in front of an abortion mill that receives taxpayer funds from the government.
A socially conservative president that led, would have flipped that Rat policy as quickly as Eisenhower flipped the policy of the Rat thug city of Little Rock, Arkansas, and used the same means if necessary.