There are forces involved far larger than the pundit and journalist level, or even the activist ideological level, that Rush is familiar with. Philosophical forces, the trends in and control of education, religious belief, personal mores, the whole tenor of modern civilization in the west. These things move on a time scale of generations, detectably so in some decades. But the forces themselves are not governably by simply choosing to offer up truer bluer conservatism at primary time.
They can be swayed by the talents of specific men, and by large scale successes or failures of long established policies or ideological innovations on basic ways of life. But occasionally and only somewhat, by mere pols. At bottom they depend on much stronger forces and much slower processes, at the peaks of cultural life, not the surface of daily politics. On thought and genuine changes in widespread and deeply held convictions, not on atmsopherics or successful momentary glib-ness.
It was news to the bulk of the American people that neo-liberal ideas could drag their sons into long and seemingly unwinnable wars half way around the world, for ideological causes that seem surreal and quite out of step with their whole image of the modern world and how it works. They are not fully convinced those things are necessary, and wonder why those we are trying to help can't do it themselves. This may not be the brightest or deepest thought available on the subject, but it is real and it is powerful.
Rush likes to say that the Dems own defeat. But that, too, is wishful thinking. If Iraq and Afghanistan had been won easily and the boys were home, there would not have been these repercussions. But they were not and are not. If no remaining threat from Iran and Pakistan were on the horizon, the whole subject might lack urgency. But they are, and it is not at all clear the present weakened state of the republican neo-liberal policy on the matter can handle them. You and I might see that is due to the obstruction of Democrats and lack of support at home, and that their alternatives are hopelessly naive and unworkable.
But not everyone does. They simply do not know. They don't like the present state of affairs and do not see the present course fixing everything. They do not know what to do about it. They do not like that feeling, it makes them uncomfortable and unhappy with people telling them how we should handle it. They sincerely doubt the men supposedly in charge, know what to do, either.
Now put all that as a new fact in the stream of the wider forces I spoke of above. It would be naive to expect that all that is necessary is to trot out a picture Reagan, wave a flag and toot a horn. It ain't happening.
Otherwise put, the question before the house is does the US want to be in the business of running Iran and Pakistan and reforming the whole Islamic world, as a civilizing mission? Or does that look like both presumption and folly? When you try to convince the whole west in such a matter, you are not up against one Dem pol or finagling by liberal republicans. You are up against a gale force civilizational wind that acts on a scale of continents and centuries.
Waving a flag, tooting a horn, and say "Ronaldus Magnus, rah rah", will not get it done.