# Now Bush loses the Cato institute conservatives. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 8, 2006, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602 "2006-03-08T22:54:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/1 "2006-03-08T22:54:17Z")
Not a debate but more suited for this forum than elsewhere. Apparently Bush is losing/has lost the more libertarian conservatives. The level of acrimony toward the Bush Administration is astounding. This is one pissed off group of conservatives. [At Conservative Forum on Bush, Everybody’s a Critic](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701403_pf.html) > [@](#): > > Instead, Sullivan was on hand to second the critique. “This is a big-government agenda,” he said. “It is fueled by a new ideology, the ideology of Christian fundamentalism.” The bearded pundit offered his own indictment of Bush: “complete contempt” for democratic processes, torture of detainees, ignoring habeas corpus and a “vast expansion of the federal government.” The notion, he said, that the "Thatcher-Reagan legacy that many of us grew up to love and support would end this way is an astonishing paradox and a great tragedy. > [@](#): > > Nor was moderator Boaz a voice of moderation. He blamed Bush for “a 48 percent increase in spending in just six years,” a “federalization of public schools” and “the biggest entitlement since LBJ.” > > True, the small-government libertarians represented by Cato have always been the odd men out of the Bush coalition. But the standing-room-only forum yesterday, where just a single questioner offered even a tepid defense of the president, underscored some deep disillusionment among conservatives over Bush’s big-spending answer to Medicare and Hurricane Katrina, his vast claims of executive power, and his handling of postwar Iraq. > > Bartlett, who lost his job at the free-market National Center for Policy Analysis because of his book, said that if conservatives were honest, more would join his complaint. “They’re reticent to address the issues that I’ve raised for fear that they might have to agree with them,” he told the group. “And a lot of Washington think tanks and groups of that sort, they know that this White House is very vindictive.” ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/2 "2006-03-08T23:00:39Z")
Bush never had the support of libertarians. Not from day one. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/3 "2006-03-08T23:02:24Z")
Pundits have been predicting a “conservative crack-up” for almost a year now. [http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000156.htm](http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000156.htm) [http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9651882/](http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9651882/) Maybe the post-Goldwater American conservative coalition is finally ripping apart at the seams. We won’t really know until November. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/4 "2006-03-08T23:04:22Z")
Not really surprising. Per your own quote: > [@](#): > > True, the small-government libertarians represented by Cato have always been the odd men out of the Bush coalition. Were they ever really on board? And now that Bush is on his way out, it’s kind of a moo point (you know, like when a cow says something, nobody cares and it’s a “moo point”). The people who are being talked about as the next GOP presidential nominee are not in Bush’s mold (in either sense of the word). ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/5 "2006-03-08T23:05:42Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > The people who are being talked about as the next GOP presidential nominee are not in Bush’s mold (in either sense of the word). How does Condi Rice differ from W? (Other than being smarter than he is.) ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/6 "2006-03-08T23:13:36Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > How does Condi Rice differ from W? (Other than being smarter than he is.) She’s a Black female? Seriously, though, Condi isn’t on the list. She won’t be running. She’d be a great VP candidate, but not Prez. And she’s been tempering Bush’s foreign policy more effectively than Powell did. I don’t know much about her fiscal philosophy, but I’d be surprised if she’s a profligate spender like Bush. AFAIK, she’s not a born again Christian, either, which is a big difference (and probably why she’s at least nominally pro-choice). In short, she really isn’t like Bush at all. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/7 "2006-03-08T23:56:51Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > Seriously, though, Condi isn’t on the list. Who is, other than McCain? (Serious question.) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 8, 2006, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/8 "2006-03-08T23:59:23Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > And now that Bush is on his way out, it’s kind of a moo point . . . Not really. What the prez does reflects on his party, even after he’s gone, regardless of how much the party itself had to do with it. The Pubs found that out in 1974. If Bush has caused a “conservative crack-up” to begin – the process is not going to halt when he leaves office. And it might reach crisis point long before that. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/9 "2006-03-09T00:02:21Z")
Especially as the apparent main causes of that crack-up – the war, and its costs, and the national security state, and an expansion of “big government” on a scale unimagined since the Johnson Administration – are not going away any time before November 2006, and probably not before November 2008. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 12:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/10 "2006-03-09T00:03:45Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Who is, other than McCain? (Serious question.) Giuliani, Allen, Hagel, Romney to name a few. Allen seems to have some heavy-hitting party backers. But my money is still on McCain. The media loves the guy, and he has huge name recognition. I’ve also seen Kay Hutchenson floated as a possible VP candidate, too. I think it’s going to be an interesting race. It’ll be nice to have the whole Bush thing off the table. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/11 "2006-03-09T00:20:09Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > It’ll be nice to have the whole Bush thing off the table. Well, that’s the point. Bush won’t be in the race, but it will be fought in the world Bush has made. Will any of those you listed, even McCain, really be able to distance themselves effectively from the war, the deficit, etc., etc.? I expect a great many libertarian Republicans, Christian-conservative Republicans, isolationist-paleoconservative Republicans, and most importantly fiscal-conservative Republicans, are just going to stay home on election day in 2008 – unless they’ve got a third-party candidate to vote for. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/12 "2006-03-09T01:18:41Z")
Maybe. But it depends on so many other things. It depends on who is running on the Democratic ticket. It depends on whether the SD abortion law is struck down. It depends on whether there is another terrorist attack. The libertarian wing is always up for play, but again it depends a lot on who is running. ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/13 "2006-03-09T02:13:59Z")
Just a thought: if it winds up being McCain/Hillary, a lot of liberals will be voting for McCain, including me. Hillary’s a panderer, without, as far as I can tell, any limit to what she will do to get a vote. We know one thing for certain with McCain: like Peter Pace, he won’t stand for torture. At this point, having a Prez with a minimal sense of decency would be a huge relief. Hillary has not demonstrated that she has that. McCain has. ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/14 "2006-03-09T02:26:38Z")
Yes she is a panderer. But so is W. We need someone who actually believes in some darn thing. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/15 "2006-03-09T03:30:56Z")
> [@pantom](#): > > Just a thought: if it winds up being McCain/Hillary, a lot of liberals will be voting for McCain, including me. Perhaps not as many as you think. To pick up the votes on the right, McCain will probably have to say and do things that will turn off the left. I’m not sure how many liberals will vote for a guy who’s pro-life and supported the Iraq war to the extent McCain did. But time will tell. ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/16 "2006-03-09T03:50:39Z")
We’ve had pro-life Presidents since forever. Anyone who still thinks that makes any difference at all is in denial. As for Iraq, Hillary supports that at least as much as McCain. Or so she says… ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/17 "2006-03-09T04:17:50Z")
> [@pantom](#): > > We’ve had pro-life Presidents since forever. Since forever? This has been a major national controversy for, perhaps, 30 years. We’ve had mostly Republican Presidents in that time, but I don’t see how that makes this issue so easy to wave away. It may be more controversial than ever, and at the moment, it’s not clear that pro-choice Democrats can protect legal abortion. As **John Mace** says, the outcome of the South Dakota case may make a big difference. It was a big deal last year that a pro-life Democrat became their Senate leader a couple of years ago. I don’t think liberals are going to go for a pro-life President. They didn’t go for Bush either time out, that’s for sure. > [@](#): > > Anyone who still thinks that makes any difference at all is in denial. Tell me why. > [@](#): > > As for Iraq, Hillary supports that at least as much as McCain. Or so she says… That’s one of the reasons I don’t think too much of her chances to get the nomination these days. ---
**Author:** ![AHunter3](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ahunter3/32/368_2.png) [@AHunter3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHunter3)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/18 "2006-03-09T04:20:19Z")
Either of Maine’s Senators would be Republicans whose hats I’d like to see in the ring. (They’ve both been getting a fair bit of press in the last 9 months, too) ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/19 "2006-03-09T04:21:17Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Perhaps not as many as you think. To pick up the votes on the right, McCain will probably have to say and do things that will turn off the left. I’m not sure how many liberals will vote for a guy who’s pro-life and supported the Iraq war to the extent McCain did. But time will tell. Not in a Hillary v. McCain world. McCain can say or do what he likes, what are the Republicans going to do, switch to Hillary? It might be the best possible outcome for the country. It lets McCain get elected without having to completely sell his soul. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2006, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602/20 "2006-03-09T04:27:47Z")
> [@Zakalwe](#): > > Not in a Hillary v. McCain world. McCain can say or do what he likes, what are the Republicans going to do, switch to Hillary? I was talking about what will happen during the primaries, when nobody would be able to say that Hillary is the nominee. The traditional strategy is “run to the [in his case] right in the primaries, run to the center during the election.” > [@](#): > > It lets McCain get elected without having to completely sell his soul. Too late, if you ask me. I think that ship sailed when he hugged Bush. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-bush-loses-the-cato-institute-conservatives/347602.md?page=2)