Shirley and Fabrizio are right, and Wolfson is wrong. America was, is, and will remain a center-right nation. Recent polling shows nearly 2:1 we describe ourselves as "conservative" or "moderate", with less than a third "liberal". Obama has been consistently moderate to allow his election, but only in the context of a comprehensive Republican meltdown.

The plain fact is that the Bush Administration has not been in any way conservative beyond rhetoric. They supported appalling farm subsidies, protectionism for steel, vast increases in both entitlements and Federal intrusion into local education; doubled the national debt while turning a trillion-dollar surplus into a trillion-dollar deficit; expanded the size of the Federal government by 40%; launched a war to bring democracy to places that have never known it on a credit card; reduced individual liberties in several significant ways; and etc. Even the tax cuts weren't really conservative minus spending cuts.

This is a classic example of Truman's truism in reverse--why would voters accept fake Democrats when they can have the real thing?

I think Wolfson is right, and Shirley, Fabrizio and Powell are wrong. While the conservative criticism of Bush is totally fair, and I would not even quibble with anything in Robert Powell's second paragraph. that criticism has been aired almost entirely after the wheels fell off the Bush bus, and certainly was not backed up by votes during the first 50-75% of the Bush administration.

In fact, until things went very wrong for Bush and the Republicans (Hurricane Katrina, more or less), both elected Republicans and the conservative punditry were united in support of Bush and Bush's programs and initiatives. Early on, some of those passed by very narrow partisan margins. In the run-up to the Iraq war/2002 midterm elections (the two were closely linked), all elements of the conservative movement acted in concert in support of Bush's drive to invade Iraq. (If there were a significant number of dissenting voices, they kept very quiet). Whatever one thinks of the merits of that decision, there is no question that Republicans and the greater conservative movement stood together during 2001-2005 or so.

On the whole, I think the voters see this in the simpler terms that Wolfson used, and not as a criticism of only a narrow segment of conservatism. That's why Republicans are getting hammered in Congress, and even in statewide races in some states. It is just wishful thinking to suggest that voters are making such a finely-honed criticism of just one segment of conservatism. That doesn't mean the American public are about to become born-again Liberals, or that the US is not a center-right (to right-wing) country by European standards, but conservatives are paying the price now for their unified support for Bush back when they thought he and Rove would lead them to a permanent Republican majority.

Besides, real Democrats have been far more fiscally responsible than Republicans for more than a generation, so Truman's truism is a bit out of date now. At least Democrats have done a better job of paying for the spending, even though nobody has made the slightest progress toward reducing spending during my lifetime.

This election has really been a referendum on the utility of Reagan as short-hand for something good. Most people under 50 aren't moved by the constant McCain references to Reagan, and the weird fetishization that was on display during their primary season just came off as weird.

If people want to look back at transformative politicians from the past, they'll look to FDR or perhaps Kennedy. If people want to look back at prosperity, they'll look at Clinton.

This fascination with and use of Reagan is just anachronistic.

It will take some time for the GOP to bounce back. Theyve had an exodus of moderates, leaving the lunatics running things. If the 2012 primary is between Palin and Michael Savage, expect the GOP to be in the wilderness a while longer.

Robert Powell  said:

"Shirley and Fabrizio are right, and Wolfson is wrong. America was, is, and will remain a center-right nation. Recent polling shows nearly 2:1 we describe ourselves as "conservative" or "moderate", with less than a third "liberal"."

I agree that the median voter is probably just to the right of centre. However, survey results that ask people whether they think they are conservative or liberal give a misleading picture. Often self-described conservatives will give very liberal answers when you ask them about specific policies. For example, you will usually see majority support for universal healthcare and only 20-25% of Americans favour making abortion illegal. 'Liberal' and 'conservative' tend to be as much cultural terms than political ones. George Bush doesn't always look like a political conservative, but he is very much a cultural one.

The ideologue's answer to everything: When in doubt, go all-in with the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.  Shirley and Fabrizio are the ones whose conservatism no longer belongs in the Republican Party, or in the "movement" as a whole.

Here is a mainstream European paper’s reaction to Obama’s victory:

“The End of Jewish Domination”

“Here is the translation of the headline, courtesy of the Athens News Agency

AVRIANI: “The anticipated victory of Obama in US elections signals the end of the Jewish domination - Everything changes in USA and we hope that it will be more democratic and humane”.

“This isn’t far Left Jew hatred. This is not a neo Nazi newspaper. It is just an ordinary, middle of the road, centre right tabloid.”

www.hurryupharry.org/.../the-end-of-jewish-domination

I hope you guys know who or what  you are supporting.

That's hilarious, jackson. Let's ask Rahm Emmanuel and Chuck Schumer about this.