Pat Buchanan challenged George H.W. Bush in the 1992 primaries. Ronald Reagan nearly dethroned Gerald Ford from the top of the Republican heap in 1976. Richard Nixon got primaried in 1972 by two congressmen, from the left flank by anti-war candidate Pete McCloskey and from his right flank by principled conservative John Ashbrook. George W. Bush, who drastically increased the size of government, lobbied for open borders, and signed a radical campaign finance bill, got a free pass to the general election by his fellow Republicans. Why?

Grumbling on the Right seems to grow louder as the election approaches. Yet of the five recent GOP incumbent presidents seeking a new four years in the White House, George W. Bush joins Ronald Reagan as the only two who avoided a primary challenge. Reagan proved an incredibly popular and successful president. George W. Bush, whose approval ratings hover above the forty percent marker, can't boast similar successes or popularity.

A few reasons stand out explaining why Bush got a bye in the semi-finals that precede November's championship round. First, we are at war. The war in Iraq grows less popular by the day, but many Republicans are hesitant to switch horses midway cross the stream. Second, memories of Bill Clinton remain fresh. After eight years of Slick Willie, conservatives are willing to sacrifice political purity for political expediency. Third, the nation is polarized. While Bush appears quite unpopular among non-Republicans, his approval rating among Republican voters is quite high. Finally, the influence of conservative ideas on the Republican Party are the weakest they've been since the pre-Reagan days. Conservatives were ascendant in the '70s, governed in the '80s, and held the line against the Clintons in the '90s. Today, while Republicans control all three branches of government, liberal ideas paradoxically hold sway over those same three branches of government.

While bush certainly isnt the best man for the job he is certainly better then the other option so i will be voting for a man who has convictions and will protect america.

Protect us from whom? But I don't actually want to get into that angle.

Dan, I agree with your claim that liberal ideas are ascendant but I do not see the relevance of that claim to explaining why there was no primary opposition to W. The other examples you give of primary opponents showed conservative Republicans willing to stand up to the direction the party was headed in so I do not see why the ascendancy of liberal ideas would change that rather than provoking opposition.

Personally, I think that somewhere along the line "movement conservatism" became simply a wing of the Republican party. I doubt Kirk or the forebears of the movement would ever . . . ever . . . have allowed expediencey to take the place of principle. I think you also need to mention the hijacking of the right by the neocons (or at least the media and they themselves call those guys creatures of the right). Their triumph in the beltway and the think tanks and media outlets guaranteed the destruction of the true right and the ascendancy of neoliberalism.

Hell, even Rush Limbaugh voted against Reagan twice.

Point to ponder.

James Monroe ran totally unopposed.

Brian,

Waning conservative influence within the GOP means that this less conservative party would be comfortable with the less conservative policies of Bush. There's not a tremendous likelihood of Bush offending a Republican base that is not all that conservative to begin with. That's one reason Bush didn't get primaried--the no longer conservative base of the GOP was not offended by his liberal policies.

Thanks for the clarification, I didn't catch the logic of it. I suppose it is just a further development from when they drove Buchanan out of the party by going back on their word to accept the platform the conservatives had made in 1996 (was that the year?).

The contenders probably thought about what George W. did to John McCain and said no thanks.