Reagan had the advantage of running against Jimmy Carter, a recession and numerous military embarassments. We don't have that advantage this time around.
Good point - I stand corrected..
And Bush 41 had the advantage of running against Dukakis. And Reagan also ran against Mondale in 84 and did very well.
Of course, Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis were all chosen by their democratic party that had majorities in the “blue states”.
Clinton won red states by somehow communicating his positions effectively (and pretending to be a conservative on matters of importance). Bush took a different tack, managing to win by the skin of his teeth.
But we shouldn’t pick our next presidential contender based on the result of running a non-communicator like Bush in 2000/2004.
Both Romney and Fred Thompson are much better communicators than Bush, and would effectively sell conservatism in the swing states. They would come across much more presidential than Hillary, or Obama, or Edwards.
We don’t need to settle, and no reason to be defeatists. Conservatism is not a lost cause, and we shouldn’t give in to Giuliani’s message of failure and surrender.