You think that rhetorical question implies either a plausible position, or a sound political posture? Ronald Reagan was significantly further to the right than GWB, in all particulars...including defense spending...and yet he won going away in both elections. Not even close. He stomped. The reason the liberals did so well, is because the GOP abdicated the high ground of explaining to the middle-electorate just how insane and counterproductive liberalism is. Liberalism became a dirty word thanks to Reagan. We had them on the mat. But GWB let them get up again.
GWB's policy and speeches allowed liberalism to be rehabilitated...and his puny "anti-liberal" attacks at the tail end of the campaign had virtually no traction. He had undermined his own credibility as an "anti-liberal". GWB had openly equated conservatives as bigots, or uncompassionate. He was a big-spender. Big Government. KennedyDasche-BiPartisan toady. We had a battle for the lesser liberal. And the more communist lost. Just barely.
The electorate has changed since Reagan. They are more liberal now. Do you actually think they are not? We had a massive turnout this election and Kerry -- the more liberal candidate of the two -- got 48% of the vote. If GWB moved more to the right of Kerry then his current position, then Kerry would have done even better.
You can't attribute more to the voting public than what is evident. The are pathetic (generally speaking).
You can blame GWB's speeches for the increase in liberalism. I could blame the media. The bottom line is the people are still responsible for their own actions and their own vote. To think otherwise is pure liberalism.