Fiscally, a proponent of getting along, he governed from the left. Read my lips cost him votes.
Social issues, from the right. You'll recall the "moral voice" of the Republican Party in 1992 was none other than Pat Buchanan, which probably cost him some votes.
In my view the entry of Perot, combined with what he admits was a lackluster campaign based imo on a sense of entitlement cost him the election.
But the question raised in the 1992 process is the same one raised in 2008.
Bush I was the nominee based on primary voting.
What would you have had the GOP do?
Break the law and nominate someone else
Ultimately it's up to the voters. They have to be won over to a particular candidate. As I noted earlier, telling those who support the "wrong" candidate to change their vote based on "social conservatives" threat to stay home won't work.
What whould you have the GOP do this primary season?
Bar Rudy from the process, based on ......
I'm not drawing a connection, that overstates FR's influence, but it hasn't escaped my attention that in the aftermath of the 2006 "there's no difference between Republicans and Democrats" campaign, two viable conservative candidates, Allen and Santorum, lost their seats.
And in my view the country is worse off with a Democratic Congress, though clearly there'd be a lot of disagreement on that point on this site.
Learn from its mistakes and don't lurch leftwards again?