Does Bush need a challenger

Davie D asks if it would be good for Bush to have a challenger in the primary.

Specifically, I think Bush needs to be called out by an old-fashioned fiscal conservative for his administration’s spending policies. Fiscal conservatism consists of much more than annual tax cuts—a fact that seems lost on this administration. Economic growth generated by tax cuts won’t balance a budget unless spending is cut or at least reigned in as well, but this administration has increased spending faster than Bill Clinton’s did. Someone needs to emerge just to call the administration to task on this. To be clear, I’m not calling for the administration’s defeat—and I still find Bush preferable to the entire Democratic field—but I think someone willing to challenge the administration on spending would be healthy for the administration, the party, and ultimately the nation.

I tend to agree. I was just thinking about this yesterday, though I haven't ironed my thoughts out yet. I'm not just interested in fiscal restraint though; it wouldn't bother me if we had a Republican with a sensible policy on Israel in the primary. Regardless, I don't think it's particularly healthy for any candidate to run unopposed in the primary.

Comments

[LT]

Didn't Bush emerge stronger after his 'battling' with McCain and Forbes, etc? I remember talk radio waiting to get behind him until after January 2000. Another primary 'battle' would make him stronger, and maybe push him an inch to the right? An inch is better than nothing...