I don't normally put a lot of stock in NewsMax, but here's a story I'm taking seriously, partly because I've been expecting something like this to happen, and partly because I've wanted it to happen. It looks like there is rebellion brewing among social conservatives in the GOP:

Leaders of the Christian right are thinking of bolting the Republican Party in 2004. Such a move would deal a severe blow to President Bush's re-election effort.

Though Christian voters played a pivotal role in electing Bush in his razor-thin victory over Al Gore, NewsMax has learned that major figures in the evangelical movement are talking about withholding support from the Republican Party.

Now Bush could try pandering to the religious right. That's what they want, obviously: this is a surely cry for attention more than a real threat (though that may change in time). But with Bush's approval rating in the vicinity of seventy percent, this is a particularly dumb time for the social conservatives to rebel. He may very well be able to get along without them, He might even gain nearly as much as he would lose: one thing preventing a lot of people from supporting Bush is his connection to the religious right. It scares off a lot of people who would otherwise agree with him on defense policy and taxes.

The social conservative rebels may not be able to maintain discipline within its own ranks: if rank-and-file Republicans feel it's necessary to vote for Bush out of patriotism, are they going to do the Family Research Council's bidding if it tells them otherwise?

Bush will, of course, try to have it both ways: he'll play down the issue, and try to avoid getting any major faction too mad at him. The decision point will come if some candidate emerges as a focus of right-wing rebellion. Pat Buchanan springs to mind, naturally. Such a candidate will probably be a "paleocon": he may have opposed the Battle of Iraq, and may oppose US support for Israel. This would work to Bush's advantage: while this stance may play well in the paleocon "amen corner", it won't provide broader appeal for the paleocons any more than it has for the Democrats: indeed, the popularity of his foreign and defense policy are the whole basis for Bush's sky-high popularity.

If such a candidate emerges, though, it will force Bush to make a choice: attack and alienate the rebels, or embrace the social conservative agenda anew, and try to bring the rebels back into the fold? If Bush basically invites the social conservatives to take a long walk off a short pier, he's got my vote, and probably a cash contribution as well. But if Bush does break to the right on social issues, this will present me with a tough choice on election day: stick with the only right-thinking candidate on the issue of national defense, or go with the Libertarian Party, who are basically right on everything except this one, all-important issue?

Link via Blogdex.