My theory is very simple.
It is well-known that there were less small-government protests, less money for anti-statist charities and organisations, and less pressure in all its forms on the government under Bush than under Clinton. Even the amount of homeschooled children fell off. It's not just my view that complacency was at fault, it's a very common view of various analysts and policy experts.
Take the pressure off politicians and they revert to their natural behavior. Your alternatives are to elect guys whose natural behavior is to enhance freedom - and they tend to be few in modern politics - or to keep up pressure.
That all sounds right. I guess I just don't think of protest as being much like "pressure." I went to the tea party to make myself feel better, not because I thought it would change Obama's mind.
Besides, weren't donations down for EVERYBODY, since 11 Sept?
Finally, just so you're ready for grad school stateside (fingers crossed), it should be "there were
less fewer small-government protests, less money for anti-statist charities and organisations, and less
pressure in all its forms on the government."
Sorry, pet peeve.