The problem is one of definition--or of cognitive dissonance. In Massachusetts, lot of people who live conservative lifestyles--they work, they pay taxes, they attend church or synagogue, they have traditional families, they abide by the law--vote liberal. But they´ll describe themselves as conservative, because they live as conservatives do.

The difference people who are persoanlly conservative who vote liberal or stay home from the polls. This is what Limbaugh has been saying since he was in diapers,run as an unabashed conservative and you´ll win.The republicans can´t get this through their skull and that´s why Dr. Carson because an overnight conservative rock star.

Romney´s tough sell was getting rid of Obamacare while not admitting his own plan failed.
People know the difference between a real conservative and a contrived one. Dole,Bush sr,McCain and Romney,not a hardballer among them.W. Bush ran a conservative platform but failed in office when he tried to make friends with the left.

Pretty much shows the GOP is way off in its zeal to move to the left. They think they can keep conservatives hoodwinked, but the game is up, in reality.

You´re on your own, republicans. Good luck.

Conservatives have such a majority that they lose elections.
Non sequitur.

Conservatives need to remember that the term "conservative" means different things to different people. Many people who are very conservative in fiscal terms were aghast at the conservative who opined about a woman´s ´natural´ barrier against rape. I spoke to a conservative the other day; in every turn of the conversation, he wanted to know if the person being discussed was white or black.

Conservatism has nothing to do with rape. It has nothing to do with skin color. If conservatives want to regain power, they need to forcefully define conservatism and get rid of these vestiges of prejudice. There is zero reason for conservatism to be associated with prejudice...only that conservatives permit such jaundiced views in their midst.

Dittos #2.

Gabula

#1 is correct. The same phenomenon affects candidates. The Republican Party often runs candidates who claim the banner of conservatism but are ineffective at defending it. This has several negative effects. First, they espouse conservative ideas unconvincingly and lose the argument. Second, when they lose the election, it is perceived as a defeat for conservatism as opposed to a loss by an individual. Conscious of these risks, conservatives go to great lengths to define conservatism in restrictive ways, which tends to alienate potential supporters who resent "purity tests" being applied to them and their candidates. So we all lose.

I have two suggestions. First, be honest. It is possible to concede that GOP candidate R is not really a conservative and still recognize that he is more conservative than Democrat candidate D. Second, be fair. Every so often, just to keep recalcitrant reactionaries like myself on board, let´s run a real conservative and see what happens.

#s 1 and 5 are correct. The description "conservative" means very different things to people in various parts of the country and even side-by-side neighbors. I´m not sure where anyone got the idea that all self-described conservatives had to believe exactly the same on all issues or lose the right to be considered conservative. Let´s focus on the economy, because I think most of us agree on what is the problem, and probably how we got here. We diverge on what should be done next. But, we are still conservatives. We have different solutions to immigration reform (which is not really a liberal vs conservative issue at all, but a national security problem). Where the whole conservative movement blows up is when some try to fit all of us into tight little molds in social discussions.

It´s my opinion that if anyone, anywhere in the country, wants to help get good Republicans elected, I don´t care if they call themselves conservative , and I´m danged sure not going to tell them they are not.

..and #7.

FTA:
The Battleground Poll, perhaps the most respected bipartisan poll, has also consistently shown that conservatives dramatically outnumber liberals in America. Even in December 2012, after Obama had won re-election, Question D3 of that poll showed Americans identifying themselves thus: "Very Conservative" (20%), "Somewhat Conservative" (39%), "Moderate" (2%), "Somewhat Liberal" (24%), "Very Liberal" (12%), and "Unsure" (3%).

My conclusion is that the only reason Dim´Rats EVER win is ... ´community organizing´, i.e., fraud. Mega-fraud.

With the enemedia.

Somedays L-dot Trolls make absolutely no sense, but then I guess they see their mission as one to "muddy" the waters.

I don´t buy it.
If America were conservative, or even right of center, the electorate would not have given Mr. Obama two terms as President. Hillary Clinton would not be our "most admired" political figure. America is drifting further and further to the left.
Too many people are dependent on their government checks to make ends meet. They´ll continue to vote themselves benefits, no matter the cost.

Some are fiscally conservative, and some are socially conservative. Some will be both.
Fiscal responsibility and job creation is the way to winning elections.

We have massive oil, natural gas and coal that we need to be developing, using and exporting.
This is NEW revenues that will help support teachers, police and firefighters, and Democrats are against it, which opens up opportunity to pull significant sections of those groups, and the people who support them, over to the Republican side.

The development will need pipelines, will need steel, construction workers, transportation(truckers) which in-turn will need new equipment, parts, etc...

This new revenue stream will balance budgets, fund pensions, and should be enough to fund alternative energy projects that will help the environment going-forward.

The takeaway from the article is the president, his Cabinet, and most of the elected Democrats are in the minority since they´re liberal/progressives.

Look, I realize that 39% at ´Somewhat Conservative´ leaves a lot of wiggle room and I´m not really suggesting that there are enough ´traditional´ conservatives to overwhelm the electorate. But I am fed up with the progressive attempts to either redefine ´traditional conservatism´ - that´s the one that believes in strict adherence to the Constitution and limited government if you want to call those litmus tests - or to marginalize it.

Those ´somewhat conservatives´, if you get the government out of their faces, will be very pleased with the growth of their businesses; the increase in their paychecks; the lack of government hacks breathing down their neck or charging them ´fees´ or ´fines´ every time they do something. Some of them will even move into the ranks of the ´very conservative´. But they won´t get that chance if the option is never offered and we seem to have party leaders that want to keep that option off the table.

And if it is true that we have reached the responsibility tipping point and the majority are going to vote for whomever promises them the most, then the whole conservative v progressive argument means nothing anymore anyway. We are finished as a nation. All that´s left is waiting for the coin to spin down into the little black hole.

Please don´t forget though, not everything we are told is the truth. Many of the lies are deliberate and for a purpose. I don´t believe we should ever give up.

#13....Excellent post. Most of us with intelligence know what you say is true. It is the LoFo´s and the DDE´s (that´s Dumbed Down Educated) cannot comprehend any of it.

Two things hurting us. Those who are educated as Marxist and not American, and those who have traded their work ethic for freebees. That is how people like Obama get into office. Liberals have no clue what "shame" means even though they live in it.

#14, I would be willing to bet everyone on this thread believes in "strict adherence to the Constitution and limited government". That´s what the original tea party movement was all about. But too many of us insist on adding in a lot of other stuff, so that we can´t match up if we voted for Mitt Romney, if Rick Santorum alarmed us, if we think Tod Akin wasn´t electable and that we frighten Hispanic voters.. If we stick to our original goals, we can find, recruit and elect good people.,

The assertion that Conservatism means different things to different people at different times is arrant cant, from the predictable suspects. At its core, conservatism, while dynamic rather than static, holds to ageless traditional order, rules and values. Any political and social philosophy defines its adherents; not the other way around. This is the reason there is no such critter as a Catholic Muslim. The crux of the problem for conservatives has always been republicanism; a secular, progressive and corporatist ideology devoid of core principle; and the catalyst for this long overdue fight.