I think my point is being missed. Throwing money at a candidate doesn't necessarily translate into electoral success and you set up a cycle of having to rasie and spend equal amounts of money each election cycle.
Turn voters into conservatives and they will vote for conservative candidates and probably do so for the rest of their lives.
Give a man a fish...
Not necessarily. You would agree most people are followers? If they(the electorate generally) begin to see a movement back to a more traditional America, I think most would gladly come along. The movement has shown some signs of life from the electorate side of the equation, AND they are putting more branded conservatives into office. Even so, problems seem to arise as they become "acclimated" to D.C.; they become incumbents. To this point there has been little in the way of keeping 'em honest, certainly not the media who does their part in covering and cheering their frequent leftward shift.
Turn voters into conservatives and they will vote for conservative candidates and probably do so for the rest of their lives.
Great idea, and there seems to be some positive movement. We're also doing our part, but how long will it take? You didn't indicate whether or not you read any of the Gokhale-Smetters study that makes a good case for a time critical change in how things are done in D.C. in particular. Does the study not elicit any concerns for what the future might hold? Unless some significant changes are made; and soon?
FGS