Let's say the Republican Party had a platform that was exactly as you wanted it to be, and they could only get 35-40% of the electoral votes and lost every election that mattered?
Would you be content to remain forever on the outside looking in?
Or would you try to be a little more inclusive right up to the point of winning Presidential elections by the slimmest possible margins?
Or something else?
There are two possibilities here: either my views are forever doomed to be in the minority, or voters simply haven't been educated to the value of my views. I would work to see to it that the voters became educated, instead of buying the dumbed-down socialist claptrap they've been spoon-fed for the last half a century. If, after decades of trying to enlighten them, my views remained in the minority, then I would simply have to accept that America is not what I thought it was, and that it was I who was out of touch, not the voters. At that point, I would probably have to reconsider my stance.
Or would you try to be a little more inclusive right up to the point of winning Presidential elections by the slimmest possible margins?
The last thing I would do is begin to compromise. Either the values are valid or they are not. Pandering to an uneducated electorate to get a guy with your party's banner in the White House is unethical and ultimately ineffective, as George Bush has amply demonstrated in the last six years. I would NOT be more inclusive, right up until I was forced to admit that America simply did not want conservative politicians. At that point, I would still not compromise; I would simply resign from the political process.
Fortunately, I believe that America truly wants conservative politicians. They just aren't smart enough to know it yet.
Or something else?
Something else.