I don't.
In fact, the writing is pretty much on the wall. Even here: GOP USA poll
The media-annointed "front runners" lag seriously behind other, more conservative, candidates.
A conservative candidate will get all the Republican votes, except from the most liberal of self-proclaimed 'republicans', a liberal will split the vote between third party candidates and stay at home voters.
I can't see anyone who owns a firearm voting for Hillary, but an anti-gun candidate from the Republicans will guarantee lackluster support for their candidate, and, frankly, a loss.
The pro-life faction of the party will support a candidate who is a conservative, but not someone who is pro-abortion.
People who want something as basic and essential as control of who comes over our borders will not vote for the candidate(s) soft on illegal immigration, no matter who they are.
The group to woo is not those who have no hard and fast single issues, but the groups who do, for they are the ones most likely to stand on principle.
Given the choice, when the time comes I'll choose to stand in front of the throne of the Almighty and say I voted against those who supported killing babies in the womb.
In the meantime, I'll keep my guns, too.
I like your whole post (of course!) and appreciate specifically what you say above. If the voters with principles are won to a Conservative candidate, the moderate waffling voters who are proclaiming now we oughta be on their bandwagon "for the sake of the Party" will come aboard ours, and be very welcome! They are wafflers, after all - caring less who they vote for so long as that person with an (R) on the ballot will WIN - or so they say...I do wonder.
I'm seeing on the 'Net that moderate Republican voters are more concerned with "who (they think) can beat Hillary or Obama" than they are concerned over what positions that candidate actually takes on the issues. Such posters don't even consider that the Republican candidate's positions on the issues are what will determine failure or victory. (Shaking head) Did they learn nothing from '06 - the year the Conservative (pro-life) Democrats took the seats of the Moderate (pro-abort) Republicans?
“Right after John Kerry’s loss in 2004, the Democratic Party finally started talking about including pro-life Democrats in the big tent of the Democratic Party. They put their money where their mouths are and assisted pro-life Democrats. Their inclusion helped pro-life Democrats win and played a significant role in handing over control of the US Senate and House. In addition to adding Bob Casey to the Senate, Democrats will see 6 new pro-life Democrats in the House,” said DFLA’s Executive Director Kristen Day.
~Source.