I am not so certain of your assertions. The first is perhaps to differentiate between the term Conservatives and Republican. The GOP happens to be the party that comes closest to the ideals of conservatives, but it is not the only place where conservatives can be found.
Moreover, I would argue that there are plenty of people who are social conservatives, but economic liberals (many Reagan Democrats) who are easily swayed to be anti-trade and anti-business when times are tough and managers are doing better than they are. And, there are quite a few economic conservatives who are socially laisse faire as well (I would argue this is the group to whom FOX speaks with most of its programming aside from news).
These two groups do not fit naturally together.
I also find it difficult to believe that the goal of a leader should be to be “acceptable to everyone”. Anyone who fits that category will be boring as heck - Fred anyone?
A leader should be a leader. A leader isn’t someone you have to agree with everytime. A leader is a person who you trust is making the right choices most of the time - even if they aren’t the choices you would necessarily make. A leader is a person who inspries confidence and radiates competence.
The GOP is fragmented because there are so many groups of 1-issue voters. If you only care about 1 thing than you do not care about leadership, you just care about 1 issue and the rest is irrelevant. Moreover, the past 6 years of GOP leadership have been with a group of people who often present themselves as “true conservatives” and have been strongly supported by the GOP establishment as such. Their actions and policies tell a different story. And, many Americans do not appear to perceive that things are being run well - whether or not this corresponds to reality is irrelevant - politics is about perceptions.
So, what we have is a party that is increasingly focused on single issues, a leadership that is not very well respected and a group of candidates that appeal only to a niche of voters, or to everyone and no one. It seems to me, that the deficit here is mostly about a leadership deficit based on a fear to tell it like it is. In the current environment, Pat Toomey would have attacked Ronald Reagan for raising taxes in California.
“A leader should be a leader.”
Everyone knows the definition of “leader.” We don’t need to change definitions or even presume to establish them. Changing definitions is one of the foremost tactics of leftists.
The GOP might be divided, temporarily. But the conservative instinct of the American people is as unified as ever.
The best hope for the leftists is to exploit natural human tendencies to act on superficial emotion (because it is only emotion that is briefly dividing the GOP) and to break down tradition.
Fred brings us together because he represents traditional conservatism, which is the biggest tent of all.