Perhaps, you're right. Many conservatives interpret events to match their ideology. They say Republicans need to stop then illegal invasion and wasteful spending, then Republicans will cruise to victory. But, the Republican candidate -Jim Oberweis - who lost last night, campaigned on a pro-border security and anti-pork platform. Yet he lost in a GOP friendly district.
Many also had a strong social conservative aspect to their campaigns and as a result lost the independents who often make the difference in close campaigns.
These are indeed the two primary issues where I and the Conservative wing have had problems. I see them as not being part of the "Original" Conservative ideology and added more recently, or perhaps it's better said "moved to the forefront" of the campaigns.
This move should have been done with more subtle tone, and it would not have become so divisive. I don't necessarily disagree with some of the intent, but the methods often suck politically. It created national agitation where voters are voting against republicans, not for their party and at the same time, many in the party have completely lost any interest in it, and are now sitting on the sidelines with their money and their support. A few have gone to the other side but that's not the major damage. The damage is in the perception of the party as a whole and caused the leadership to become invalidated.
This often happens in a party that reached it's goals, and is nothing new, but it was preventable.
I warned about this, as far back as 2004. It's a shame, but it is what it is. It will correct it's self when there is once again a common goal to achieve, and only then. It will take a period of time with a Rat controlled Congress and the resulting damage done. Perhaps even a major incident. But it will reverse eventually as the pendulum swings back.