Unfortunately, just because you "think" something, doesn't make it true.
Every piece of empirical evidence on party identification and loyalty with young people is very clear. It is a well-studied phenomena. But, don't take my word for it, do a little reading. You could start with a book called "The American Voter". If you've gone to college, and studied ANY political science, then you've read the American Voter just like any medical student has read Grey's Anatomy.
http://www.amazon.com/American-Voter-Angus-Campbell/dp/0226092542
And, since you mentioned "Money Quote", try these one on for size from he aforementioned book...
“When we ask people to recall their first presidential vote, for example, we discover that of those who can remember their vote for President two-thirds still identify with the same party they first voted for.”
“A majority (56 per cent) of these presidential voters have never crossed party lines.
Not good enough, how about a little diddy from Norman J Ornstein from the AEI (hardley a left-wing think tank)...
“All the research done on the dramatic Democratic realignment of the 1930s shows that the key was young voters, coming of age as the Depression hit, influenced deeply by the contrast between Hoover and Roosevelt…those young voters became lifelong Democrats…The oldest segment of today's population, those who came of age during the golden years for the Republicans (the Roaring Twenties), remain staunchly Republican today.”
http://www.aei.org/scholars/scholarID.48/scholar.asp
The Democratic party gets it. At one time, the GOP got it as well as witness by Reagan's brilliant outreach to college Republicans. Young people matter - they may not matter in the first or even second election they vote in, but they certainly will matter in elections through the balance of their lifetimes. The GOP can't continue to cede the youth vote (by completely ignoring the issues that are important to them) to the Dems and expect to be a party of any relevance or influence in 10 of 15 years.
So why you and the rest of the "Flat Earth" wing of the GOP cling to disproven anecdotal evidence while holding scholarly reason, logic and research in contempt, the Democratic party and their candidates continue to whoop Republicans at the local, state and national levels.
Finally here's the worst part, when people provide information based on empirical evidence, you name call, demonize and pillory because your either not bright enough to get it or too scared to admit it.
But hey, you'll still have Rush Limbaugh and his loyal base of 4 million daily listeners. I wonder how many elections 4 million wins? Let me know how it works out.
How cheap our liberty is. What is the point of winning elections if you abandon your principles...something our Founders considered.
“A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.”
...Samuel Adams, letter to James Warren, February 12, 1779
That was funny, especially the part about us not wanting any outreach to voters. That was a good one, if one likes fairy tales.
Your quotes are meaningless because you’re coming off a truly bizarre position—that supporting Limbaugh’s positions somehow spells doom for the party.
Why do you think a principled conservative message won't work?
Keep in mind that the party-building exercise among college-age youth that you regret wasn't made, was neglected by the RNC and the guys you agree with -- the Large and in Charge Wing of the GOP, as opposed to us conservatives. So why don't you unload on Karl Rove and Dubya and Ken Mehlman for that little oversight?