You mean the guy who was polling 40+% consistently throughout June of 1992? The guy who only lost because he more or less self-destructed like a crazy man?
Not actually a very good example to make your case. A non-crazy conservative could mount a winning campaign.
Like it or not, politics is a numbers game, and the majority of the electorate is not conservative.
Sure they are - they just need to be made to understand this fact.
It's more than just running a non-crazy candidate. You have to have someone of real stature. The electorate needs to be very, very angry. There could be a Conservative party victory and permanent replacement of the Republican party but I think without these things it ain't gonna happen.
Poll results 6 months before elections aren't particularly relevant.
I voted for Perot. It was a dumb mistake. Lesson learned.
“A non-crazy conservative...”
Leftists, Romneybots, and several recent posters on Free Republic would say that’s an oxymoron even if not talking about Ross Perot.