All that sounds nice, but I'm not sure it stands up to examination. It seems even on this thread the example of Reagan changing from a D to an R over several years is a counter example.
And check up on how Gingrich came to be Speaker of the House, thus leading to the "Voters' tantrum of '94".
All of these might be considered "baby steps" that did indeed make the GOP more competitive. I'm sure there are exceptions, but would you throw out the successes with the bath water from the failures? Who indeed can guarantee success? Who's pronouncements are more prophetic than another's?
Also see my posts #146 and #346 (I think).
You're talking about a man's personal conversion, that has absolutely no relevance to the discussion at hand. We're discussing the effects of RINO Governors on their respective states, state parties, and on Presidential contests within them. Remember that Reagan beat the similarly annointed liberal RINO San Francisco Mayor George Christopher in 1966. The liberal media and party elites hammered Reagan as being "unelectable", too. BTW, the man Reagan beat, Gov. Pat Brown, started out in politics as a RINO before switching to the 'Rats. At least as a liberal, he knew where he belonged. IIRC, Christopher eventually switched to them, too.
"And check up on how Gingrich came to be Speaker of the House, thus leading to the "Voters' tantrum of '94"."
I know how. He stopped acting like his accommodationist RINO predecessors, most of whom weren't interested in winning the majority but in remaining friendly with their 'Rat "betters" and knowing their place.
"All of these might be considered "baby steps" that did indeed make the GOP more competitive. I'm sure there are exceptions, but would you throw out the successes with the bath water from the failures? Who indeed can guarantee success? Who's pronouncements are more prophetic than another's?"
Your comparisons, no matter how well-intentioned, are not particularly relevent and reach very flawed conclusions. The basic question remains here, do RINOs help us as a party, as Governors ? Do they get us baby-stepping towards a more Conservative agenda ? The answer, which I discovered several years ago, is an unequivocal "no." They not only do not get us babystepping towards Conservatism, they get us leapfrogging towards liberalism and towards more 'Rat governance. The body of evidence is there, I've researched it thoroughly. Ah-nold is not the solution, he is the problem. McClintock is the solution.