This part is untrue. People self-identify as conservatives at a rate nearly double that of liberals.
To win control a party must keep its base and get over half the middle.
Well, duh.
The question is: can you keep the base with a candidate the base finds abhorrent?
It's all a question of balance, so you have to find a consensus candidate who can appeal to the various wings of the party. It would seem to me, and many others, self-evident that Giuliani cannot be that person, but many still believe he can.
Our problem on this board is what constitutes a moderate. I mean, which issue are they moderate ON? If they are moderate on one single issue which Tancredo has issued an ideological injunction against, that individual is set on by so called "pure" (terrorists aren't our problem, MEXICANS ARE!!) conservatives.
This childish, churlish behavior is rationalized as "fighting the two party cartel" and gettng us "back to our conservative roots" (trans: the original thirteen colonies, with a hundred foot was around them) and the all time favorite "If electing a Democrat to the White House is what it takes to shake up the conservatives - usually with the injunction that those shook up conservatives take us back to our roots - then so be it." That one is my favorite. It says it all. You shouldn't have to have more than a room temperature IQ to realize that every time you read that sentiment, earnestly expressed by a self labelled "neocon", you are seeing the ancient tactic of division. Divided we fall.
Divided we fall. These are alleged conservatives dividing us in order to destroy us. That puts self-labelled neocons trying to divide and conquer ALL conservatives at the cost of our lives and our security as a nation squarely in the enemy camp with al Qaeda and the rest of the Democrats.