I think these wrap-ups of the election are only partially right.
They blame social conservatism because the Republicans lost running on it. They forget that social conservatism was all they could run on. Certainly, running on economic conservatism would have been a joke after the last 8 years.
It isn’t that social conservatism is bad, just that it isn’t enough to win elections alone. It takes the whole conservative package.
They blame social conservatives first, because they aren't (they aren't blaming themselves, notice that?), and second, because they, as leaders, are accustomed to having their followers do "what they are told." In this case, doing what they are enticed to do, which is "vote against the DEMs."
The theme is that social conservatism is a lost cause in the political field, so don't expect any political party to champion social conservative issues. Especially don't expect the GOP to champion them. In effect, they are saying that the championing of social conservative issues loses elections; and therefore, those who expect the championing of social conservative issues are losers.
I've got a big "L" tattooed on my forehead. The GOP can kiss my butt.
Are we talking about the same election? Because the last time I remember a GOP presidential nominee running an a platform that paid anything more that lip service to social conservatism was in 1984.
Sarah Palin was talking about these issues, but McCain certainly wasn't.
What these election wraps tell me is that no-way, no-how did the ass-whipping in 2006 and 2008 create consensus on the right.
Each sub-group within the right is still convinced that "the other guys" are the problem.
And there is plenty of smug ITYS attitude among Rinos/CINOs and conservapurists to keep us in the Marxist wilderness permanently.
Useful idiots the lot of us.