It is self evident that neither the left or the right has a majority. If one side did they would win all the national elections. Poll after poll after poll has shown that roughly 1/3 on the voters are on the left and 1/3 more are on the right and 1/3 are in the center. The Center is made up of RINOs and DINOs. It does not take a big stretch of the imagination to see that neither conservatives nor liberals ever have control of the the Federal Senate. If the Democrats elect more DINOs than the Republicans elect RINOs the Democrats have the most power in the Senate.
I am always amazed by those that want to run the RINOs out of the Republican Party. They would just become DINOs and let the Democrats rule forever.
If the Republican have 45 conservatives and 10 RINO's in the Senate and the Democrats have 35 Liberals and 10 DINOs in the senate, the Republicans rule. NO the Republicans would not be able to hold all the RINOs on every issue. But they could always get a few DINOs to make up for the loss of some RINOs. They would not win them all, but they would win a lot more than they lose.
The Senate under FDR had a ton of Southern DINOs. But FDR could always pick up a few RINOs to win on his issues when the conservative southern senators went off the reservation. LBJ did the same thing.
Reagan constantly argued for tolerance for RINOs. He said it this way.. A Republican who is with you 80 percent of the time is not your enemy. Reagan as always used words that appealed with out invoking the wrath of buzz words. But describing some Republicans as "those who are mostly with you" is another way to say RINO.
My point is there is never a way to garner a conservative majority .... or a liberal majority for that matter. The reason is clear. About a third of the population is not ideological. They do not vote based on ideology. Thinking that people can be taught or educated to be ideological is like educating a left handed person to be right handed. It does not work well at all.
Surprisingly some ideological people can be changed from the left to the right and vice versa. But getting a majority to one side or the other has proved very elusive. It is must more effective to structure the arguments of the right so they appeal to the non ideological center.
Let me give you a couple of Reagan examples. When Reagan described his economic policy as letting people keep more of their own money, he was appealing to the non ideological voter. Telling the non ideological voter that cutting marginal tax rates is a good think, won't get their support. Letting them keep more of their own money will. Cutting marginal tax rates is an ideological appeal. Cutting government regulations is an ideological appeal. Getting Government off your back is the non ideological appeal. Cutting Goverment Regulations is an ideological appeal. To persuade the center, it is not so much what you want to do, but how it is described that makes the difference. Getting the votes of the non ideological center is the ONLY road to success. The left is quite good at selling the center. "Taxing the rich", "Special Interests", "Under the control of rich, fat, cats"... are ways the Democrats appeal to the center.
But if I make no other point, I would urge the consideration of the fact that at no time in our history has the ideology of the left or right ever enjoyed a majority. About a third of the voters and politicians are died in the wool DINOs and RINOs. The party that gets a majority of their support rules on nearly all issues. The ideology that rules is the one that learns to structure the arguments for policies so they appeal to the centrists. Failure to recognize the need to appeal to the center results in continuous defeat. Belief that the arguments that persuade the ideological will persuade the non ideological is political folly.
While you are not always right (Schwarzenegger DID run LOL ), your viewpoints and experiences are invaluable to those of us who enjoy the pursuit of hidden gems.
I agree with your assessment of the 1/3 in the center. They are the ones that need to be targeted when formulating arguments and phraseology.
Thanks again for your response.