@DiogenesLamp
Based on what actual evidence? Where is the proof that this huge voting bloc of conservatives that never votes actually exists and is willing to vote for the "right" candidate?
It's difficult to prove a negative, but my evidence is the fact that they don't cast votes for conservative candidates. And I know all the excuses about voters being "tricked" and "misled" by nasty media campaigns such as the one that supposedly sank Ted Cruz. But aren't we talking about a silent majority of true blue conservative voters? Aren't those the exact people who should be able to see through that stuff in a heartbeat, and know that it was just garbage?
I'd suggest that if they really are so easily led off the trail and willing to let Trump have the nomination, then they really weren't true blue conservatives to begin with.
Apparently Conservative voters do cast votes for conservative candidates. Or did you miss the TEA party influence on the last midterm? It was real enough. This time though, other factors are intervening.
For starters, a significant number of those in Congress who ran as Conservatives shed that mask as soon as they were elected. That's discouraging. Many were sent there specifically to get rid of Obamacare, by repealing or de-funding it. That didn't happen, and that will cost some enthusiasm for Conservatives. In this case it put a premium on being an 'outsider', which one candidate claimed to good effect, while using an elected official's having been elected against him, despite decrying him for not going along to get along which made him an outsider. Apparently there is a portion of the electorate which, despite proven ability to perform feats of contorted logic, couldn't pick through that one. An outsider in North Dakota ran as a Conservative and got the GOP nomination for Governor, despite not being one of the Party anointed--something very difficult to do, even here, but something which says Conservatives can and do get the vote.
The arguably most Conservative candidate in the Presidential Primaries was subjected to a prolonged and well timed campaign of lies and smears, targeted by region or demographic when the primaries rolled around in their respective states, all of which were aimed at making him repugnant to Conservatives. Despite that smear campaign against him, he still came in second, and fairly close in actual number of votes. Many lazier people unfortunately only read headlines, and those were often lurid. So they didn't vote for that guy if they bought the spiel of the week (or one of the earlier weeks). I doubt most voters are as well versed as us hardcore internet posters at seeing through false dichotomies, fallacious arguments, misstatements of fact, and the like as we are, but even that would be no guarantee.
Of course, the Party hierarchy has no benefit from running Conservatives, so why would they do anything to assist a Conservative candidate in attaining a nomination or even office? If they aren't on the ticket, they won't get the vote. If they don't have name recognition party backing can get, that's a hard row to hoe, too. So lack of ability to choose a conservative candidate would affect whether or not Conservatives are voted for.
I don't think the ballot results necessarily reflect the political stance of the electorate accurately. Nor do I think they will this time. There is no way to sell Trump to me as a Conservative, despite the fact that many Conservatives will vote for him out of desperation to keep Hillary out.
Those who vote third party will, depending on Party, reflect some of that conservative vote, but the vast majority of those who might have identified themselves as Conservative likely will hold their noses again and vote otherwise for what they hope is the lesser of two liberals.
