Nope...... That "reality" is determined by primary voters in red districts, and their desire for what level conservative zeal in the preference of their candidates.
As the dims continue their push to take us over the socialist cliff, the FC will only get larger and stronger in inverse proportion. Think Newton's 3rd Law.....
I was referring to the election for Speaker, but if you want to talk about the electorate in general, fine.
But in that case, I'm not sure you're right. Just because more voters don't want actual socialism doesn't mean they agree with everything the FC stands for. There are still a lot of voters in that great squishy middle, and they'll lean towards whomever seems the most reasonable.
Newton's Third law doesn't have to be balanced by the Freedom Caucus. It could be balanced in the eyes of those voters by just sticking with
less socialistic people in the middle who seem more reasonable.
So, whether they perceive a particular conservative as offering a reasonable alternative is critical. And that's often not just an issue of policy, but also about presentation/rhetoric. So while it clearly is important to stick to principles, it is equally important for purposes of expanding support to not just pander to your base with red-meat rhetoric. All that does is get you high fives from your base, while alienating people you might otherwise have been able to persuade.
How candidates are perceived impacts the reality of how people vote.
