[T]he contemporary conservative movement—and particularly its increasingly dominant “constitutional conservative” wing—is unusually resistant to changes in its ideology, policies and messaging, for the rather obvious reason that they believe in a fixed, timeless government model located somewhere in the 1920s that reflects not only the Founders’ design but a divine imperative communicated through the Declaration of Independence, natural law, and scripture. So of course they will look high and low for evidence that they don’t have to “change to win,” and even if that pursuit fails, they’ll argue for holding out for a perfect electoral storm to avoid any compromise in their “conservative principles.”But no one & no thing are perfect. A quibbler in comments suggests that the 1890s (Gilded Age) are a better model than the 1920s (Roaring Twenties) & we agree, not that the '20s aren't a good illustration. A "free market" boom followed by the bubble bursting is about as economically sophisticated as the Con-con gets.
And come on, Ed, put meaningless idiocy like "natural law" in quotation marks. Maybe a parenthetical "whatever the fuck that is." What is it? Just the proverbial law of the jungle? (Another conservative concept.)++picky: "Scripture" would be capitalized in any respectable reactionary's mind-numbing blather.