Oh, and by the way, this whole rise in ideological purity perpetrated by people like that Australian guy is what cost the GOP their strongholds on New Jersey, Connecticut, and other moderate suburban areas back during Gingrich's """revolution""" with his ideological purity.
Somewhat true. Although back in the early 90s, there was a group of moderate Republicans called the "92 group" that were strongly behind Gingrich. This was not so much because of Gingrich's ideological purity as the fact that these folks did not accept the concept of the Pemanent (Democratic) Congress and sought to win. This group was made of Republicans who had actually governed; who had been part of majorities in their state legislatures and state houses, and who had experience being "bi-partisan" to get mundane things done that make government work because they would be held responsible if those mundane things didn't work.
The issue that really pushed the suburbs and the Northeast to the Democrats was the religious conservatism that became a GOP power base in the 1990s. The GOP was able to win over Evangelicals to the GOP up and down the ballot, but this alliance cost them the support of secular Republicans who were conservative on economics, but socially liberal. Even New Hampshire, a state that has always been fertile grounds for tax revolts, trends Democratic these days.
