http://www.washingto...010_08/025376.php A good summary, but I think he doesn't have it quite right. It's not a "smaller government good" vs not "smaller government good" battle. Instead, I think most public "conservatives" are more interested in talking points and orthodoxy which approaches religious fervor. Most public "liberals" are more interested in evidence, learning from history, and applying those lessons to make the future better.
One can't expect to win an argument about religious beliefs. That's why so many arguments with public "conservatives" don't go anywhere. Evidence from the real world is suspect when it contradicts their orthodoxy. Voodoo Economics won and poisoned the brains of the "conservative" establishment.
On the other hand, people in the real world who tend to vote one way or the other, can sometimes be persuaded to change their views on policy and voting patterns. (E.g. the 2006 and 2008 federal elections.) Those are the people that leaders should be trying to reach. Not convincing Limbaugh that he's wrong or countering his memes - that's a lost cause. His paycheck depends on not changing.
FWIW.
Cheers,
Scott.