Will some GOP stop voting because of confederate flag, gay marriage, immigration

[CountryClassSF]

Many will also not vote for a candidate that believes in compromising their religious beliefs.

[DC Al Fine]

Pretty much what TJ said. Abortion was and continues to be the line in the sand for social conservatives. You won't see a third party run or mass defections unless the GOP candidate crosses that line.

[RINO Tom]

Most of the Republicans who aren't down with the social conservative/anti-immigration stances of much of the GOP are already Democrats, or "Presidential Democrats" who vote GOP in local races.

This is true, with the exception of people who are deeply fiscally conservative or quite fiscally conservative and quite hawkish.  Also, anti-immigration in an American context is much less stringent than in other nations.

You're right about that. One of the reasons for that is of course that you're a nation of immigrants, but I think the main reason is that you mostly get latinos (and some Asians like Chinese and Indian) while we in Europe mostly get muslims and poor Africans if many can't even read or Write, from war-ridden countries like Somalia. Latinos are very similar to Americans culturally, Europe's immigrants usually are not.

Sorry, but bullsh*t.  I'm in Europe right now, but if there's one thing I've lost a lot of respect for, it's European liberals who get on their high horse about what Americans should or shouldn't do/think about illegal immigration in our country while being xenophobic and downright racist themselves.

1) Our immigration is none of anyone's business but ours and Mexico's.

2) Don't throw stones from a glass house.

[Zioneer]

I am actually hoping a social conservative gets nominated, annihilated in a blowout election, and forever discredits that wing of the party.

I think some swing voters are able to appreciate someone who speaks their opinions honestly, even if they don't completely agree with them.  When the candidate (Romney, McCain) is afraid to take a position out of fear of alienating voters that are 90% Democrat and are not swing voters, it  is the equivalent of a downward spiral in polls, you're focusing your GOTV on voters who are 100% invested in electing Democrats, and completely alienating voters who you absolutely need to win.

I'm not saying, all the Republicans need to do, is nominate a social conservative activist, and then the White House is in the bag. I'm saying that they need someone who relentlessly focuses on the three legged stool of the Republicans and understands that hyper-social-leftists aren't going to be open to voting Republican.  Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida should not be cast aside in an attempt to  run up the percentage in the Castro or the West Village. It's a ridiculous strategy on part of the GOP - they're more obsessed with the gay vote (what, 5% of 2012?) than any other demographic.

Romney was obsessed with the gay vote? That's news to literally everyone who witnessed 2012.

[Likely Voter]

Once again the notion that Romney failed to turn out the base is ludicrous. In 2004 (the last time a GOPer won the PV) White Evangelicals (as good a proxy for the GOP base as any) were 23% of the voters and Bush got 77% of them. And remember that Bush's operation went out of their way to get out the vote with that group after underperforming with them in 2000 (some say to the DUI thing). Anti-SSM ballot initiatives were a big part of that. So of course Romney lost so he must have done worse with that group right? Actually, in 2012 White Evangelicals were 26% of the vote (3% more than 2004) and Romney got 78% of them (1% more than Bush). And bear in mind that the white vote overall went down 2004 to 2008 from 77% to 72%.

Romney got the base out in a huge way, he lost because he turned off moderate whites and non-whites. It is as simple as that.