The main problem, (and all your stereotypical rhetoric about librulz and socialism is the rule that proves the relative absence of the exception) is that too many people don't want to actually debate on a point by point basis, because when you start delving into what socialism for example actually means, it stops making sense to rant about it. And people don't like that, because its more important to them to have their rhetorical instrument than to actually substantively debate something in detail. You, PoS, have literally discounted the definitions of terms in favor of popular error, all so you can keep derping about soshulism.
The fiction that sounds good is more important than the reality that doesn't.
In my view too many of the conservatives just wanted to throw down with "liberals this" "dems that" "socialism derp", and didn't want to break it down to the nuts and bolts and apply the facts. Its about ideology to them, as an end, rather than the fundamentals that led to the ideology as a means. They wanted things to be black and white. Us against them. Good vs evil. But life isn't a comic book, and the vast majority doesn't fit into the monochromatic fiction, and their ideology and rhetoric starts to break down when exposed to such complexity.
The unfortunate part is the social conservatism. It is flatly indefensible on anything but emotional or religious grounds, and therefor gets dismantled with ease. That so many conservatives also happen to be social conservatives simply poisons the well.