[Classicliberal]

Over the past fifty years massive immigration from non-white, or more aptly, non-European countries, has rapidly changed the face of the United States. Going from nearly 90% of the population in 1960, 'white' Americans have declined to a historic low of 63% of the total population, per the 2010 census. Correlatively, the white voting share has gone from nearly 88% in the 1988 election to 72% in the last election; with the 2012 election being also notable for the fact President Obama was reelected with the lowest level of white support ever at 39%--an electoral predicament offset by the fact he won more the 2/3rds of every non-white voting group, if we consider Hispanics as non-white too.

Moreover, looking forward, demographics show that America will no longer be a white-majority country after 2048--whites will retain a numerical plurality but will certainly lack the hegemonic electoral clout they once had. These forecasts given the current composition of the Republican party being 90% white seem to be the writing on the wall; the Republican party in its current racial composition will not be able to win national elections if the Democratic voting advantage with non-whites continues. To note, the catch all 'non-white' grouping I'm using is obviously a little too convenient--Asians, Hispanics, and blacks are all culturally very different groups that, on par, have pretty divergent interests and the recent electoral trends are certainly not, by any means, permanent.

However, what I've found rather revealing in a recent Pew research poll was that most political views broke down completely on racial lines. Obama approval: white majority disapproves; non-whites, whether Hispanic, Asian, or black, overwhelmingly approve. More government, more services: white majority disagrees; all non-whites, as in the last question, overwhelmingly agree. Ask about less government and services and the results are flipped but the clear racial divide remains; whites run conservative, non-whites liberal.

Even among the 18-29 year old group where there is much more consensus on social issues, when the issues turn to ideological views on government or fiscal matters, the racial divide between whites and non-whites returns; with the former, of course, trending conservative.

From these trends I start to hypothesize three conclusions:

1. The ideological base of American conservatism, at least fiscally, in smaller, limited government, on average, seems to have restricted appeal to mainly white Americans.

2. As whites continue to decrease as a share of the electorate, the Republican party ideologically will have to shift left as the growing non-white electorate changes the national political calculus and the country as whole becomes more centre-left than right--maybe more like Europe ideologically: defense reduced further, more social welfare, etc.

3. There might be a cultural element irrespective of the short-term political interest of both white and non-white voting groups. To elaborate, 'native' white-Americans may sense a greater connection to the ideals of the United States at its founding, or their ideological conception of that founding, regardless of the country's current governmental composition. That is, small, constitutionally bound, limited republican government, an emphasis on private associations/charity rather than social welfare, and relatively free, low taxed market economy.

Where as, non-white groups, coming from non-Western cultures with little to no ideological connection to the classic Enlightenment political thought or classical economics would culturally be distinct. Instead, they would tend ideologically to more statist models of government, higher government spending, more services, higher taxation, wealth redistribution--basically a 'social justice' conception of government, one focused more on wealth and racial inequality than maximizing economic growth.

TL;DR: Whites are decreasing, various non-white minorities are increasing as a share of national electorate. Contemporary elections show pretty stratified racial divide in political ideology between white and non-white Americans and public opinion polls seems to correlate this as well, even cross generationally. Main questions: Does this spell doom for American conservatism? How much does cultural heritage determine white and non-white political ideology and voting patterns?

[Torus34]

American 'conservatives' aren't doomed any more than any small group within a larger democratic society is doomed. They will continue, though their influence on l'affairs politique will continue to decrease. 'Conservative' talk show hosts will still make a nice living on AM radio, though the size of their audience will slowly shrink due to die-off.

Meanwhile, life for the vast majority will continue to go on.

[Quantum]

It is implicitly racially based even if conservatives deny it with their racial blindness bullshit, given the fact that the Founding Fathers were of European stock. When whites become a minority, the ideology dies along with them. Which brings me to the question of why white conservatives support the system by voting Republican when governments and corporations over the last fifty years have been steadily replacing the labour force with non-whites, and exporting American jobs abroad through policies and ultimately for profit. I can't believe that they can't connect the dots between supporting the system and losing their influence and one can't feel sorry for them triggering their own demise.

[ThirdTerm]

Hispanic voters are racially around 53% white and they are swing voters who can be persuaded to vote Republican. America will still be a majority white country in 2050, if white Hispanics are properly categorised as whites along with non-Hispanic whites. Overall, Hispanic Americans' paternal ancestry is 69.3% European, 21.3% African and only 7.9% Native American (Lao et al, 2010). Cuban exiles in Florida are very conservative voters and Marco Rubio could serve as a poster boy for the Republicans to attract Hispanic voters in general. 78% of Korean Americans voted for President Obama and 60% of them identified as Democrats, while only 14% were Republicans. In states with large Korean American populations such as New York, Virginia, New Jersey, Georgia, Maryland, and Massachusetts, Democrats are wooing Korean American voters through supporting anti-Japanese measures passionately promoted in the Korean American community, which have nothing to do with American culture and values, and Korean Americans are keen on maintaining their own cultural heritage.

Having survived weeks of behind-the-scenes scheming, an obscure textbook bill that elicited threats from Japan and drew busloads of Korean activists to the Capitol was headed Wednesday to Gov. Terry McAuliffe for his signature. McAuliffe (D) had promised on the campaign trail to support legislation requiring that any new Virginia textbooks note that the Sea of Japan is also known as the East Sea. It was a move meant to win voters in Northern Virginia’s large Korean American community, where “Sea of Japan” is considered a holdover from Japanese occupation.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/va-bill-on-alternative-sea-of-japan-name-in-textbooks-heads-toward-mcauliffes-desk/2014/03/05/f2730194-a4b1-11e3-84d4-e59b1709222c_story.html

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) called on the Japanese government on Tuesday to “speak plainly” about a dark chapter in the country’s history in which Korean, Chinese and other women were used as sex slaves by the Japanese Imperial Army during World War II. Standing next to a controversial Glendale memorial honoring the so-called “comfort women,” Schiff said clear recognition will pave the way for an improved diplomatic relationship between two of the United States’ most important Asian allies, ensuring security in the east.
http://articles.glendalenewspress.com/2014-04-22/news/tn-gnp-schiff-pays-a-visit-to-comfortwomen-statue-20140422_1_glendale-statue-comfort-women-japanese-imperial-army

[Torus34]

Revisiting the topic line of the OP: 'Is American conservatism racially based?':

If one wishes to trace American conservatism to its roots in the way-back-when, it was exclusively the product of the mind-set of whites. To that extent it sprang from a racially-distinct group. Period. End of discussion.

A far more interesting area can be opened through the imposition of a single letter.

'Is American conservatism racially b[i]ased?'

[Reason10]

To answer that very long-winded and somewhat numbskull tirade, I should preface this by saying that today's American conservatism is different from conservatism of the past. I don't pretend to fully understand what came before, but what we're looking at today got its start around 1980.

Today's American conservatives espouse the views of Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, Rush Limbaugh, etc.

American conservatism sends a simple message:

1. Freedom and liberty have given Americans the greatest standard of living in history.
2. Race is no longer relevant. Forget your skin color and get off your fat ass and get to work.
3. Government is best used to deliver the mail, build roads and fight wars. Leave the rest to the private sector.
4. The Constitution is as valid today as it was when it was written.
5. There is no freedom without the rule of law.

This brand of conservatism is embraced by ALL races in the US, and suggesting otherwise IS RACIST. American conservatism is about embracing the things that made America great.

This wasn't always the case about American conservatism, but it is the case today.

Only racISTS see race as an issue here.