Political parties are interesting as they often bring together diverse individuals who agree on a core set of issues but disagree over what appear to be less important issues. Since the importance of this or that issue depends on what political cards are currently being played and what cards are anticipated in the future, the core set of issues might change from time to time. If there is wide spread disagreement about those issues outside the core, coalitions are likely to shift through time. Perhaps we are on the verge of such a shift.
To simplify, we can think of the GOP at present as being comprised of three groups: neocons, traditional conservatives, and neoliberals. Neocons are in favor of interventionism, both home and abroad. Traditional conservatives support free markets, but also support "traditional conservative values" and don't mind using the state to enforce said values. Neoliberals are in favor of free markets and, even though some may share the conservative values of their traditional conservative allies, they do not advocate using government power to legislate those values. I do not see the neoliberals and neocons finding common ground. So the question is: will traditional conservatives downplay their state-supported values in order to side with neoliberals or reject their free market stance in order to side with neocons?
The sides have been drawn but it isn't clear how things will end. Consider these two videos from CPAC.
It should be interesting.