In 1852-1856, the Whig Party began disintegrating because of various factions within it. Some went with the new Republican Party, some went with the Democrats, and some formed various new parties. See Wikipedia's article on the Whig Party (United States).
Now the Republican Party has morphed from a party of general principals to a party of rigid orthodoxy. If you are for issues A and B but not C, you are considered a RINO (Republican in name only). Some like Olympia Snowe resisted but have given up seeking office any longer. Some like John Posner, a federal appellate judge have spoken out strongly – "Top Reagan-Appointed Judge Slams 'Goofy' Republican Party", Ian Miller, Think Progress, 2012-07-06. Some like former Utah governor and Presidential primary candidate Jon Huntsman have withdrawn from party activities – "Huntsman scolds GOP for losing focus, will skip convention", Thomas Burr, Salt Lake Tribune, 2012-07-06.
I'm seeing more and more people write that they were once Republican but have dropped out or even become Democrats. We saw the future when Ronald Reagan was nominated over John Anderson. Now even Ronald Reagan is to "the left" of many Republicans.
Will many of these dissatisfied Republican politicians work to form a "deliberative" party that looks for long-range solutions? It could happen, especially if a few well-known journalists start promoting the idea. There might not have been a Republican Party without Horace Greeley and his New York Tribune.
"[W]e think some simple name like 'Republican' would more fitly designate those who had united to restore the Union to its true mission of champion and promulgator of Liberty rather than propagandist of slavery." - Horace Greeley, New York Tribune, June 1854. Change "propagandist of slavery" to "propagandist of large corporations and rigid dogma" and we have the makings of a new party. See "The Origins of the Republican Party".
Maybe a new party could adopt the 1856 Republican Party platform with suitable contemporary modifications
