Some of you will know that among the GOP biggies that initially honed their political chops in the College Republicans were Jack Abramoff, Karl Rove and Ralph Reed. Rove and Abramoff, for example, grabbed power in the body through a concerted push towards more extreme right wing positions and electoral techniques. This wasn't just Rovian dirty tricks (although it was certainly that in part) but a strategy of advancing one's own power and ideology by purposefully getting rid of moderates.
Politico has a piece up now (longish but very good) on a rising star of the same sort in the conservative movement operating on campuses and running on donations (multi-millions now) much from the rogue's gallery we're familiar with.
The propaganda line being pushed is the tried and true, "lefty liberal professors are brainwashing America's youth". The over-arching thesis is that one can choose either capitalism and liberty or one can become a commie. And when these people use "socialist" presently, they imply all or most of the past negative associations of communism. But since the collapse of the USSR, that existential enemy could no longer be wielded effectively as the big boogie man. A replacement was required. It is no coincidence that Gorbachev left office in 1991 with Russia changed forever and that the '92 campaign of Pat Buchanan featured a portrayal of the new greatest existential threat to America - liberalism.
"Liberalism" as boogieman works for the well-primed GOP base which is why it is the central target of Limbaugh or Coulter or Hannity or a near-endless list of modern conservative voices. But it has had limited traction with non-conservatives, mostly because they lead liberal-style lives as a matter of preference. But "socialism" has the propaganda value in how it acts as a bridge between the conservative concepts of liberal and communist.
And what's being pushed is a false dilemma - socialism or liberty, you get only one or you get the other. It's the big lie at the center.