It wasn't until the GOP added social conservativism to its platform that it becamse a majority party. Before Reagan came along and added pro-life to the party's small-government platform, the GOP was the minority party. Reagan added the social traditionalists - that was a big share of the "Reagan Democrats". The pre-Reagan GOP "leaders" like Ford didn't like broadening the GOP tent to include these folks -- but that's why Ford lost and Reagan won. Now we've got Rudy-fans who want to go back to the Gerald Ford days, the days when the GOP snubbed the social conservatives - and lost.
Quit acting like a victim. If there was a viable social conservative running in this election, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
However, the guy who crushed the mob, cleaned up NYC, and will bring the nation's attention back to 911 happens to be unpalatable on two or three issues ultimately decided by the courts. That's not the worst thing in the world, especially given the House and Senate are still reasonably close, and wiping out Obama or her Thighness could give us at least one chamber back. Bill Brady *is* a social conservative, and Durbin is as wacko as they come.
If Rudy takes Illinois, for example, a Bill Brady could sent Dick Turban, who thinks our troops are Nazis, into retirement.
But the 100%ers don't think like this. They would rather believe there is some conspiracy against them.