Replies

I'm a moderate on social issues, but have no problem voting for a social conservative if they're good on other issues.

That's because the social issues don't mean that much to you. If social issues are a make-or-break thing for you, like they are for me, then it makes a huge difference in who you vote for.

But you ask a social conservative who purports to also be an economic conservative to support a strong conservative who's a bit more moderate on some social issues,

Doug Forrester was "a bit more moderate" on social issues and I held my nose and voted for him. Kean the Less is a liberal and a doctrinaire pro-abort. I don't vote for liberals and his abortion position makes him utterly anathema.

they tell you to go screw yourself. What gives?

Hey, I'll at least do Kean the Less the courtesy of not openly supporting his Democrat opponent. The same could not be said for those oh so noble moderate "Republicans" who came out for McGreevey against Schundler in 2001.

That's because the social issues don't mean that much to you. If social issues are a make-or-break thing for you, like they are for me, then it makes a huge difference in who you vote for.

Yeah, I'd say that's probably true. My point is that I don't think social issues should be top priority for anyone - stopping socialism is much more important, thus stopping Menendez is much more important.

I know we don't agree at all on abortion, so I'm not even going to go there.

Hey, I'll at least do Kean the Less the courtesy of not openly supporting his Democrat opponent. The same could not be said for those oh so noble moderate "Republicans" who came out for McGreevey against Schundler in 2001.

I wasn't aware of that. That was a stupid thing to do. Of course, I'm not a "moderate" Republican - I'm moderate on social issues, but very conservative on economic issues. If somebody was moderate on economic issues also, then I could see why they wouldn't support Schundler, but I can't see why they would call themselves Republicans.