[MinnesotaLibertarian]

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.

[Antoninus]

Yeah, I'd say that's probably true. My point is that I don't think social issues should be top priority for anyone.

I disagree with that sentiment with every fibre of my being. A coarse, vicious, self-indulgent society that kills the unborn, the elderly, and the disabled in the nae of convenience is bound for self-destruction and no economic policy on earth can save it.

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

If a politician can't stand up and say: "Baby-killing is wrong" he should not expect my vote. Period.