[MadIvan]

I recall 2000. I remember people were suspicious of George W. Bush, but were much more willing to give the man a chance. Yes, there were some people who were running into the undergrowth yelling something indecipherable about the Bilderbergers and the CFR, but overall, there was unity, more or less, once it came down to it.

The present fracture is dangerous and wrong - if this continues, it will create a split that will not be easily healed. Furthermore, infighting is going to distract the Republicans from crafting a "Morning in America" type campaign that they desperately need.

Regards, Ivan

[CitizenUSA]

MadIvan wrote: "The present fracture is dangerous and wrong - if this continues, it will create a split that will not be easily healed."

I agree. The moderates who keep demanding compromise should start learning some of it themselves. Seriously, the Republican candidate needs to be palatable to the party's base. You may not agree, but none of the leading candidates are very impressive, and some of them are downright polarizing, like Rudy.

[nopardons]

What? You've forgotten all of the druggie posts, people calling him a "moron", claiming that he was "anointed", and posting that mendacious libel about the never happened Mexican abortion?

[backtothestreets]

"The present fracture is dangerous and wrong - if this continues, it will create a split that will not be easily healed."

Will create? Draw a little closer and look again. The percentage of Americans that identify as Republicans is down to 27%, the lowest of this decade. In fact, the lowest it has been in over two decades. Americans identifying as Democrats is at 36%, unchanged from 2001 when Republicans took control of Congress and the White House. Americans identifying themselves as independents are presently at 24%.

From 1973 until 1980 when Ronald Reagan became president, people identifying as independent outnumbered people identifying themselves as Republican. We are at the point once again where the Republican Party is on the verge of becoming a quirky political party of little significance.

Reagan did not rebuild the Republican Party with a broad history of liberalism. He appealed to conservatives. Rudy Giuliani is not doing that. If he were, this entire thread would be in support of Rudy. The party needs a candidate that is a healer.

Rudy is a very capable organizer and administrator, but his political and personal history show he lacks the conservative credentials Ronald Reagan had. Rudy's attributes would serve best in taking on the role of Chairman of the Republican National Committee to build the party, not as a candidate for president.