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.
And just who decides who is in the "base" and who is not? Please. The real problem now is that the Republican Party is in danger of becoming too narrow and too sectional. That's a recipe for permanent minority status. Sorry, but the argument that all Republican candidates have to be conservative cuts no ice with me. You can't win nationally with 35% of the vote and giving up the large coastal and upper midwestern states.
America does NOT have a populace that is mostly Conservative.
In order to win elections, a candidate MUST appeal to more than just its base and I've got news for you, YOU are NOT the entire "base" of the GOP.
I don't accept this. There are many instances of the "unrealistic" wing saying they will sit on their hands on Election Day if Rudy is nominated. I have not seen one Rudy supporter say the reverse if Hunter was nominated. The difference is that the people who support Rudy have sufficient overall love of country to realise it's too much of a gamble to let it fall into the hands of the Democrats completely. The unrealistic wing doesn't care if the world explodes so long as that gun grabber Rudy doesn't get into office.
Ivan