[Little Ray]

I would not vote for Guiliani if he were a Democrat (I would be very happy that the Democrats had fielded a pro-war candidate, but I still wouldn't vote for him...) - why should I vote for him 'cause he's a Republican?

If Guiliani becomes the 'Pubbie nominee, or, Heaven forbid!, is elect president, it changes the Republican Party. It will no longer be a home for conservatives. It will be a home for "pragmatic" politicians who will do anything for power - in other words another Democrat party. It IS better to lose the 2008 election than to abandon the principles of the Republican party.

[TSchmereL]

. . . why should I vote for him 'cause he's a Republican? Because it is a false that the alternative is not worse. Because in a presidential election, one of the candidates wins and becomes the president. Life is full of bad choices. You don't exhibit rational behavior when you choose the worse of option of two bad options. You are trying to make the argument that by allowing a worse option to become a reality, it actually helps further a cause that was served, however poorly, by preventing the worse option in the first place. I don't buy it. If Guiliani wins, it does not change the Republican Party. You believe what you believe regardless of what others tell you is right. The only thing that changes is your political influence; it goes from low to zero. The Republican party is already a home for "pragmatic" politicians who will do anything for power. It is not better to lose the 2008 election. To further any of the principles that you don't want to abandon, you have to have at least some political power. When you become politially powerless, none of your purposes are served. You are willing to be a victim of the strategy of divide and conquer. I am not.