I'll te ll you what. When the Hunter people stop coming on Rudy threads and spamming their articles, I'll consider not spamming that particular article.
As it is, your equating Rudy with Arnold is clearly disputed in that particular article, whether you admit it or not.
My contention is that too many GOPers have thrown in the towel on Reaganism. Sure, each candidate can point to some part of his record and claim that mantle, but Reaga was the one who finally brought the social conservatives along for the ride in a great coalition. Newt and the boys expanded on that greatly during Clintons term, giving them majorities. Even Bush had coattails, beating Algore, who was a sitting VP during a boom economy, and increasing GOP leads and during the next two election cycles campaigning vigorously to keep them.
Then between 2004 and 2006 something happened. The spine was lost in the Senate and House. Bush went out there and campaigned magnificently on SS reform, one of his biggies for fixing goverment, and the GOP leadership completely pulled the rug out from under him based on polls. The MSM constant, and mostly false criticism of the war, gave way too many republicans weak knees, so it ended up being Cheney, Bush, Rummy, Condi, and Hunter left arguing the wars merits while the House and Senate kept quiet. Other than Hunter, where was Frist and Hastert and team blasting the MSM and blasting the treasonous dems?
But make no mistake, the socons are not an expendable commodity for the GOP. Rudy still would beat the hag or Ears Obama with independent support, but the GOP will return to its pre Reagan days, and many of those people will never come back. Just look at Britain and the story of the Tories abandoning Thatcherism for a glimpse of what's to come.