For me it comes down to the realization that the perfect candidate does not exist.
I simply look at the field of candidates, announced or presumed and basing my decision on what I think to be the ~major~ issues facing the country, I made my choice.
The understatement that pulls me out of lurker mode on this thread.............
The understatement that pulls me out of lurker mode on this thread.............
That's fine, but your post was an argument with EV that somehow he wasn't doing anything for aborted babies and that it didn't really matter about Rudy.
You are quite correct about making choices. In the end I might choose someone who was somewhat pro-choice if they were right about every other issue (although to be honest I have a hard time with pro-choicers because I see it as a basic character flaw not to recognise the continuity of life and at least see that once a baby is viable it isn't something to be owned and discarded). But the only thing I see Rudy having the lead on right now is the lead.
MEaning that other than him "looking electable", I don't see what he has that others don't have. Several others speak as well as him, are as smart as he is, have the executive experience he has, and are more conservative. Others are much better on issues, or have a much more moral personal life which is important.
If the only thing that makes him the best is that he is "electable", I'd rather spend the next year trying to make a better candidate "electable" than support Gulliani.
If he wins the nomination, I'll be there to get him elected, but grudgingly because I fear he will make it hard to get conservatives elected down-ticket, which is very important.
It's just strange to see a person who seemed supportive of George Allen for President now supporting Rudy Gulliani, who makes John Warner look like, well, Duncan Hunter.