So you just defeat Hillary, and it makes no difference if her vanquisher stands for the same things as Hillary, like uncontrolled spending, leftist judges, amnesty and open borders, globalization that has all our products and foodstuffs under the control of a future enemy, etc.?
In your menu of binary enumeration, you just picked number three - unprincipled winner, and just pushed down the road an even more overwhelming defeat by a Hillary clone.
The only desirable option is a principled winner, and you’d better find one soon or 2006 is going to look like a Republican landslide by comparison.
George Bush is in trouble because, with the exception of the war, he has drifted away from (or cleverly camouflaged) the principles people thought they were voting for.
Would I prefer Hillary's vanquisher to be mainly aligned with what I believe? Of course. That's why I've said in the past I'd prefer our candidate to be someone like Thompson, who seems to align with a fair number of issues and seems the most viable national candidate. But even if our candidate is not completely aligned with all of my beliefs on the various issues, I will still vote to defeat Hillary, because with someone other than Hillary at least I have a fighting chance at survival and a chance to influence policy along the lines of my principles. That doesn't mean abandoning principles. You stick with them and fight for them, but you have a better chance that they will be at least considered, and perhaps acted upon. With Hillary, I have none of that. And you won't either. People around here better get that through their heads, and quick. Look at the things she says and does. You think you're going to have any chance with her? Forget it. With anyone else? Maybe. Note: maybe. Not certain, but maybe.
Those pushing Rudy are banking that voters are
1) too stupid to know what binary enumeration means and
2) think that anyone with an "R" by their name is "winning."
;-)