“If the GOP nominates a socon, then I think there will be a GOP liberal-RAT conservative “unity” ticket (think Bell-Everett), and there MAY be a right-wing Nader equivalent, as well (think Breckenridge). If the GOP nominates a liberal, there will be a conservative insurgency.”
While I agree that there may be a conservative insurgency if a socially liberal candidate is the GOP nominee, I respectfully disagree on the other predictions.
Those who would vote for Giuliani, either because they genuinely support him, or so that Hillary may be stopped, would NEVER field a third-party, or splinter, candidate - which would, of course, get Hillary elected.
Only the socons would split from the party if a Giuliani-type was the Republican nominee. Everyone else would rally ‘round the nominee no matter who it is, imho.
Such is my dread of a Hillary presidency that I consider myself a “dead-cat” Republican*, in that I’d rather vote for a dead cat than the 2008 Democrat nominee. Dead-cat Republicans have no more problem voting for Rudy than they do Huckabee, because their goals are clear: KEEP THE DEMS OUT OF THE WHITEHOUSE IN 2008.
Most Republicans are dead-cats. Only the most passionate socons are not. So the party splits only with a Rudy nomination, as I see it.
*Apologies to yellow-dog Democrats.
Which is the scenario the Dems and MSM would like to see
I agree that Rudy supporters would rather vote for a social conservative than vote for Hillary