I'm sure it pains you (and me also) to admit that the key to winning in 2008 is to pick the MOST conservative candidate as possible ... who also has the resources, the personality, the financial support, the likability, and the personal ethics to get 51-percent of the vote in the general election.
Unfortunately, the most conservative candidate does not always mean the best candidate.
It's really that simple.
There is a point, of course, for myself and for most Republicans that even the most likable Republican candidate is unacceptable ... if they betray too many conservative-GOP principals.
To me, Guliani falls in that camp.
Mitt Romney, on the other hand, supports and exudes many of the great conservative virtues that made the GOP a great patriotic party.
Is Romney perfect? No.
No candidate is perfect. (Reagan passed amnesty in 1986, and raised taxes in 1987, passed a pro-abortion plan in CA in 1967, and did nothing when the US Marines were attacked in Lebanon in 1983)
Still, many people see him as the ultimate conservative Republican candidate.
Thus it will be with Romney, I believe.
To me, Guliani falls in that camp.
Mitt Romney, on the other hand, supports and exudes many of the great conservative virtues that made the GOP a great patriotic party.
I'd agree with most everything except the last paragraph. I think if you substitute Fred Thompson's name for Mitt Romney, we'd be in agreeance 100%. Can you tell me why you prefer Romney over Thompson? Romney seems to want to be all things to all people, and the last person running for president that sounded like was John F Kerry.
Except, myth romney isn’t a conservative.