Why? Because those who find Rudy unacceptable under any circumstance have set in their hearts a moral compass directing them against voting for anyone who openly opposes and would undermine their core beliefs?
If you are against abortion for whatever reason and a candidate wants you to defy your conscience, you'd better NOT do it. If you're against SSM and a candidate says you have to accept it if you cast a vote for him you'd best follow your conscience, if you have one, and not do it.
I'm sick of people pretending to be what they're not and that includes those of this party pandering to leftist liberals because all they can see is "winning" the White House. You compromise now. The left will still be around tomorrow wanting you to give in a little more here, a little more there and because you were "tolerant", they'll gladly accept your surrender.
Because someone will become President, and if Giuliani is the (R) nominee, then it's either him, or (presumably) Clinton. To say Giuliani is "unacceptable", even under those circumstances, is to say that a Clinton Presidency is acceptable. Of course, you've basically said as much, so I guess what I'm saying doesn't apply to you.
If you are against abortion for whatever reason and a candidate wants you to defy your conscience, you'd better NOT do it. If you're against SSM and a candidate says you have to accept it if you cast a vote for him you'd best follow your conscience, if you have one, and not do it.
This makes sense if we're talking about the primary. It doesn't make sense if the general election ends up being Clinton v. Giuliani. Because then either candidate (by your assumptions) would hold those positions you dislike, and "not voting for Giuliani" would not be an effective method of influencing those policies either way.