[LtdGovt]

I said HERE, meaning Free Republic.

Of course. But I pointed out that the whole body of Republican primary voters seems to disagree.

I think social conservatives can accept that there are many Republicans who will vote for Giuliani under any circumstances. Why can't the Giuliani supporters accept the fact that social conservatives who adhere to principles be given that same consideration?

On the basis of what principle would someone refuse to support Rudy against Hillary? On the principle that handing the election to Hillary is the right thing to do?

Oh and by the way, accepting that someone is going to vote for a particular candidate is easy. I already accept that you are going to vote for Hunter or whoever you like. However, it is difficult to accept that some people might actually be helping Hillary win the election. You would be trashing me if I said that I would not vote for Hunter in the general election, and rightly so. Because the WOT is crucial. Why can't the Hunter-supporters be like the Rudy-supporters and support the person who wins the GOP nomination?

[TommyDale]

"Why can't the Hunter-supporters be like the Rudy-supporters and support the person who wins the GOP nomination?"

Some may do so, but you have to understand that for many, this is a case of religious and moral principles. You do realize that, right?

[Rodney King]

Why can't the Hunter-supporters be like the Rudy-supporters and support the person who wins the GOP nomination?

Because we don't trust the Rino's on that. Look at what they did to Ollie's senate campaign, Brett Shundler's gov race, and others. When the RINO's lose they get worried that their neighbors will look down at them for supporting a non-elitist, so they cross over in order to be "responsible".

[Old_Mil]

On the basis of what principle would someone refuse to support Rudy against Hillary? On the principle that handing the election to Hillary is the right thing to do?

On the basis of Rudy's own admissions that handing the election to Rudy is really no different than handing the election to Hillary.

[WFTR]

You would be trashing me if I said that I would not vote for Hunter in the general election, and rightly so. Because the WOT is crucial. Why can't the Hunter-supporters be like the Rudy-supporters and support the person who wins the GOP nomination?

Your vote belongs to you and no one else. If Mr. Hunter doesn't represent what you believe or disagrees with your beliefs on too many crucial points, I won't trash you for refusing to vote for Mr. Hunter. Even if your refusal to vote for Mr. Hunter causes him to lose the general election, your vote is yours, and I respect your right to vote for someone who represents what you believe.

You claim that the WOT is crucial. Maybe it is, but I see nothing to suggest that Mr. Giuliani will be a strong president in that war. He advocates amnesty for illegal aliens, and that amnesty would lead to more of them coming to this country regardless of what other policies we put in place to stop them. Our being lenient about overstayed visas played some part in the September 11 attacks. If we want national security, we must have border security, and Mr. Giuliani is weak on this issue.

If you don't like Mr. Hunter for reasons related to policy and issues, why don't you suggest another candidate? I'm nominally supporting Mr. Hunter right now, but I could change my mind as the field changes. Former Governor Gilmore of Virginia has formed an exploratory committee. Being governor is a stronger qualification than being a Congressman. I don't know where Governor Gilmore stands on the issues, but if he is pretty good on the important issues, I might be able to support him. If you can support him and not Congressman Hunter, maybe he would be a good compromise candidate for us. Newt Gingrich wouldn't be my first choice, but I could probably support him. I haven't ruled out supporting Governor Romney, and I would likely vote for him even if I didn't volunteer for him in the campaign. I might even be able to vote for John McCain if he had a good enough running mate, but I'm uncertain about that vote. Why can't we continue looking for a good candidate who will be broadly acceptable instead of trying to force someone on those who cannot support him?

Bill

[itsahoot]

On the basis of what principle would someone refuse to support Rudy against Hillary?

Why don't we cross that bridge when we come to it, I don't think Rudy will even be there.

[Just another Joe]

On the basis of what principle would someone refuse to support Rudy against Hillary?

Why, 18 months in advance, do people think that Rudy has a lock on being the nominee for the GOP?
If Rudy IS the GOP nominee for the office of President, running against Hitlery or Obama, then I probably would vote for Rudy.

Will I vote for Rudy in the primaries? No way.