Replies

Because some prominent social conservatives lost?

Which prominent or not social conservative won in '06? Did Santorum win because of he was a socon? Did JD Heyworth win in AZ coming after the illegals? Did Jim Talent win in MO (MO! the buckle on the Bible belt!) genuflecting before the guns, God, and no gays crowd? Too bad beating one's breast doesn't work getting out the vote or the socons would win hands down every time.

The anti-Rudy's have done nothing more than let their sanctimony get the better of their reason. As Coach Lombardi used to say, 'if you're not going to lead, then follow or get the hell out of the way.'

You have three examples here. The only one who lost by a significant margin and whose primary reputation was Social Conservative is Rick Santorum. Santorum lost because (a) his opponent was well-known as the pro-life son of a renowned abortion foe and (b) Santorum therefore made support for the Iraq War--and not social conservatism--his focus at a time when public dissatisfaction against it was heightening.

I doubt Bob Casey was a good alternative for social conservatives, but the Democrats won by providing social conservatives with an alternative to the GOP, and many of them apparently took that alternative. If the Giuliani types who post here take over the Republican Party, I am quite sure many more such alternatives will be offered to social conservatives in the very near future.

One election and you are running for the hills? Or maybe more appropriately, are hoping you are right that the socons don’t matter and the GOP can form a winning coalition with moderates and libs. What would be the point? Just call it pro-war democrats.

This “socon” crap is getting real stale.

Is the 2nd amendment a “social” issue to you? Seems to me its in the constitution, right after the one about free speech, assenbly and religion.

Is global warming hysteria a “social” issue? To Rudyfans, it doesn’t matter that he will “do something” like “go after the special interests” who cause global warming, when the entire thing is a F*****K farce.

Is ramrodding “hate crimes” legislation a “social issue”, or is it really an anti-constitutional, orwellian crock of poop? I vote the latter, Rudy is its cheerleader.

Is egregious use of Eminent Domain a “social” issue? I’ve always took property rights to be among the founding principles of our country.

Is suing the tobacco companies, gun manufacturers, and auto insurers just “social” issue noise, or was it an onerous, pompous overreach by the mayor of NYC?

Is being praised by the feminists a “social” issue? When it costs tax payers money to pay for Rudy’s abortions, forces beauty salons to have gender neutral pricing, spends federal money on day care for working women, and opens gov’t funded clinics for gays and lesbians, its social alright. Social engeineering, that is, in a very leftist direction.

Sorry, nancy, this lib don’t pass ANY test to be the GOP candidate

I keep asking this question; maybe you can anwer it for me.

Two separate GOP constituencies are at odds with Giuliani’s stance on the issues — social conservatives and small-l libertarian conservatives. Set aside for a moment your feelings about people who vote third party or stay home: If Giuliani gets the nomination, it’s a fact that some significant percentage of people from both of these groups will not vote for him.

In your estimation, where does Rudy get the votes to make up for this loss of historically GOP voters, plus some more votes to put him over the top?