Why can't party loyal accept a person who can lead, has a fiscal conservative plan but has no opinion (or has a different opinion) on social issues be a GOP candidate on the ballot?
Why can't people who want fiscal conservatism accept a person who can lead, has a fiscal conservative plan, but is equally sensible (i.e., conservative) on social matters? Let's not fool ourselves about who is distracting folk from fiscal issues.
Why can't those same people try to find a way to respectfully, tactfully seek middle ground with the so-cons, instead of lecturing us from their high horses about how we are all screwed up, and everything's our fault?
I'm sorry if I've brought that up too often here, but I call them the antisocial conservatives for a reason. They are biting the only hand that is likely to help them (i.e., the so-cons).
And to be fair, I think a lot of people on my side are just too suspicious of the other side, and should be more willing to learn. Case in point: I know a lot of people of my persuasion will never be brought around to drug legalizing, because it's just too hippy, and they can't see how it affects them. That's especially true when drug legalizationist sentiment is so often accompanied by fedora atheism, and slur terms like "homophobe."