>>If Hillary wins, she will push the SCOTUS so far left that conservative social issues will be history for at least a generation. I would much rather take my chances with SCOTUS appointees from Rudy than from Hillary.<<
Of course you would, you’re rational.
If you look at RG’s judicial advisors, they’re all on the Right - Federalist Society types. If he gets two judicial appointments, the odds that at least one will vote to weaken or overturn Roe is very high. If Hillary is in, the odds of course are zero. (And, yes, there are other issues in this race besides abortion).
I’ve made this point over and over until I’m exhausted — what difference does it make what a candidate’s personal views on abortion are unless you just want to feel good?? It all comes down to judicial appointments. With Hillary you are dealing with a known commodity - she will appoint extreme leftists like Ginsburg who are rabidly pro-abortion as well as horrible on everything else. With RG, you are dealing with someone who is likely going to give you at least a moderate conservative, maybe better. In addition, he is pro-defense and pro-free market. How is this a difficult choice??
So let me just clarify the “One issue” thing:
If, say, a candidate Conservative on 50% of the issues won the GOP nod, then revealed themselves to be rabidly anti-Israel and possibly outright anti-Semetic, you’d be all on board to stop Hitlery, right?
I am more concerned about the Islamic terrorists who want to kill us. Rudy (or most other Republicans) will take this war more seriously than Hillary or any of the Dems. If we lose this war, don’t worry about abortion, gay rights, etc as under sharia, these issues will quickly go away. Just as President Members Only jacket said at Columbia, “there are no gays in Iran”.
You're certainly not basing that comment on his record, which is more liberal than Bill Clinton's was in Arkansas.