Wow. Ask and you shall receive. I got an overwhelming amount of email on the Rudy v. McCain question, with all sorts of interesting angles and insights. Let me quickly summarize two recurring themes from the emails of people who support Giuliani over McCain:

1) Leadership: Rudy may not have a voting record but he does have a record. There's his leadership during the crisis of September 11, of course, which is forever etched in people's minds. But there's also his leadership in turning around New York. He cut taxes, reduced crime massively, and made the city livable again. This goes back to the reason Governors usually have it over Senators when it comes to running for President: they're not in Washington D.C. back-slapping and bloviating but instead are out governing, solving problems and producing tangible results - good or bad.

2) Loyalty/Integrity: Despite the argument that it's McCain's turn because he's "paid his dues," many just don't see him as a loyal party man - for obvious reasons. But the problem is deeper than McCain's willingness to go against Republicans on key issues, there is a real sense of dislike toward McCain among some for his self-aggrandizing chumminess with the media. In other words, it's not just that McCain disagrees with Republicans on some issues but the way in which he does the disagreeing that irks them. Rudy doesn't seem to engender any of those same feelings - just the opposite, in fact.

Generally speaking, there was a very small group that said Rudy's position on social issues was a deal-breaker (his refusal to get behind the ban on partial birth abortions was mentioned), and another small group that said they would sit out a general election featuring either Giuliani or McCain on the ticket, but more than ninety percent said they would vote for either Giuliani or McCain over any Democrat - some enthusiastically and some holding their noses.

There was an overwhelming sense that social issues, while still important, pale in comparison to the number one priority which almost every single person agreed is defending the country against terrorism. One emailer pointed out that abortion, gay rights, and the rest will be ultimately settled by the courts anyway, so while a President's values on those issues might still be of some importance, given the fact that we're currently in the middle of a very long, very dangerous war with potentially catastrophic consequences the overriding concern in 2008 is electing someone who is tough, competent, and can manage and respond effectively to the threats we face at home and abroad.

UPDATE: By the way, I don't have time to respond to Sager's response at the moment, but it's well thought and well argued, as usual. Dafydd ab Hugh at Big Lizards has more as well.