That seems to be what David Catanese suggests:
The four GOP candidates for Senate in Florida spent Saturday largely agreeing with each other on a litany of social issues during an Orlando debate sponsored by The Florida Family Policy Council.
But retired Army Col. Mike McCalister managed to separate himself slightly from the pack on gay marriage and abortion.
The AP’s Brendan Farrington takes note in graph seven of his dispatch:
McCalister, however, stood out in saying that while he opposes gay marriage, he thinks it should be an issue that’s left up to the states. He also was the only candidate to not clearly state when abortion should be allowed. LeMieux and Hasner said the procedures should be illegal except in the cases of rape and incest or when the mother’s life is at risk. Miller agreed they should be allowed when the mother was at risk.
I don’t know if McCalister differs from the pack by leaning to the left or leaning to the right? By saying gay marriage should be decided to the states, does that mean McCalister would be comfortable if a red state enacted anti-gay legislation. And by not being clear about when abortion should be allowed, does that mean he believes there should not be any exceptions?
So, yeah, McCalister may be standing out from the field, it’s just not clear which way he’s standing.